trust me, nothing you can do will annoy me

As amok says, it is very hard to understand your posts. Whether that be due to a lack of English skill or the way your mind works or maybe something like spell checker messing with your posts, done from a phone maybe, we don't know.

Anyway, that aside, if a game after downloading it plays without a client or a launcher that needs an internet connection, then to my mind it is essentially DRM-Free.

Aside from DRM-Free Lite, there is also DRM-Free Limited.

DRM-Free Limited would cover where the single player aspect is DRM-Free but the Multiplayer isn't.
You could also say it covers where the single player element is also not entirely DRM-Free ... requires online connection to get bonus stuff or gain access to something.

Of course DRM-Free Limited can be provided in two ways. You can get the single player part, but the multiplayer part is either DRM or is missing altogether. Quite whether you call a game that is missing its Multiplayer as some kind of DRM, I've never been able to make up my mind, as the bit you bought is DRM-Free.

Buying or obtaining DRM-Free Lite games from stores such as Epic and Steam, is an option. Those stores are here to stay, been around a long while. The relatively few who buy at GOG are never going to change what happens at the other stores. In fact, GOG are always doing it tough, especially when it comes to getting game providers to provide their product to GOG, especially AAA game providers. That said, GOG do seem to turn many of the lesser providers away, or more likely just cannot settle on acceptable terms.

So the encouraging bad behavior as you say, is a non issue. You and I are not going to change whether those stores survive. If we get DRM-Free only games from them, then that might mean they provide more games DRM-Free. That is a positive thing, that might yield improvement, rather than the negative thing you are suggesting, that won't.

So many now seem to take DRM-Free for granted these days, when most of it could be lost in the blink of an eye. The way the world is going and has been going for a long time, is toward even more DRM. GOG is one of the few lights in that darkness, the biggest one, but it isn't a given they will continue to survive ... it's a continual battle for them all the way.

Same argument was used with microtransactions..Pay to win , lootboxs and the least egresses of them all DLC .. Thus you see how that same mindset and argument went for those arguments .. Its why I am against buying even remotely DRMED games.. Because of how the same arguments and history repeating itself again.. Thus I believe like the Lootbox factor in resent years where it took literally getting so bad the goverments have took notice to get things changed drm might be a similar situation if people keep the same mindset you are presenting here in your reply on the subject .. Which by the way some goverments have started to take notice of the drm situation not enough to change things but I never like govermental oversight in hobbies given how baddly that has shown to usually backfire over the years aswell for the end user

It's similar to streaming shows and movies... many people "boycott" that like it's going to make any difference, when those platforms are insanely popular. There is no boycott you could ever do of Steam that would matter, because quite simply the vast, vast majority of PC gamers disagree with you. I see people on here acting like there's still a war going on or whatever... there is not. It's over, we lost.

You can still "boycott" stuff you disagree with of course... I refuse to buy always online singleplayer games myself... but don't think you're making a difference. That debate was settled years and years ago.

Haha what war?There was never a war to begin with. Gog has its place like steam epic etc and we will always get certain games here.Amazon etc are popular because they give people a lot of options watching offline buying them physically or stream but they are still in the million numbers which isn’t that high compared to the rest of the world.Amazon prime has 148 million members. Gog can grow massive as well if they add more options and make everything more customer friendly for example proper linux support.But non or less there will always be a need for a place like gog so I’m not worried

One of the silliest things I've read on here, congrats for having zero perspective.

What same argument, I don't see the relationship or relevance at all.
And what the heck does remotely DRMED games mean ... sounds like a nonsense to me.

A game is either DRM or it isn't.

No matter what facts I give you, you are determined not to change your tune.

While I believe in supporting GOG, I believe in supporting DRM-Free more, wherever I get it from, and wherever I get it from I like to encourage them to provide more DRM-Free games, whether that be Steam or Epic or whoever.

Your attitude and stance is going to have zero impact, except on yourself.

Same argument as in ''Don't buy the games with drm will encourage more drm free games '' has been a very similar argument to ''don't buy games with dlc that will end the dlc practice or just don't buy the dlcs'' that didn't work as games still are now regularly with DLC''Just don't buy lootboxes they'll go away as a side affect'' that didn't work'' Don't by microstranstions and they'll go away'' that didn't work.. ''Don't buy the always online games and they'll go away'' didn't work either

See you are using a very similar in ''just buying drm free games will result in getting more from storefronts that have a minor form of drm going on from usually one has to tweak files or delite files to get them to run without a launcher.. Thus my statement similar to that your argument doesn't hold water when the similar has been said on other

As for Drmed remotely what I mean is simily some forms of drm is easy to work around as has been stated by people on here about Tweak afew lines in a games coding one gets to not needs Steams launcher for example

what a strange omission from Bethesda. what do they stand to gain by barring a release on gog?

They might save a teeny bit on manhours (and money) by not bothering to implement multiplayer for the gog version. Other than that: absolutely nothing.

You mean the same Bethesda launcher that Bethesda is specifically getting rid of this year? That one?

Yep.
And even though that launcher's getting retired, most of Bethesda's recent games will still uses Bethesda.Net's Log-In via their servers w/ your own Bethesda.Net Account.

And yes, Quake Enhanced does have Bethesda.Net Log-In's w/ your Bethesda.Net account in-game, on Steam....even though the Steam-version doesn't use the Bethesda.Net Launcher.

Bethesda was basically just using their own Launcher as a mean to buy their games directly from them for buyers; that's it.

They'd still need to remove that junk and/or disable it, to get Quake: Enhanced on GOG - that junk will not fly here on GOG from GOG itself and its user-base & fan-base.

See this on Bethesda.Net log-ins via their servers/services:
https://bethesda.net/en/article/2RXxG1y000NWupPalzLblG/sunsetting-the-bethesda-net-launcher-and-migrating-to-steam

Which is meaningless, as unlike what you claimed there isn't any "proprietary platform" that has to be reworked for GOG. Plenty of multiplayer games here require a third-party online account, e.g. Age of Wonders 3. As long as single-player doesn't require anything like that, not very many people care.

Well, the way I see it, is that the reworking is only removing or adjusting what they added, so shouldn't be necessary in the first place, as they already had a GOG ready version before that, no doubt minus whatever Multiplayer support is required.

I and many others don't give a toss about the MP element, and that could always be added later to the GOG version.