I am trying and I hope so too, but its getting harder and harder.

I was just thinking about this this morning. Even if GOG did get rid of all of the DRM and other issues due to the backlash they still would probably have to be forced to follow their "principles" in the future. I'd like to see some new (or old) staff / management / owners who genuinely care about being DRM-free.

Also, if I was a millionaire I'd totally try to buy enough shares to make a change ;-)

Something to remember is that If management changes nothing tells you that the new one will cares about DRM-free at all. They might consider that becoming a fully DRM-agnostic store or throwing the towel and selling Gog would be a better business strategy for CDPR.

There is another solution - GOG could create a sister company, some sort of subsidiary: "GOG Game Shop" that would be "DRM free agnostic", and leave "DRM free" shop exclusively on GOG.com. Problem solved.

They already have, and it didn't solve any problem. In the main thread after they announced they'd sell Epic Games through Galaxy, one moderator tried to repeatedly make the distinction that GOG.com and Galaxy are 'different things for different audiences' (which means planned changes beyond having Galaxy just be a fancy optional launcher for GOG games). The 'difference' in theory being Galaxy now having optionally DRM'd Epic games available for purchase would almost be treated as a 'different store', whilst GOG.com (in theory) would remain the "actual DRM-Free" store... Read through the thread, and few people believed there was any real difference in practise beyond artificial internal marketing, and this Hitman release reaffirms that perfectly.

You are correct - but I am talking about clear cut GOG splice: general "GoG Game Store" as separate web shop with anything goes approach; and "GoG Classic" web shop with only curated selection of DRM free games. So that Hitman and other "contaminated" games can be sold in GOG Game Store (and Galaxy) with all other games, and "clean" games (DRM free) would be sold via GoG Classic.

I've been saying that since they dropped the flat price principle. And CDP has their own store, or at least used to, so the solution would have been to have games that don't follow GOG's original principles there and leave GOG to make a stand, preferably with a transfer of games from the "generic" store to GOG after a number of years, when they're old enough for the publishers to perhaps be more maleable regarding terms.

Maybe they could be Embraced.

isn't Zoom-Platform sort of doing that? (albeit at a snail's pace) The problem is getting devs and pubs to actually give a crap about a tiny store.

If GOG does get a overhauled leadership, one thing I would like is to see positive curation. Forum-goers might be familiar with my opposition to curation, but here is the dividing line for me: Most of the curation proposed is about preventing games people personally dislike, rather than actually seeking out quality games.

To me, good curationship is about trying to find good stuff, be they popular, nostalgic, or unknown gems. For example, ActRaiser Renaissance was just released on the Steam store. The original holds a place in my jaded heart, and undoubtedly enthusiasts of the SNES library would love to get their paws on the remake. If GOG had a team of headhunters monitoring Steam's upcoming releases, the company could have made a deal and released it here.

But that didn't happen. While a solitary release wouldn't change GOG's fortunes, I think have many mild successes would grow GOG's reputation and safeguard a niche: "Good Old Games". Steam cannot be directly confronted, so GOG should pursue a mission that Steam isn't willing to pursue - the preservation and presentation of good games. Similar to what the Criterion Collection does for film.

The appeal of GOG throughout its better days lay in how it set itself apart from Steam, not in mimicking it. While I am alright with efforts with being more friendly to the common customer, GOG must realize that its customer base are a different breed from the Steam userbase. We are people who treasure our games, worry about calamity taking them away, and want to see the great games last eternal.

GOG was created with that premise, and has forgotten it.

That's my point. ZP has been around since 2014, which is incidentally when GOG notably set firmly on its way to shed its clear, specific stated values (even if a solid argument can be made for the moment when they decided to allow newer games (and higher prices), in 2012). But can it be said that it in any way replaced the old GOG in the scheme of things?

ZP has DRM-free games and, afaik, not many sales and not deep discounts. Does it have regional pricing?

Are you talking about ZP not having many games? I don't think we can have our cake and eat it too:

correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't GOG drop "one world" pricing to get more games here basically and grow? If they stuck with their values, do we have any idea how much more they would have grown or been able to stay in business? Do you believe they'd continue on the trajectory of growth and an ability to actually influence the industry for the better and get "AAA" games here without compromising their values? Personally I don't see it, but I guess we're just getting into "what if" territory.

(IIRC you are someone who has said he'd prefer GOG have gone out of business than compromise any of their values, something I disagree with aside from DRM-free but certainly don't want to argue over.)

I guess I don't actually get what you're saying here: in your view, shouldn't a "GOG shaped hole" already exist since GOG dropped their values? Why does one need to be "created"? Or are you saying you believe nobody will try what GOG did ever again at this point because GOG dropped their principles to be able to grow or even stay in business, so a business won't even bother trying what GOG did?

Also it sounds like you're saying it's hopeless, in which case

So set up a second store that allows DRM, regional pricing, etc., but keep GOG "pure", all under CDP's control? Would that have satisfied you, because, even if GOG "died", they'd have died "for something", like a martyr?

The answer to that is no, and one of the reasons for that could be because GOG is still filling the hole in some ways and to some extent, albeit awkwardly and inappropriately and incorrectly and in a way that is not fit for purpose.

I still buy from GOG occasionally because I'm stuck with GOG if I want to have any sort of decent selection of high quality (sometimes) DRM-free games. And I'm sure many other customers are also in that same boat.

However, if another GOG alternative were to come up, which has a comparable selection of games & features as GOG does, and which truly features only DRM-free titles, then I'd probably jump ship to that store. And so would many others.

It's like the saying, "beggars can't be choosers." A lot of us have to put up with GOG's crap, yet still patronize the store anyway, because there is no viable alternative to it.

Then again, it could also be the case that if GOG were to disappear, then no one would even try to fill the hole, because DRM-free is an ultra-niche, and dying concept. As a business person, it wouldn't make much sense to try and get into it with a new business, and especially not if the motive is profit, which is unlikely to be much, if anything.

There are a few, like zoom-platform.....but a number of people seem to not want to put trust in them(perhaps after getting burned by GOG?). Of course, (and just like early GOG) without patronage sites like zoom-platform cannot grow and gain more games/site features.

Simply put: If people want more viable alternatives to GOG in the DRM free arena, then they need to frequent/buy from the ones available(no matter how small they are or how suspicious some are of them) and help them grow.