The uploading of visited planets is disabled when offline, but you still get some benefit by clicking the upload button. I can understand that server access might be needed to organise and deliver specialised content like seasonal missions and the like even if you're playing by yourself. There are situations where server-delivered content makes sense because to code it in would take much more work and drastically change the game in doing so.

But the devs locked simple things like free daily derelict transponders and new planet discovery quicksilver payments behind a server check, and the devs didn't offer a viable way of earning Quicksilver - a premium currency which still exists in offline games and can activate things within an offline game - without an always online server check. This is where it got iffy. The game will give you just enough Quicksilver in an offline game to buy one egg for the living ship quest to unlock, and maybe a misc cosmetic. This quest is genuine SP content, but if you don't know about it because you didn't read up on the game first you could waste your coin and never see this content unless you go online. See my point? The devs will argue there's content which is by necessity server-locked, and yes that exists, but there's a tiny bit there around the edges which gets wilfully ignored by both parties. And that's the part I've deemed unforgivably DRM.

Yeah, it does not do proper QA, at most limited in scope (i.g. "Cult of the Lamb," the staff said checking its installers) and not unlikely with pre-installed Galaxy.

I do remember a version of "Kingdoms and Castles" with the game that just doesn't launch on no matter what the system (our forum folks noticed), it was later "fixed" by the developers with pushing a new release version. The fact of "No Man's Sky" officially dropping and [url=https://hellogames.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/10364071969041-I-m-getting-an-Unsupported-Windows-Version-Detected-popup-on-PC-but-I-meet-the-minimum-specs]multiplayer for Windows 7/8.1 and GOG not correcting that does tell a lot too. I am sure any of you may name a ton of additional problematic things on the store in addition.

Could GOG at least employ 1 person that will install and run games on an offline PC daily for at least 10 or more minutes on 2-4 systems? This is not unrealistic. Typically GOG makes around 5-25 installers daily (except on a weekend and holidays), this means plenty of time for some basic testing of things if GOG cared about that.

I'm unsure, looking on the state of Cyberpunk 2077 still riddled with bugs and the newer remaster of "The Wticher 3" being a disaster. Where is the guarantee this will be read by the top without any changes by others? Not unlikely it'll be pre-processed into something else, into what "the top wants to hear" instead of the truth (sometimes sad one).

It was a targeted email though, to users they chose, apparently.

I wonder :

- If anybody isn't "one of their best customers".

- How many of these "best customers" ticked "Most of games I have I got as a free giveaways".

GWENT: Rogue Mage.

Well, I for instance didn't get mine so far. So maybe it really is narrowly selected group.

But to be fair wouldn't call myself "best customer", I don't spend much.

Not sure why you are calling attention to it being "free" (as if the price has any bearing on whether content is locked behind DRM/client/online requirements or not). By the way, you may want to visit the GWENT game page and peruse the sidebar. This "free" game has DLCs on the scale of a Paradox (granted I did see at least one "free" one in there, to be fair). It should be obvious that the "free" GWENT game is a vehicle to get you to spend money. For your talk later in your post about how "that's just life", you seem here to be under the impression GWENT was made out of the goodness of CDPR's hearts to give us all free fun in perpetuity, rather than the far more likely reality that it is a vehicle to sell "DLC", two of which are priced at $69.99 (i.e. more than a AAA game!!).

Yes, spare the relevant objection that online-locked content has no place on a DRM-free store. If you want to play online games - you have to bite the bullet and go to Scheme or Epic Fail. Go there and keep it off of this store. Spare us!

"Shut up and settle" is not an argument.

How about throwing it into that often unused notification area?
Here's a 6:

6) Better invoicing for devs/publishers.

They shouldn't have to invoice GOG manually, it should be an automatic transaction which occurs quarterly, at the very least. It isn't like GOG can't keep track of what they're selling as a story.

i requested a humble choice like program where paying 9.99 a month would net you 8 games that are added to your account through a curated selection of AAA and indie games.

That's true, yet singleplayer modes of majority of those games don't require it. I'm pretty sure that's because it's easier for developers to use GoG's api, so it's sorta understandable, still absolutely annoying though.

No, it really doesn't. Not every company does that and we absolutely SHOULD oppose any that does this. But saying that it's the end of GoG because they put some useless trash behind their crappy launcher is just delusional.

And am i talking about NMS? No, i wasn't, but i'm with NMS players 100%. It's bullshit, and we should criticize both GoG and Hello Games for this.

"DRM? On <i>my</i> GOG? It's more likely than you think."

Are you really saying that it is OK for GOG to distribute games fully gated behind a DRM scheme as long as said game is online-only? Or that they can impose the use of Galaxy for the download of any free game?

And spare me the "easy solution" thing, I see DRM-free online multiplayer modes all around me developed by unpaid amateurs. The reliance on Galaxy/DRM is a choice, not a fatality.

I could not care less. I have about everything I am interested in and in the rest ... well ... in the rest I am not interested :D
Sure I have stuff on my wishlist waiting for a good price but looking at the GOG freebies I dare to say that I would only get doubles.

So DRM-free multiplayer just isn't a thing? We're going to ignore the years of online gaming and how direct connections are still very possible, and say online play MUST include DRM?