I find it odd that you are not jumping to def-con vs the DRM, this is usually how the change starts towards always online DRM.

It may be optional now but later it might not be (might be years down the line and this is the first step towards that change).
Also by offering a online multiplayer there is a good chance developers in future releases will only use that for mp instead of having lan support, so that is my fear, with the ease of adding mp with the online component comes a reduction of developers offering lan for MP. Blizzard and the Diablo games are an excellent example, Diablo had LAN MP, D2 had LAN and hosted MP, D3 forced always online MP and pretty much no SP. This seems to be a reaccuring evelution for companies.

Personally this does absolutely nothing for me, I do not enjoy matchmaking, ladder, social, achievements or any of that stuff. I find it fun to play LAN (where we meet up at some place instead of over the internet).

.Net is a library, it is not something you have running, same goes for direct X, Visual Studio is a development tool that you make software with, but I assume you are talking about the Visual Studio runtime library which is again a library.
Comparing these things with a program that is running in the background and connecting to a server somewhere with your account information is an extremely poor comparison.


Don´t get me wrong, I am happy for those that do find this an improvement and like this change, but I am voiceing my concerns with what I am afraid this will eventually lead to.

Obviously I can't speak for others, but my concerns stem from this exchange:

This, to me, implies that Gog doesn't consider ownership checks with a central authority DRM for multiplayer features. Lots and lots of games, pretty much all of them up to a certain point, implemented their matchmaking so that you can still play them, even online, long after the official servers went down. My fear is that Galaxy will be another nail in the coffin of that way of doing things, all while Gogers (who would be on the barricades if this concerned single-player) cheer it on.

But this is all speculation anyways, we're just voicing fears. It would be nice if we could get an actual position on this.

Im not jumping because theres no grounds for concern; thats fear-mongering, and its unfoundedly destructive.

They could also turn GoG into Hello Kitty Island Adventure; does that mean we need to be worried about them doing so with what they said about galaxy? Thats jumping to extreme conclusions, like when people keep claiming "yea, thats how it started before the Nazis took over".

Theres no guarantee that developers will ever support Lan. In fact, most games do not support lan at all, let alone multiplayer. The idea that Lan is somehow in jeopardy is a false dichotomy; its been out of the loop for almost a decade now. Its been thoroughly replaced with other online systems, like dedicated servers and client linking over a cloud. This isnt something necessarily because of DRM, or "Steam-like" clients, but an evolution of the industry. Is it sad that Lan isnt included anymore ? Sure it is, but for the most part other online options work just fine if not better mechanically, unless its a forced online experience, which is actually far and few between unless its a MMFPS or MMO.

And thats your own opinion and decision. There are a vast majority that do enjoy the other types of multiplayer and human interaction, and we have to acknowledge that and accept it, just like folks that enjoy Lan.

I know what those are, thats why I used them as examples. Its the same concept, regardless of their intended feature; its extra software you have to install to play your game, which could be completely optional. Thats what we are arguing here are we not? The belief that we are installing "intrusive" software to be able to play our games, regardless of it requires an online connection or not. Its only a "poor comparison" if you are narrow minded / fixated on a sole outcome; fighting against anything you perceive as the enemy. As I mentioned, its become a stigma now to use any form of extra client or interface for a game, no matter its use. It doesnt matter if it has nothing to do with DRM at all, or affects your game; its seen and considered as intrusive software and practice. And yet at the same time they ignore every other software they have to use to function at all, or any other extra step they need to take.

There are reasonable questions and concerns...and then theres just paranoia. Until GoG actually gives us a reason to question their intentions, people need to stop jumping to conclusions that every new change is going to lead the site to turning into Steam. Its like almost literally every time they mention a change to the site.

Thats taking It out of context. The blue response was that the Galaxy system has no real DRM at all, and allows you to play with systems that require DRM, which would be an odd philosophy. Its like companies letting you use pirated copies of Modern Warfare to play with people who bought the game on official servers. Its exactly that comparison.

The comment about online checks, was that you still have to log onto your account and buy games, plus be logged on to download them. This, by definition, is a form of DRM. The problem is that people overlap and misconstrue the acronym DRM so much that its lost its initial meaning with the vast majority. Logging on to post on a forum is "DRM", and you dont see people up in arms about it on a daily basis. It actuality, its just an online check to make sure you are who you say you are, just like buying stuff on Amazon, or playing most Multilayer games. While slightly inconvenient, its necessary to make sure everyone is being honest, and to combat mischievous behavior.

So this is slightly off topic, but I logged out to check if they had ever reinstated the "One world, one price" statement on the homepage for reasons you'll love GOG (or something to that effect), and not only was the one world one price statement not there, I couldn't find any of them.

Did GOG completely remove their mission statement from the main page? Am I missing something? If so, when did this happen? Anyone know?

How can there be a vibrant global MP community if there were not Clients to ensure that everyone playing a given game, were all playing the same version and with no cheats? If there is not this Legitimacy Check, MP would be No Fun. Not from a lobby of global scale. Between friends and groups, there is less or no need. But out there in the public, i think an MP Client is required.

