So I always felt that if i bough a game I should be able to play it as much as I want in my own house and further more my family members that live under the same roof should be able to play my copies as well.

SO i have two computers in my house. I have mine that is connected to a monitor and I built one for my wife that is connected to the TV. Both have my GOG Galaxy launcher installed and the beauty of GOG is that I can launch both at the same time. So I can play Witcher and she can play Ori at the same time.

But I was watching her play Ori and I was like "cool I want to play too".

So my question is... If we both play the one copy at the same time, is that abusing the DRM free nature?

I would think yes but then that begs the question... If we playd the same copy but not at the same time then it should be fair.

However; I feel like this is over critical and too lawyer(is) way of thinking. Then again Steam totally blocks this kind of use altogether despite the "family share" feature which is really quite lame and dose not work like the example i give above.

No.

If you both play two different copies installed from the one copy originally bought from GOG at the same time then to me that'd be like pirating one of those copies(i.e. your family member should have to buy their own to play a seperate copy of the same game at the same time).

If you both play a co-op game with local co-op together then 1 copy would be ok to me/gog I think.

(Of course in the first example I myself wouldn't mind people sharing copies within the same household, but gog likely wouldn't go along with that.)

All well and good, but when GOG's profit margins are so thin we should really be encouraging people to buy copies for everyone in their house who wants to play at the same time on other machines....just my two cents.


The sentiment is fine, though.

On the other hand, wasn't it Microsoft who decided that multiple people can play Age of Empires multiplayer as long as there's one CD for every three (or so) human players? Which meant you could install it on three PCs in your family and have fun together with just one CD.

But in the end, whatever Microsoft or anyone else says doesn't matter. Follow your heart if you're chaotic good, follow the books that make you a demon if you're lawful good.

Why would you deny yourself utopia and guilt trip yourself over a victimless non-crime? Well, I don't understand masochism either but it's roughly as absurd. And I think it is equally absurd, or at least arbitrary, to suggest that it's OK to take turns playing a game but not play it simultaneously. You're imposing some unnatural contract on yourself. Or likening bits to physical goods, which they are not. I would download a car, and a new towel. Please bring me that utopia!

If you want to feel good and giving away money makes you feel good, then buy your wife a second copy. But keep in mind that this is not a trade, it's just a donation, and you might never get anything in return. You could get a middle finger. It only looks like a trade because of the laws that are in place to uphold artificial scarcity and deny utopia.

(The last three paragraphs were directed at OP)

Please don't let the greedy businesses that imposed DRM be your moral compass :(

Yeah, I think "at the same time" and "at different times" is the lawyer bit. However it is straight up just moral self policing. I mean I will play 40 hours of Ori eventually and then at some other time my wife will hit 40 hours too. But why should i feel bad "when" that game play time occurs. the game will be played either way.

This is all in the context of me and my wide playing games in our house, no one else.

So following one's heart is good and following the law is bad then?

What if your heart told you to steal a car or light someone's stuff on fire? :|
===========================
It may be victimless but it keeps money from a site like GOG(in this case) that needs every dollar to keep doing it's thing.

Also that's usually how most software works(unless you have a bulk license or the devs made an exception)....one copy for each person who plays on another machine.
===========================
It is a trade....GOG gives you another game copy license for what you pay for it.

Also please stop calling it a utopia to freeload off of others work(without the devs permission, that is)......that's not a utopia to the ones making the works and expecting to get paid for said work when others just take and don't pay them for it.
==========================
So wanting to get paid for your work is being greedy and evil? Or is it just wanting fair compensation for your efforts in some cases?

To equate all businesses/those who want to make money under the same banner is saddening to read.If you are both playing at different times then to me that is fair and likely that is ok to GOG as well. If you were playing at the same time on different machines gog might not care but it'd be morally right imo to buy two copies then in that case.

It not only helps a good site pay it's bills and stay alive, but it promotes the drm free message.

Have to say, I like your writing style.

Maybe. Though if i limit myself to those rules, i still have 800+ other games from GoG alone i could play. I'm not hurting for selection if i have to wait a week to play a game. I just won't get my platformer itch scratched immediately. Perhaps. I do recall Neverwinter Nights being an asshole about it; Where everyone had to have unique keys. I was not going to fork over another $40+ just so me and my girlfriend could play a game together at the same time for a few hours; Thus I'd look for cdkeys listed and have one of them with a few extra keys to get around that artificial barrier.


Actually i rather liked how Blizzard handled it with Starcraft, where you could install a 'spawned' version which was a multiplayer-only stripped version of the game, allowing you to play with friends but also acted as a demo (not sure if it required to play only with the spawning CDkey or if only a full version could host, though you didn't need a cdkey to install a spawned copy).

If you are playing by yourself why would you even need more than one copy?

Anyways, My heart / gut says that its all good. and when it come to supporting GOG, I'm well in the good there. I mean fair is fair and charity is my choice.

Sounds fine...but why do people(in general) ask questions as if they are trying to be swayed to one side when they already have an answer already chosen?

This is not to say I am trying to be mean, just that I could never figure that out. If one knows what one knows or thinks what one thinks then why open a "forum"(thread) to discuss it? :|

I usually, wonder what is the "fair use" limit when you have the freedom to use the game as you want. For me, it sounds totally fine to play with your wife but I'm not sure about playing at the same time

Talking out loud and socializing with other is a good way to work out one own internal dilemmas. I knew the answer but it was locked away in my head. Funny how the mind works...