It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionGalaxy, Multiplayer and DRM(15 posts)(15 posts)
(15 posts)
Pages:
1
This is my favourite topic
Posted August 23, 2018
high rated
Let's face it. Forcing players to use Galaxy or any proprietary servers for multiplayer games has the same effects as DRM: if the server is down, the game doesn't work any more. If Galaxy is discontinued for any reason, the game doesn't work any more. I.e. the ability to play those games is subject to the whim of corporations. The reason may sometimes be convenience and not copy protection, if you are willing to believe that, but the effects are still the same as DRM. So enforced use of specific, proprietary servers should be completely incompatible with GOG's FCK DRM initiative.

Fortunately there is a way around it, if GOG wants it. Even if devs program for Galaxy only 'out of convenience', GOG can change Galaxy. It should be possible to allow setting up private servers via Galaxy. It would even be possible to add a LAN mode to Galaxy. The games would still connect via Galaxy, so devs don't have to do anything different. But Galaxy wouldn't connect to the GOG account any more, but just to the private server or to other computers in the same network. So this 'disconnected private server mode' of Galaxy would fulfill all requirements of DRM-free and everyone would be happy. Those who like Galaxy as it is don't have to use the 'disconnected' feature. But those who view enforced proprietary servers as DRM would have the choice to set up their own servers.

Incidentally this would be the only way how GOG could convince me to use Galaxy. If Galaxy enables me to play games via LAN that don't have a LAN mode natively, then I would install Galaxy for those games. If you think such a 'private server and LAN mode' for Galaxy is a good idea, please vote for it:
https://www.gog.com/wishlist/galaxy/private_servers_via_galaxy_drmfree_multiplayer_for_all_games

Yes, I am aware that there is already a slightly similar wish about dedicated servers, but that's not really about a new Galaxy feature. So I think the two wishes are different enough to be separate.
https://www.gog.com/wishlist/galaxy/dedicated_servers_both_official_and_rentable

Also there is a wish to use Galaxy as LAN-via-internet. But what I'm asking for is rather a 'internet-via-LAN' capability. :-)
Posted August 23, 2018
First vote lol.
Btw such unofficial servers should be also checked by the clients to avoid malicious behaviours.

EDIT: ah no, it's a new Gog whishlist bug :(
Post edited August 23, 2018 by phaolo
Posted August 23, 2018
avatar
phaolo: First vote lol.
Btw such unofficial servers should be also checked by the clients to avoid malicious behaviours.

EDIT: ah no, it's a new Gog whishlist bug :(
Yes, it is. New wishlist entries seem to show 0 wishes for a while.
Post edited August 23, 2018 by Lifthrasil
Posted August 23, 2018
While I like the idea, I get most irate when multiplayer games don't have a LAN function, its important to understand that when multiplayer is ranked, moderated, match making and/or has anti-cheating measures that is a service additional to the software.

The Software can be DRM free, but access to the hosted service requires account authentication to uniquely identify players.

I have no qualms in using Galaxy to access a service.

But for unranked, ad hoc multiplayer games, using a 3rd party service should not be forced. LAN option and private servers should always be included.

I definitely support the idea of Galaxy giving the option to emulate internet play over a LAN.
Posted August 23, 2018
I love how people mislabel official servers that require accounts as DRM.

Not having LAN is a different thing, though, and I love to slam any developer that makes a multiplayer portion of the game but omits it.
Posted August 23, 2018
avatar
Lifthrasil: Let's face it. Forcing players to use Galaxy or any proprietary servers for multiplayer games has the same effects as DRM: if the server is down, the game doesn't work any more. If Galaxy is discontinued for any reason, the game doesn't work any more. I.e. the ability to play those games is subject to the whim of corporations. The reason may sometimes be convenience and not copy protection, if you are willing to believe that, but the effects are still the same as DRM. So enforced use of specific, proprietary servers should be completely incompatible with GOG's FCK DRM initiative.
Just to clarify: you're arguing against Galaxy on its own or against Galaxy as a "must use tool" for multiplayer games?

Galaxy on its own has no impact on your (singleplayer) games whatsoever.
Other than Sacred 2 I've had no problems with any of my games on Galaxy and it's even possible to make Galaxy launch external mod-needed progrmas like FOSE for Fallout 3.

