I completely agree with the above points. GOG to date(and to my knowledge) has done really well at following the most consumer free/permissive version of DRM-Free. That's why I buy games here. But now? I don't like this direction, and I certainly won't be silent about their push away from the ideology, *especially* when they still want to claim to hold to it.

Because again, it is not in the spirit of GOG's DRM-Free policy! If you as a company have something that separates you from your much, much larger competition, stick to it. Especially on such a consumer-sensitive topic as DRM. Perhaps they don't mean to slowly boil us alive, and in that case, they shouldn't confuse the issue by offering a title that directly contradicts that factor of separation. Otherwise...

For some games (like Aliens vs Predator and Double Dragon Trilogy), it does. For this one, it doesn't seem like Stardock bothered to do so.

Yes but the question is who does provide crossplay technology and other hardware needed for it. As much as I read from Stardock statement they don't have the technology or ressources to crossconect steam and gog. But frankly I don't really understand how this system is supposed to work.

Maybe it's that the guys @ stardock are not yet fully familiar with galaxy and crossplay. But i don't think it should be that complicated.

No it doesn't. Using Galaxy for multiplayer isn't a violation of their DRM-free stance. You're confusing Steam's DRM with the other aspects of the Steam Client and concluding that client = DRM, which isn't the case.

I wouldn't insult other people's intellects if I were you. That's too small a glass house to be throwing stones in.

the fact that multiplayer requires Galaxy is not the biggest thing. in fact, it was their stance from the beginning that you can play the games in singleplayer without the client. probably less because they liked it like that and more because they knew about the technical problems ahead. since avp classic 2000 it's been like that. I agree it sucks. slippery slope.

one thing I'll say though is that needing a client for multiplayer doesn't necessarily qualify as DRM if said client is also not a barrier to playing the game. I do acknowledge that in practical sense for a multiplayer-only game it's the same thing.

the bigger thing for me though is that you can't crossplay with Steam. that's retarded. I thought the whole point of Galaxy was that it was designed to allow this. so what's going on there? did Steam iterate the Steamworks API to box out gog? did this always require a ton of extra work on the part of the developer? see I'm not sure about that.

in any case it's kinda stupid that you can't play multiplayer with the Steam community. that's pretty stupid.

Nothing has changed about Galaxy from when they announced it. They stated from day one that the Galaxy client was optional, and that many of its features would be optional as well (even though that hasn't all been fully implemented yet as it is still being developed). They also stated in the original video advertising Galaxy that it would have a multiplayer component that was optional. You don't have to use Galaxy multiplayer ever, and you never have to install Galaxy client for any reason ever if you don't want it on your computer. Additionally they stated that if you want to use Galaxy multiplayer that you will obviously need to be online and have an account (your GOG account, not some new account) and that makes logical sense because Galaxy multiplayer is an online service so you need to be online to use it.

All of this was stated in the original video they produced which I believe is still up on the website (if not it's on Youtube), and they elaborated on that in numerous videos released since then including at gaming conferences, Q&A sessions with Marcin and Guilliame (sp?) and some other GOGlodytes.

Everything they stated about Galaxy so far, including the optionality of it is as true now as it was when they stated it. If someone thinks otherwise then they misunderstand how things work. The only one thing that is not yet 100% in line with their claims, is that the current beta client has a configuration screen to configure various optional features/components and while the options show up there they are all greyed out mostly because they haven't written the code for it yet, but the mockup config screen shows the intent of code to come, and it is not yet a finished product. Those missing promised features and options are being worked on and will be in future builds. There is a new build coming soon and they've hinted it might be here in a few weeks perhaps but haven't committed to a specific date yet.

