Very good. Thank you.

Thank you, too, it was heartfelt. It is still in full in one thread at the moment: https://www.gog.com/forum/general/boycotting_gog_2021/post1437

EDIT: Ah, I was beaten to it, thanks for sharing the link, and apologies that I cross-posted at first.

This is the chance to support the developers and buy your copy of Devotion: https://shop.redcandlegames.com/games/devotion

This is awesome news and I will definitely be buying a copy. I also hear it will soon be available on Zoom Platform.

I also love the irony, that China's desperate (and failed) attempts to suppress the game have only served to boost its publicity :-)

Logged in to GOG again just to share this great news I got from Red Candle's e-mail newsletter after months of silence. Glad to see it's already been shared.

You can actually buy both Devotion and Detention as well as their respective soundtracks, and there is a discount if you do it all in one go.

Once purchased, it's all available as a DRM-free ZIP download: Detention has Windows, Mac, and Linux versions, while Devotion is available for Windows and Mac. Soundtracks are available in 320 kbps MP3 or lossless WAV.

30% of this $33.56 could have gone to GOG if they respected their actual customers (as well as, in my case, 100% of whatever the price of CP2077 was, alongside some other stuff I also didn't buy from them since December: easily $100+ in total).

Hahahaha, the Zip folders still include the Galaxy dlls! xD

The Detention folder also features a Galaxy dll, which can only mean that a Detention release was also in the works!

Christ, gog, your cowardice screwed your customers out of the best point&click to be released in years.

Thanks GOG for being so spineless! Decided to spend my money elsewhere :3

Yep if you guys still want to support the Developers of Devotion you can buy
it DRM free on redcandlegames


As romulus16 did

Question:
Do they provide file checksums for downloads?
If so, what kind.

The downloads are ZIP files, so there's a built-in CRC32. If the archive is corrupted and you try to unpack it, you'll know.

On a general note, whenever there's no checksum for downloads, and I want to be sure of file integrity (such as for firmware updates that can brick a device), I'd just download the same file twice and run fc /b (or diff -s, or WinMerge if you prefer a GUI).

You must be joking or are pretty inexperienced / uninformed on both.
Having deep IT background I would instantly dismiss both "solutions".

CRC32 is ludicrously imperfect alg for any kind of protection. It's awfully basic.
It doesn't actually protect from collisions.
There is a reason why reliable websites use at the very least SHA1 for ANY file formats.

You must have never experienced file corruption twice in a row on 2 different occasions then.
I personally not only am 100% aware this is possible, in my case this is very likely under some circumstances (I have exceptionally unpredictable global network connection).
It also assumes you CAN waste TIME and bandwidth for downloading something more than once "just to be sure".
Already on 1 GiB files this could be a problem.
The whole point is that you could as well download the same file 100 times on different timestamps and if you are unlucky enough ALL would be corrupted and you WOULDN'T know WITHOUT A CHECKSUM.
Not to even mention possibility of MitM or malicious file server replacement, DNS interception (thus redirection), and I could go on like that for quite some time.
Without TRUSTED original VERIFIED checksum you never really know if the file you downloaded is legit or not.
And needless to say risk of "some people" trying to screw with related file hosting IN THIS CASE is rather high due to "hosted content nature".

If a malicious actor can replace the file you are downloading, they can just as easily replace the checksums, unless you think one were kept on a more secure server than the other or some other implausible/impractical scenario. Or am I missing something?

Yes you are missing things. Such as nobody is forcing developer to leave checksums on the same backend as files (remember, http server is not the same thing as the hosting backend).
Also there are ways of verifying authenticity of checksums.
Also GPG (but I'm not expecting game sites to use them even tho it would be great).
There is plenty of ways to protect checksums themselves, even as simple as posting them publicly on say your social media (as a developer), which is fine since checksums don't contain any private info or any part of code at all.

Let us keep this thread going, for the sake of it.

The Story of Devotion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvUoJYLcI_A