That's the usual issue of what "is" a DRM and what peoples "consider" as being a DRM. As I said multiple times before just because something is "bad" doesn't means it is necessarily a DRM.

And no streaming, and that include game streaming, as bad as it might be, is technically not a DRM in itself. DRM includes intent, the always online part of streaming is an inherent part of how the technology itself works, it's not something created specifically with the intent of controlling the user rights or limiting copies, the fact that it does is a side effect.

Otherwise it would mean that listening to radio was a form of "analog DRM" because it limited what the user could do with the music.

I am fine with multiplayer requiring DRM, I can swallow a few cosmetics requiring client, but I cannot justify cases like hitman, where at least 50 percent of the game is provided as a service behind an internet wall.

Yep, there is lots of these. It’s a free multiplayer game. It’s an mmo. We have to provide features. People were never able to do multiplayer before clients.
The problem is most people are daft enough to believe all the lies

Well blind shills and fanboys allowed multiplayer drm so gog tried to see what else they can trick people with.

Totally agreed...in fact I would say it's the worst form of DRM.

The issue with Hitman is that GOG think the core singleplayer experience is DRM free, and many (myself included) think that's not true. It's not like GOG said "yay we're fine with DRM now!"

GOG knows if they scrap their DRM free pledge they will have nothing left that makes them unique. They're not stupid.

Aside from the progression stuff, the missions also had drm so they knew that for sure since it was put on the game page when it launched.

What missions have DRM? Pretty sure all the missions launch fine when offline.

1. Existence of Galaxy requirements and other third party requirements for content of several games on this store can be read as DRM by the standards set out on FCKDRM.com. So, in essence, GOG has said long ago they are "fine with DRM", just not singleplayer DRM.

2. Partnership where DRMed Epic games can apparently be sold through the new store app on GOG Galaxy client. If GOG are the ones providing the support and refunds to such products, this would logically follow (to me at least) that GOG as a company are indeed fine with DRM.

3. Quote about how developers/publishers are free to design their games in the way they want as long as it doesn't affect singleplayer in a "major way". Naturally, this is "subjective"!

4. Another user pointed out in the Anniversary topic that, since Shenmue III apparently, GOG no longer includes "DRM-free" on the posts about new releases. Yes, I realize that isn't the same as saying "we're fine with DRM", but it is worth noting given everything else going on lately.

They're obviously trying to sell everything they can get away with, and boiling down their DRM free pledge to its most core aspects. I am saying that myself. However this is very different from saying "we're no longer a DRM free store." They are not saying that, and are not selling games they can't defend, because they know what keeps them in business at the moment.

Hitman's inclusion on the store was obviously done with the same mindset that allowed promo t-shirts in Cyberpunk, i.e. "the core game is DRM free and these are just online bonuses." I think they VERY MUCH MISJUDGED that decision with Hitman, but that was obviously the thought process. The thought process was not "get bring on the DRM, who cares anymore."

That's your opinion, but from a purely technical point of view it is not, hence why even the FSF consider it as being "DRM-free".

(Again it doesn't means it is "good" by any mean, just that it is not a DRM per se)

How about no. Those developers are already releasing their games on DRM platforms like Steam and Epic. If you want games with DRM, buy them off DRM platforms. Games like Hitman GOTY do not belong on GOG or anywhere else that pledges to be DRM free. The issue with this game is entirely because single-player features are locked away behind DRM that requires an online connection to essentially validate your ownership.

It's not the same as needing to connect to a match making server for online play, which could be considered DRM. However as I don't play anything online, I have no opinion on this.


edit - typo fixed

that's not true at all.
DRM is not a word that mean only one thing, it is a term that only stand for Digital Right Managment... it's not a piece of software that locks a digital media (like denuvo), it's the concept of locking digital media.
that's why always online is a form of DRM, it was used multiple times as DRM, it's still used as DRM for multiple things and it always limit the user freedom.
Of course there are multiple types of DRM, denuvo, Adobe, steam, streaming, streaming with EME... but all of them are drm if you cannot make a backup copy without removing that limitation (for example there are website where you can download a video that stream, that's not drm because it does not limit your ability to make a backup of the video, that still streaming but the concept it's not DRM).
The main point is you don't need to lock something with a software to consider it DRM, you just need something to limit the user ability to make a backup copy.

Also, funimation actually use an obsolete form of DRM software for their videos, it does not use EME (that Encrypt the Media), but it crunch the original video in small pieces so that you need to record each piece and put it together in a stream to actually get the original file. How can that website say that is actually DRM-free? I think they are just ignorant that try to share the idea that only EME is DRM, that's not the case.

But they label Amazon ebooks and music as worst offender, when ebooks got drm only if the author/publisher decide to use it and music bought is all DRM-free.

DRM-Free is already a difficult concept to explain to most prople, we don't need ignorance like "always online is not drm" to spread.

Honesty and full disclosure on top of the sales page, stating what isn't available to customers not allowing the game to connect to the Internet, could have helped. It wouldn't have prevented the uproar, because it's exactly what no one really wants to see being sold here. The only difference in this case is that a GOG manager answered when it was about to hit the fan. Yet he still managed to feign ignorance, telling us they haven't been aware of anything and will look into the situation ... I had a good hard laugh after discovering this statement!

How often have they been made aware of things they have to change, games they should remove instead of selling them at full price or discounted (Plane Mechanic Simulator, Soul Saga), because developers have abandoned the product, DLC aren't released even though they exist (My Time At Portia), problems all over the place? When it was acknowledged by one of the blues, not much happened and hardly anything ever changed. The list is practically endless.

This is why even with utmost honesty, abandoning the DRM-free stance they might have had pre-Galaxy (2.0), it would be another knell in their coffin. Whatever happened in their management, that much must have sunk in by now, without expecting a different than usual outcome: Playing the waiting game until the storm's blown over. I just hope they are able to appreciate the fact, that, if they keep doing the way they are doing, paying customers with very deep pockets will turn their back on them.

In short: In the current situation GOG management and staff have driven themselves into, this will never work and they should abandon the idea of another attempt in the same direction, for instance during one of the next big sales. Just look at what happened this Christmas last, a certain Taiwanese game due to be released and removed from store, followed by the CP debacle, why that would break the camels back for good. People may look past and swallow many things, but for anyone there come a point where enough is enough.