Yes it does. But you also failed to reply to the main part of my message: It is DRM. You might be OK with it, but it is absolutely DRM. And that means it should also be opposed, because DRM on GOG is unacceptable -- especially when these titles are still, to this day, falsely advertised as "DRM-free".

Depends if you want to have ranking lists or matchmaking in your multiplayer. If you do, then you need some sort of authentification and that's DRM by the definition used in these forums.

Also on gaming consoles (PSN, XBox Live), Steam, XBox Live(PC) EOS devs can rely on existing gaming networks, which they then rent or even get for free and don't have to maintain.
If they are forced to build their own server structure in order to release on GOG, then we can kiss multiplayer goodbye for good, no one wants to carry these costs anymore.
Since my MMO days I don't play online multiplayer anymore. Do you? If so, would it be ok for you not to have multiplayer on GOG?

Because the base game as such is free.
And I've seen (others) bring up Gwent as a counter-example when somebody mentioned something like "all the games SOLD here on GOG are DRM-free".

DLCs are EXTRAS that you CAN buy, if YOU WANT, but you DON'T HAVE TO buy, because they're NOT NEEDED to play the game.
Pretty easy.

And yes - the same (minus the "base game is free) goes for Paradox titles.

I'm a little curious: if you can't rein in your longing for UNNECESSARY EXTRA CONTENT, then how does the "vote with your wallet" trick, that you(?) and others here always propagate, work for you?
I mean, reading all your (general "you" here) comments, it's obvious that you're lacking self-control...which I believe to be an essential trait to make the "vote with your wallet" and other likewise actions, work.

Says who exactly? You...and which code of laws?
Again: wishing is not getting.
You don't want something locked behind DRM - then don't buy/claim it. Self-control is the magic word.
But "I want to keep bitching and moaning endlessly" is?

I honestly have no idea what you're blathering about. What does self control have to do with anything here? It's about keeping a supposed DRM-free store DRM-free. Whether the DRMed content is free does not matter. Whether you or anyone else considers is "unnecessary" content doesn't matter. DRM is DRM regardless of any of that, and if it is present here, the store is not truly DRM-free. It's that simple. It's not about having or not the "self control" to not buy DRMed product, it's about having the confidence that a product sold here is DRM-free without having to triple check or worry about how incomplete the "base" version you're buying might be without some future "extra" content that might be DRMed.

If the game is meant to be an online only MP game? And the DRM in question is restricted to the need to be online (duh!) and to the use of an application (Galaxy) that enables the online play? Yes.
Because I don't have to use either the game, nor the DRM that comes with it. My choice. Your choice.

Let's see...it's a game made by their mother company, the app (Galaxy) is made by them to support features that other DRMed stores had long before them...they want to encourage customers to use their store related app...so, yes - they can.

Btw: they impose the use of Galaxy for the download of ANY free game now?
Well, that must be a new implementation, because so far I could add and download any free game (bar Gwent, of course) to my account without having to download and install Galaxy.

And while I have a Gwent placeholder sitting in my account (or rather: the extras that come with it (OST)), I never felt the need to download Galaxy...
I wonder, what is it that makes me so special in contrast to you and others here?...what enables ME to defy the nefarious schemes of GOG/CD Project RED, while YOU apparently can't?

But those "unpaid amateurs" aren't connected to GOG. Galaxy is.
And if GOG would use these "unpaid amateurs" work - without paying them - all hell would break loose here on the forums. Simply look up threads about mods used by GOG releases.
Exactly! And as with every choice, it's up to the individual, whether they make that choice or not.
I made my choice.
Did you make yours?
Look, I'll keep it short here: it's all about choices.

GOG made their choice, to develop/use Galaxy as a means to online MP, now it's up to you to make the choice whether you want to use it, or not.

Wishing for alternatives to Galaxy, doesn not mean getting alternatives to Galaxy.

If GOG wants you to use Galaxy to play a certain game - but you don't want to use Galaxy, then don't buy/claim that game.
Simple.

Sure. So do you think the goal of CDPR in creating GWENT was to make a free game for us out of the goodness of their hearts? They love us so much they made a full, fulfilling game experience for free? I could buy that from indie developers who are not necessarily in it for business purposes, want to make art and change the world for the better etc, but not from a corporate entity like CDPR whose "job" is to maximize profits.

By the way, why does GWENT get so much higher publicity (forum posts about updates, etc) than other free games on GOG (most of which are actually DRM-free and playable offline), if "free games" are all equivalent? My answer is: they want you to spend money on this particular free game by buying the exorbitantly priced DLC. My thought is: CDPR made the game free for a reason, and made paid DLC (or whatever we want to call it) for a reason.

The "you can ignore it, it's optional content" is at odds with the fact they have incentive to make the DLC appealing/the base game lacking without the DLC. That said, I wouldn't know in this case of GWENT, as I refuse to even buy Thronebreaker given it forces GWENT online content as "bonuses"...I'm sure that's out of the goodness of their hearts too, rather than trying to funnel additional users into the online game.