Galaxy multiplayer is an online matchmaking service that talks to GOG's servers to arrange games between players. That service is optional if people want to use it. If not, people are free to play the single player game and they do not need to install or care about the Galaxy client or the multiplayer matchmaking service. They'll end up with a game that is more or less identical to if they did not even have the Galaxy multiplayer service and the game came with no multiplayer at all in that case, and in that regard Galaxy multiplayer is 100% optional just as they've claimed from day one. There will be some files included in the game archive that are the support files that provide the galaxy services for people who actually want to use it because they have to be physically present for technical reasons, but if someone doesn't use the service then they're just idle files sitting there that are needed by the OS executable loader to be able to run the binary, but that's how every executable works.

I think you missed the maint point of this thread -> Ashes of Singularity does not support crossplay which limits multiplayer only to gog players. And devs are not aware of any solution that could connect steam and gog multiplayer (does not exist in their words).

In order for a game to work with crossplay the game has to be written to support crossplay. Crossplay isn't a feature that just magically works with hundreds of existing games without the developers of those games having to write any code. The only games that crossplay will work with are those that decide to support it. I believe Aliens vs. Predator 2000 and The Witcher Adventure game both support crossplay, but not sure what other titles do. Most likely the games that are on GOG right now that support Galaxy multiplayer, some or all of them either do or could be made to support crossplay in the future.

I think a lot of people got a false impression that Galaxy multiplayer would be a magic service that added multiplayer capabilities to all of the games in the GOG catalogue and that all those games would magically work with multiplayer with the same games on Steam, but that's a misunderstanding. Every individual game will need to be updated by the game publisher with Galaxy multiplayer support in order to work with it, and they'd have to release an update of their game on Steam or wherever else for it to work with crossplay also. Anything else would require them to not only hire David Blaine, but to also hire Chris Angel and Penn & Teller. :)

Sounds like they probably need to talk to GOG developers through their back channel then to figure that out. Customer web forums probably aren't the best place. :)

Which I informed them that a few games already do this on GOG and Galaxy provides this functionality already.

You must have missed the discussion above, in which we discussed the various definitions of DRM-Free, and how it was disappointing that GOG has chosen the low road form. That, or you read it and it went over your head, which at this point I wouldn't put past you. Don't want to have your intellect insulted? Don't start the stone-throwing then, and try to keep up with the conversation. I don't remember anyone implying it was magic... That isn't the point. The point is that to call it DRM-Free when multiplayer is a large component of the game, and to say that Galaxy is "fully optional" to access the same is disingenuous, and not in keeping with how GOG has operated in the past.

This doesn't really work for multiplayer, because regardless it will always require something be it the internet, 2 PC's or other people. You can't sit alone in your bunker and still have a full game experience with 1 person even with LAN/DC

Which would be like a majority of games seeing as LAN/DC are not popular anymore, developers don't feel it's worth the time when very few would ever use it. Can't say I blame them or GOG. Hate it, disagree... doesn't matter it's what's true. The mentality of multiplayer, especially online focused multiplayer is to not be an everlasting feature.

Sure it is. Just look at any game with third party accounts before Galaxy. It's really no different and GOG has been selling multiplayer games like this long before Galaxy.

I couldn't agree more with this. Yes, there are some old games that still (without any modern intervention or updates) have thriving multiplayer communities. But they are far out numbered by the games whose popularity waned and whose multiplayer lobbies are an empty wasteland.
Multiplayer is a fad, it works only as long as the product has major popularity and a large frequent user base. Yes, developers could add all sorts of ways for people to play multiplayer games that would work long after clients or services are dead; but it would not be worth there while to do so. Few people make games out of the goodness of their hearts. Like every thing else game development is a business and they are in it for profit, just like GoG is. If you want to play a game multiplayer, do it when it's new and everyone else is too.

As for the crossplay thing... that really depends on how it works and how it's implemented. Keeping in mind this game is early access and the devs seem to be saying they will work on it at a later day there is more than enough time to implement it before 'release'.

Quite frankly I'm amazed no one is complaining about needing Galaxy to roll back to older versions of in development games as that seems far more of a non optional use than multiplayer...

If I may offer a very slight refrain.

Every time I see this thread title I keep hearing, "This battle station is now fully operational."