Isn't forcing me to use a separate app to play the games which I've paid for a form of DRM?

I know that galaxy is (so far) optional, and manual installers do exist on GOG, but it's not like they are being given equal treatment here on GOG.

There are reports about manual installers falling behind galaxy in terms of updates in games, there are games being sold on galaxy which are unavailable as manual installers, and recently there was a free game given only to galaxy users.

"it isn't GOG's fault" - a moderator from r/GOG

Galaxy isn't DRM. It's a delivery platform. Because if you download the game you can run it on every PC. Just copy the game folder anywhere.
Steam also isn't DRM. Steamworks is but it's optional - i have ~70 games that run without Steam running or installed.

DRM is not about forcing you to use specific tool to download. It's about digital rights management. You have to be online so DRM will check your rights to use some stuff. Either every single time or from time to time (like Denuvo). Also it limits your ability to run software on other hardware (at least not without checking if you have rights to run it) - like modern Windows. Sure you can run it offline indefinitely but if you'll change motherboard you'll have to get a new license or you'll be running in limited mode. Or how some games with Denuvo restrict you from running them on more than 5 different PCs per day (you can bypass it for offline gameplay but not online).

Galaxy doesn't do anything like that.

no

That doesn't surprise me. The moderation on /r/gog has always been rubbish during my attempts at using it. They're always DRM apologists and super pro-Galaxy-the-best, "no criticism allowed", etc. Of course, I shouldn't be saying this because they promoted one of the bad mods there to being an official moderator here.

But to the OP: "to play", yes. But, in theory, requiring a client's use *once ever* for the purchase and first download, if properly done, could be done without counting as DRM. Of course, it can make things so ponderously complicated that it may as well be though.

Steam is drm and 98% of the games use steamworks drm.

Steam itself isn't a DRM at all. It's a store and content delivery platform. Steamworks is. ( the least intrusive and probably the least restrictive DRM of all currently used.)

I disagree. What if the computer you can download on can't install the client? Like, if it's a public computer, or it runs an OS that is not supported? That doesn't matter. If it can it lock you out of playing a game you "bought" - it's DRM. And I personally find that unacceptable.

It isn't. you can download it through galaxy and launch it offline

You're not forced to use this "separate app".

Unless we talk about multiplayer. That war has been lost a long time ago.

I disagree, IMHO It's the game that is DRM-free or not, not the way to "obtain" it. You are talking about how convenient to download the game not if the game itself it DRM-free.

Dumb example : If you purchase a DRM-free retail game (i.e. the game being DRM-free on the DVD), sold in a sealed container that can only be opened in presence of a notary and multiple witnesses, would you say that this game is not DRM-free because you couldn't decide where to open it's "container" ? Yes it would be a lot less convenient than normal retail games and understandable if a lot of peoples won't want to go through the hassle (I probably wouldn't ;) ), but at the end of the day once you have the DVD in your hand then the game on it is still DRM-free.

Same thing with some Steam game, I purchased "Enslaved Journey to the West" on Steam, I made a backup of the install folder and now I can play it on any computer I want without ever needing to install Steam or even be online so for me it qualifies as being "DRM-free", would have it been more convenient if the game was on Gog and I was able to download offline installers ? Of course, and I would purchase it again on Gog if it's ever released here. But it being less convenient doesn't make it a DRM.

Dumb example, yes.
But, to give you an answer, it would be "ARM" (analogue rights management, since there is no digital component...).

And no, I would never buy a game like that. It's basically the same thing as DRM.

Expect for this to get very technical.

1. If a client like Steam, GOG Galaxy, Epic Store is required to RUN the game at all times - yes, the client's acting as a form of DRM. Even if you got the client running & working offline (like Steam can do) and you can run the game only when that client program's going - if that client runs in the background just to run said game, it's still DRM.

2. See, for me - things get a lot grayer, when you have to install a game-client just get the game (to download it for the first time) for system #1 and then....the game can boot WITHOUT client running. Say you have Two PC Systems. It's like a half-yes and half-no here for me. Stardock Impulse did this a lot, back in the day - get the game from Stardock's client; but if you were smart and kept the files for said game and the game's EXE isn't wrapped w/ DRM, then you're okay as long as you keep the files. You can back the game up somewhere else (like on HDD, SSD, BR disc, etc); not install client on system #2; plaster those files onto system #2 - and those files run.

Except for all the things for which it isn't optional.

Please check your facts before you tell people they're misunderstanding things, otherwise you look like an arrogant fool.