For someone who are not participating in the boycott, and are not taking this boycott seriously, you guys sure are taking this boycott seriously.

One could even call it lashing out.

Zoom is GOG alternative like GOG is Steam alternative.

It would be abundantly clear to anyone reading the first 10-15 pages of the thread that it was intended from the very start that anyone who is significantly reducing their spending is welcome to join the main boycott list. That has always been the 'policy'.

For people who sympathize with the cause, but not to the extent that they want to significantly reduce their spending?

I've been lukewarm about Skyrim ever since it was first released. I loved Morrowind, but Oblivion was a big step down, imo, and I have the impression Skyrim is quite overrated. I don't own/haven't played Witcher 3 either and I would probably play that ahead of Skyrim, as it looks a lot better.

Red Candle Games is a GOG alternative

Is Skyrim worth breaking one's boycott (however they define it)? I think that depends, and is worth being discussed in this topic. A related point which may be of interest to those in this topic is how GOG is handling Skyrim's mods. I have to say I am unclear on how it works but the impression I'm getting now is that one has to use a mod manager app from Nexus, which is problematic to me and others. I thought I read, solmewhere, that there is a rumor of GOG coming out with some sort of "Galaxy Mods" (which is a no thanks from me). Anyone who knows better or who can articulate this all better, please feel free to correct/enlighten me.

I agree and I think this is also worth discussing. The release of Skyrim is a big event, as it's probably one of the most popular games of the past 20 years and one of the most requested on GOG.

Despite the issues I have with GOG and the boycott etc., I think it's a good thing to see Skyrim released on GOG. I am above all a supporter of DRM-free and I will always celebrate the liberation of a major game that wasn't available DRM-free before. This release is a good thing and gives some hope that more of the recent AAA games will see DRM-free releases at some point.

But yes, the mod-ability does seem to be a valid concern. DRM-free means there must be no restrictions at all on how a game can be played/used. If the developer is trying to restrict or control how the game can be modded, by requiring the use of a third-party mod manager, then that might be straying into 'DRM territory'. I also find these rumors of GOG looking at 'Galaxy Mods' to be quite concerning. Hopefully the issues around mod-ability will be clarified and the game will ultimately be freely mod-able, without the mandatory use of third-party tools (which should always be optional).

Personally, I'm not going to buy it right now, but I might try it at some point in the future (if only to see what all the fuss was about). Also, bear in mind that it'll almost certainly be at this price every time GOG does a sale (and we all know how frequent those are).

The mods that are compatible or not with the gog version have nothing to do with the drm. The drm is the restriction of using a good in the official way without modification.

Because it's not up to the developer or publisher to make a game compatible with a mod. But the reverse. A mod as well as the tools for modding is a privilege that the studio makes to the players.


Nothing obliges them and even worse can if wish it prohibit it whatever the reason. Modding is already legal only if the developers or publishers allow it.


They can ban it and even sue modders if they want because a game is a cultural product like a music, book or painting. We have a perfect example with nintendo which pursues all modders

And diverting a cultural product without authorization is in fact a crime.

I respectfully disagree with you Lukin. Modding has been a big part of PC games for decades, from very early on. Many PC gamers expect PC games to be mod-able to some extent and it's arguable that it is part of what distinguishes PC games from console games.

Digital Rights Management can refer to anything that is built into a game, which aims to control or restrict how players can play or use the game, after it has been purchased, including modding. I agree there is no obligation for developers to make PC games easily mod-able, or to provide tools to facilitate it. But I would argue that built-in technologies that deliberately aim to control, restrict or monetize mods are a form of DRM.

It is similar to a situation where the main game is released DRM-free, but post-release DLCs can only be played with a third-party client installed (just that, in the mod case, the content has been made by someone else). If the main game was only playable with the use of a client, many would call that DRM.

It's possible to mod Skyrim SE (GOG) manually and offline (similar to Skyrim LE, Oblivion & Morrowind):-
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/skyrim_se_and_modding/post13

GOG is a Steam alternative only for the people that highly value "DRM-free" games, which is a somewhat fuzzy concept. Beyond that GOG is just a modestly larger Zoom compared to Steam. It would like to be a Steam alternative but that requires them to be like Steam, and even then it's a silly pipe dream at this late stage of the game.

So no, Zoom is definitely NOT a GOG alternative. Never heard of Red Candle Games so I'll check them out.

Really? Trying to expand the DRM meanings? More ammo for the crusade? Now it Is also DRM a game not specifically designed to be modded from scratch? At which level? Are some games more DRM'd depending the level of modability?

This is already starting to be a joke.

I mean the post was a joke but the bold text was the even bigger joke my guy

Spreading lies about the modability of Skyrim's GOG version is a sign of desperation. But this is not the only thing. It was pointed out earlier and it still persists. Very obvious fake accounts like "A CRICKET RIDING A TUMBLEWEED" or "ChinaGovIsFacist" are still on the list. Both accounts are deleted. Meanwhile two boycotters have bought newer games. And one boycotter who wanted to be moved to the second list is still listed as a boycotter. This alone shows that the lists of this boycott are not reliable.

I updated the lists I posted earlier, see post 5803.

Nobody is spreading lies about the modability of Skyrim. One user (not OP) said it was unclear to them how it works, but that they had the impression that you had to install a mod manager app from Nexus. This was subsequently cleared up, but it's not surprising that the question was raised, considering how man people seemed to have problems installing mods, just read the forums.

Making a completely pointless list of users who boycott to somehow cast doubt on wether they are boycotting or not, however, is a sign of desperation.

You again. The lists show the current state of the boycott. Edit: It is the boycott which Longcat is not participating because they are not listed as a boycotter.

GOG has a huge release with Skyrim. Of course, it is pure coincidence that two representatives of the Zoom Platform are active in a thread to boycott GOG shortly after that release.

GOG should consider to sue both and probably some other people here to get indemnity.