This Client can serve as an MP enabler. And it can support a social platform. That Can Be about all that it does. Will depend on implementation if the program gets terminator, spy, and gate-keeper functionality. Since this is a Gog thing, i am betting on a clean implementation. Tools of enablement, not shackles of control. We'll see.

Looks like it pitchfork lighting time again... .finally! Mine was collecting dust.

GOG removes DRM-Free policy from homepage! It's the GOGpocalypse everybody! GOG is STEAM now!

It could be due to the fact that the TW3 banner takes up more space than the usual ones.
I do recall seeing the mission statement banner as late as the day of the conference.

Quoting Judas This reply makes me believe that they will not be removing currently available options.
Also see this post and this one. They keep saying "Add Galaxy option", not "Replace with Galaxy option".

Unless they did say so somewhere and I missed it.

Its gotta be GoG caving to CD's demands. They just walk in and change everything or GoG cant publish their new Witcher game. This is how onliine only DRM starts, by catering to non DRM companies like CD, just for a non exclusive.

/hint of playful sarcasm <3
Basically it means that galaxy wont be making every game out there multiplayer compatible with the galaxy system. Some games are designed in such a way, that it may not be feasible or even possible (licensing / contracts ) to integrate / update older games (or any game) to use the new galaxy system for multplayer matchmaking, etc.

All the other features will still work, and basically the galaxy client works just like the GoG Downloader we have now, only it will have features like chat/ etc. like a steam/origin/uplay client/browser. For all intents and purpose, its just going to be a glorified GoG downloader to most people, and they wont need to use it, but if they do it wont be any more intrusive than that, or add more functionality for their games than it would.

Licensing/contracts shouldn't be a problem, especially considering that GOG already has permission to modify the games as needed to get them running. Technical issues may be a problem of course, but I do believe GOG Galaxy will be using a wrapper to get around those.

As long as GOG Galaxy doesn't turn every new game with some multiplayer functionality into Galaxy-only game and current GOG downloader doesn't go anywhere, I have nothing against this.

What would really sell Galaxy to me would be if it offered improved online functionality (like server browsing) for actual old games that only have direct IP connecting or have server browsing based on some defunct service.

Its probably a really touchy situation between GoG and the owner of the games. Its one thing to "update" the game in a way for it to work with new OS / platforms (something they still need to work out with the owner prior) , but to redesign features and/or modify the game not initially intended may be a whole other situation. It took them a long time just to get some / all companies to get along on the dlc / expansion / gold edition / etc. bandwagon for games, and that was stuff that was already out there.

As you said though, im sure that their use of the galaxy client will provide a more "easygoing" avenue for them to make it all work, and Im sure a lot if not most companies will see this as a way to boost sales without having to fork over any of their own money, so theyll go along with it. But its agreed, the technical aspect of it just may not work for some games, and thatll be sad but not unbecoming or unexpected.

Well this is where we disagree, I think there are grounds for concern and this is why I am voicing my concerns, this is what this thread is about, customer feedback.

I disagree, this is not an extreme conclusion, this is very much a possible conclusion.


I agree, there is no guarantee that developers will ever support lan, but if they are offered a easy alternative to LAN mp then they will most of the time take it, f.e. what galaxy is going to offer.
Yes the industry is working its way to move into more online stuff, so I would say LAN is in jeopardy, there is plenty of games out there, recent games that support LAN mp so your notion that it has been out of the loop for a decade is false, steam/origin like clients are pushing out LAN, most recent games that have been moving towards steam have dropped their LAN support and moved towards online servers more and more, so I stick to it that steam/origin like clients are causing a decline in LAN support.

Yes it is my opinion as stated in my post, just like it is your opinion however you feel about it. But there in lies the problem, with the majority not minding the restrictions this inherently has. This is why I among many others use gog, to avoid the steam client hazzle.

Well, that was the point, those examples are horrible to compare, thse libraries and online clients are not the same things, it has nothing to do with fighting the enemy or being narrow minded.

If the extra software is not optional to use the game mechanics (f.e. multiplayer) then it is an intrusive software, then it is pretty much the same as steam/origin, that means I can not use the mechanics when I do not have an internet connection, this is the problem with the online component. This might be something you do not care about, but I do and thus I voice my concerns with this.

Every other software and steps we need to take do not stop working when we loose our internet connection or if we forget our password nor do they ask us to login this is the difference and this is where this stuff starts affecting my game.

Thats your opinion, in my opinion these are reasonable concerns.
Generally I prefer to voice my concerns before hand, not afterwards where it is harder to change/abort.

Thats currently where the grey area is, and where a lot of people are getting confused about their game libraries. The point of galaxy is to supplement / create systems that are already in place for games, like ones that use steamworks; the other is to bring into the fold other and older games with the same intentions in mind ( like how old multplayer clients like xfire and gamespy used to work) without adding any extra 3rd party programing or hoops to jump through. It may not be possible for some games to do this, but its the intention that they try and make sure as many games as possible can use the new multilplayer format if they so choose.

And the key point is "choose" .