Because it's arguably the most apparent example though sadly there are now additional examples. At one point I believe GWENT was the only game of its kind here, but you may know better as you have been on the site far longer than I have.

There are a lot of unfounded assumptions being made here.

For one, who decides what is "necessary" or "unnecessary"? The developer/publisher, who has a literal vested interest in withholding content to sell at a premium later? They declare a base game is complete, thus, it is so? Personally I would say the individual gamer decides what is necessary or unnecessary for themselves, though we should err on the side of the "complainers" as it were in order to maximize the amount of content we get.

I've been "voting with my wallet" over the years by buying releases here DRM-free, many full-price to support that, GOG, and DRM-free in general. All it did was cause suit cretins to pour money into their increasingly NOT-optional client. So I don't really advocate that approach here, but I do when it comes to smaller purely DRM-free stores as long as I feel they are trustworthy and not just waiting to sell out their DRM-free principles too, as it were.


Providing feedback of customer dissatisfaction isn't an "argument" per se but it is a valuable tool for businesses who would care to listen. It strikes me that this topic about the survey is an example of that too, but it remains to be seen what GOG will do with the feedback provided therein or in this topic/this forum.
No, it's a CHOICE!! If you don't buy any DRMed games, then the store is still DRM-free. Have you no self-control? How do you old complainers not get this? :)
And it will be too late to undo all the DRM at the point when people like yourself feel comfortable in admitting "the complainers" have a point. You might as well say "gee, you know guys, I think you're right that microtransactions were a bad idea". Too late, they're here to stay now. Other than maybe some social discomfort, what do people like yourself have against joining up with us "complainers"? Or at least standing aside and letting us complain with getting pushback.

Well sorry, but if you haven't learned what self-control has to do with anything, when it comes to buying behaviour, then I'm afraid, I won't be able to teach you that in this place.
So, you don't check on games before you buy...oh, I forgot...no self-control. Sorry. delicate topic for you, I'm sure.

I, on the other side, don't buy what I don't want to buy.

Even if GOG would (notice the conjunctive) offer DRMed games from January 1st on - I would still not be forced to buy those.

I could still make elaborated choices over what I buy here and what not.
For what it's worth: I pity anyone who lacks that kind of self-control.

Any (serious) examples on games that got more "incomplete" after release, due to extra content, that the base game didn't have at the time of release?

I finished the survey yesterday and the questions about MTX and subscriptions and similar gave me stomach cramps.

Sure you can ask but asking the question alone ...

If GOG is to introduce ANY kind of DRM (or content locked behind secondary dependencies (including Galaxy) other than my account login to download and use offline) then GOG is dead because what other reason is there NOT to buy buy from Steam, then.

If I accept DRMed content, I buy it from Steam - certainly NOT from GOG!!!

PS: Plus I bashed their fraking useless Support Chatbot gating contact to actual support-staff.

Go be an apologetic for crappy practices somewhere else.

What they do, is to promise that the games are drm free and we should be allowed to rely on that.

If they took that promise back, you would be right with your criticism. But so far they didn't.

No. I think I'll stay here.
But you feel free to leave if this store isn't what you're looking for.

Choices.
What criticism?

Even then, as customers it would be perfectly reasonable to voice our complaints that GOG is changing for the worse.

You seem entirely unable to understand that some of us want to keep GOG entirely DRM-free (or to have a polite conversation without acting like a jerk, but that's a different matter). It's not about anyone's "buying behaviour". Yes, if it introduced games with DRM we could "just not buy them". But that's not what we want. There's little to no point to GOG like that, such stores already exist, and we CHOSE not to use them. If I wanted to buy games with DRM, I could already go and buy them on Steam. What's the point of having them here, also with DRM? That doesn't give me any more CHOICES. And if games are allowed to be released with DRM here, what would the incentive for publishers be to go the extra mile and offer them without DRM? Soon there would be little to no DRM-free releases. And no more CHOICE.

Maybe try a little harder to grasp what we're actually talking about, and little less to bang on how special you are with your self control, which is really nothing remarkable to anyone over the age of five and is not in any way relevant to what anyone here is talking about.

You're in luck! Cyperbunk does indeed have a "free DLC" that is gated behind Galaxy! Now stop pretending that content that requires online activation to access is not DRM.

"You can access parts of it offline" doesn't mean a game is DRM-free. Unless you're even crazier and would say that Hitman was also DRM-free? Same exact situation as the CP2077 and Witcher 3 bits -- only different at a matter of scale.

Content is gated behind an online requirement to use it. It does not matter what or how much of that content is restricted (or how much money may or may not be parted with for it).

There's zero benefit to you continuing to lie and gaslight on behalf of CDPR and GOG.

Here's the easiest litmus test to apply: Can someone take their offline installer, put it on an offline machine (say one in a cabin in the woods that has no Internet connectivity at all), install it, and get the same, complete, nothing-missing*, experience as someone playing on a connected machine?


*many people also add "from the single player", pessimistically acknowledging that the 'multiplayer "clients required" ship has sailed'