rjbuffchix: Survey says: more DRM and DRM-like schemes coming here in the near future, surely with plenty of fanboy apologia about how it's not reeaaallly a DRM, "it's a Reward." If they are really asking how important is DRM-free, they've lost the plot completely. I guess we do have the odd Skyrim here or there to look forward to but I've made a conscious effort that if a desired game is available at a smaller, purely DRM-free store, to buy it there instead of here. No more funding Galaxy and CDPR (I don't want to support your dream of becoming a Rockstar) if I can help it.

Time4Tea: All I can say in response to this 'survey' is: backup your offline installers. It's clear from GOG's line of questioning that things are going to get worse here over the next couple of years.

BreOl72: B) If Hitman or any other DRMed game would be here, I(!) still would not have to buy them. So, again: no problem.

mdqp: Not to be a busybody, but how come so many can't agree to disagree?

DRM is a matter of principle to some, and a "practical matter" for others. There is a lot of overlap, and of course what's "practical" is a very subjective assessment, so I can understand the disagreements, but it seems like people are talking in circles.

What I mean is that, even if you don't agree, is it really so hard to see each other's point, as flawed as you might think it is? For example, those who want no DRM, no matter what, do this because they worry about the future, and the possible consequences down the line. They also find it distasteful to receive arbitrary restrictions. There are also other concerns, such as ownership over our licenses, accessibility and so on, all of which have a lot of validity (I personally feel the ownership part as very important, and to this day I generally regard most of my purchases outside of GOG as "cheap rental").

There is a lot be said for preservation, and what can be accessed legally despite buying a game, and I imagine those are all self-explanatory arguments.

On the other hand, it's not difficult to see a practical argument as well. For example, if a game used to have an online component, but the service is long dead, should it be denied a presence on GOG? I think almost no one would be against having the single-player here. But then, if another game has DRM for the multiplayer, should it be denied?

If you look at it practically, even if you are against DRM, there would be no meaningful difference (if anything, the one with DRM is even better than the other, since it's still playable online if you are willing to compromise). Is there really a point in waiting for the online to die, before we can have the single-player DRM free? Or perhaps to be fair to all these game we should deny any on here which have content currently unavailable because of present or past DRM, which is extremely restrictive and might disqualify perfectly good single-player experiences from ever appearing (heck, I don't know the entire GOG's catalogue, but this might be relevant for a lot more games than I can think of, perhaps even some classics).

Someone brought up the bonus for Cyberpunk 2077. I think it's needlessly restrictive and arbitrary to block it behind Galaxy (even if I personally use Galaxy), but I can see why it's not a big deal for many. I mean, you are probably aware of games having unique bonuses for pre-orders or purchases on certain consoles or gaming stores. It's a ridiculous trend, but should any game with unique content on console be labeled as DRM-ed and refused sale on GOG?

Sure, it's annoying that they are dangling the extra in front of you with the Galaxy requirement, but is it really different from having a special skin for, say, a playstation version? Both are arbitrary, silly restrictions, but it's easy to see why it's not considered as core for such games. Just like some games might have problems with licensed music or other temporary deals for extras, cameos and whatnot, some content might really be legally impossible to obtain at this point in time, should that bar any version of a game from appearing?

These are just some examples, mind you, and sure you can argue against any of those, but can't you really see the point the other is trying to make? Everyone should push GOG as far as they are willing to, because that's the way to get the best out of GOG, but people usually have their reasoning for their positions, there is little to be gained from getting hostile with each other (yes, even if you think the "other side" is undermining your efforts by being overly rigid or flexible with their interpretations).

adamhm: GOG's parent company. And it is a big deal, not because of the content itself but what the restriction of it represents. It's the "foot in the door"/"thin end of the wedge"/"camel's nose under the tent"/"whatever-you-want-to-call-it" that will be used to justify progressively more egregious use of DRM later, by which point it will be far too late.

mdqp: Not to be a busybody, but how come so many can't agree to disagree?

clarry: I think we all understand each other's point pretty well, but we don't accept to arbitrary bending of definitions. Just call DRM what it is.

clarry: Just call DRM what it is.

neumi5694: Nah, that's all just interpretation. You can find any argument in the questions if you are looking for it.
You may or may not be right with your conclusions, but the line of question does not imply anything.

wolfsite: Filled it out, I clicked Pro DRM-free responses whenever possible, rejected any subscription or service, and the need to focus on offline.

Knightspace: Dude, i'm Polish, half of what we do is complain. And believe me, i've done this a lot, even here. Porn games on the landing page, removal of main patches, publishing inferior versions of the games or supplanting older editions with new ones, bending to publishers and authoritarian countries. All of this is infuriating, but THIS? This is nothing. You are irrationally angry over NOTHING.

Don't assume things about me just because your weird obsession with useless incentives to use their garbage launcher is apparently something earthshattering.

Syphon72: It's clear people have their own interpretation. Because nothing in the survey came off as GOG pushing DRM. Most questions were about:
-Satisfaction with GOG
-Services
-Subscriptions,
-Do you game mostly with people