Scared 2 would not start via Galaxy no matter what I did. I'd click "play" and Galaxy would be stuck in a loop.
A workaround was to get a shortcut linked to the game exe itself and not the Galaxy.
Since Scared 2 does not support any important features in Galaxy, all I "lost" was the ability to see how long I've been playing.
Posted August 23, 2018
avatar
Lifthrasil: Let's face it. Forcing players to use Galaxy or any proprietary servers for multiplayer games has the same effects as DRM: if the server is down, the game doesn't work any more. If Galaxy is discontinued for any reason, the game doesn't work any more. I.e. the ability to play those games is subject to the whim of corporations. The reason may sometimes be convenience and not copy protection, if you are willing to believe that, but the effects are still the same as DRM. So enforced use of specific, proprietary servers should be completely incompatible with GOG's FCK DRM initiative.
avatar
Wolfy777: Just to clarify: you're arguing against Galaxy on its own or against Galaxy as a "must use tool" for multiplayer games?
I'm arguing against enforcing proprietary serves. And against using Galaxy linked to your GOG account as the only multiplayer option. Sure, as mechmouse pointed out, for ranked multiplayer you need a unique and not falsifiable player identification. But that should never be the only option, because it has the same drawbacks as DRM, should the proprietary server fail. For private matches among friends it should not be necessary to connect to your GOG account or any other third party account.

So, short version: I want the option to play all multiplayer games that GOG sells without involving any server owned by GOG or any other publisher.
Posted August 23, 2018
avatar
Wolfy777: Just to clarify: you're arguing against Galaxy on its own or against Galaxy as a "must use tool" for multiplayer games?
avatar
Lifthrasil: I'm arguing against enforcing proprietary serves. And against using Galaxy linked to your GOG account as the only multiplayer option. Sure, as mechmouse pointed out, for ranked multiplayer you need a unique and not falsifiable player identification. But that should never be the only option, because it has the same drawbacks as DRM, should the proprietary server fail. For private matches among friends it should not be necessary to connect to your GOG account or any other third party account.

So, short version: I want the option to play all multiplayer games that GOG sells without involving any server owned by GOG or any other publisher.
Thank you for explaining.
Posted August 23, 2018
avatar
Wolfy777: Just to clarify: you're arguing against Galaxy on its own or against Galaxy as a "must use tool" for multiplayer games?
avatar
Lifthrasil: I'm arguing against enforcing proprietary serves. And against using Galaxy linked to your GOG account as the only multiplayer option. Sure, as mechmouse pointed out, for ranked multiplayer you need a unique and not falsifiable player identification. But that should never be the only option, because it has the same drawbacks as DRM, should the proprietary server fail. For private matches among friends it should not be necessary to connect to your GOG account or any other third party account.

So, short version: I want the option to play all multiplayer games that GOG sells without involving any server owned by GOG or any other publisher.
I don't use galaxy - and probably never will because running/buying drm free games WITHOUT steam like client software is the major reason why I buy games here - and I also feel cheated by companies that create multi player capable games including an option for LAN gaming but only for those who use registered accounts and client software connecting to their server via the internet at the same time.

I would rather have games that offer a "clean" LAN gaming option without the need for any unwanted third party software. And/or direct connection multi player gaming via the internet from my PC to another (again without the need of a game publisher/developer's server in between).

But somehow I must admit that I like your idea: if galaxy would one day offer an option to run completeley offline and just act as LAN game server/connecter for gog.com games (without the need to connect to the internet at any time which I would disable anyway during LAN sessions) then I guess I would give it a try and install it for that purpose (only).

Unfortunately I somehow guess that will never happen...
Posted August 23, 2018
Very interesting discussion. Bookmarked to read more in-depth later. Voted for the wishlist too
Post edited August 23, 2018 by direspirefirewire
Posted August 25, 2018
*little bump*
Posted August 25, 2018
avatar
Lifthrasil: Fortunately there is a way around it, if GOG wants it. Even if devs program for Galaxy only 'out of convenience', GOG can change Galaxy.
Better and easier still: just open source it (or at least fully disclose the Galaxy API) and let the community do whatever it pleases and needs with it.
Posted August 26, 2018
Please make that. Great idea!
Posted August 26, 2018
avatar
Lifthrasil: Fortunately there is a way around it, if GOG wants it. Even if devs program for Galaxy only 'out of convenience', GOG can change Galaxy.
avatar
muntdefems: Better and easier still: just open source it (or at least fully disclose the Galaxy API) and let the community do whatever it pleases and needs with it.
Yes, an open-source Galaxy would be a good option too. Then GOG doesn't even have to invest their own manpower into making the Galaxy-LAN or Galaxy-private-server addons, but leave that to the users.
Posted August 26, 2018
avatar
Lifthrasil: ... https://www.gog.com/wishlist/galaxy/private_servers_via_galaxy_drmfree_multiplayer_for_all_games
...
I guess that for most multiplayer games where the number of players in a multiplayer session is limited to a not too big number you could probably just bundle the server part with the client part and sell it as a bundle. So nobody should need Galaxy for playing these games.

Otherwise Galaxy and multiplayer is DRM. GOG doesn't seem to have big problems with it, nor seem many of GOG's customers. Even I don't care because I don't buy them.
Pages:
1
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionGalaxy, Multiplayer and DRM(15 posts)(15 posts)
(15 posts)