I think Galaxy is fine, it serves a customer need and I hope and expect they will continue to develop it.

What I don't care for so much is the total loss of multiplayer unless you sign in to a 3rd party service, and the total inability to play multiplayer once Kalypso eventually shuts down their service.

I agree with that, and I would not want that either. It still does not make this DRM. It makes this a crappy design decision that you should be unhappy with Kalypso for... not at GOG for giving them tools to utilize.

I thought I made this pretty clear. I'm looking for a Steam like experience without all the BS that Steam provides like third party DRM, client DRM, and paid mods, ect. For me Galaxy fulfills that.

Should be available from your account now. If it's not, refresh your account, and if that doesn't work, contact support.

Requiring 3rd party authorization in order the play a game, even if only the multiplayer aspect, is DRM in my opinion. If there were also a way that the game could be played without authorization that would be something different. However, for this game that is not the case. So, I am unhappy with Kalypso for not providing a DRM Free multiplayer and I am unhappy with GOG for allowing them to sell it on their "DRM Free" site.

As I've said, everyone is free to believe whatever they want... doesn't make it true however. As I've also said before, GOG has never included unrestricted multiplayer in their DRM free motto, it quite clear it always reffered to playing single player and being able to install it without restrictions. One of the first games here was Sacrifice, back when GOG began, that had a CD key for playing online according to Grargar. If I believed online multiplayer could have DRM, then I would surely count that as DRM as well. If people were so against this so called type of DRM in online multiplayer they should have stood against it then, not now with Galaxy how many years later. At this point is done and over.

Take care though, we'll agree to disagree.

Thanks! I was afraid of something like that. GOGs database model must be a major pain.

Indeed! Sadly GOG does not support him the least.

That's exactly the problem with these proprietary multiplayer systems, they more and more kill the open multiplayer modes like LAN or dedicated server. When such a platform closes the multiplayer mode of the game is lost.
If GOG still were fighting against DRM as active as they once did they could have implemented a more open multiplayer solution and not another monopoly system to lock in customers.

Such as getting used to DRM in all music or games a few years ago? That's indeed a good argument. ;)

That is why GOG.com initial exists: No DRM at all. And it seems the participants here having "no problem with that" have forgotten about API-dependencies, so an installation of this game here also needs Galaxy or some parts of it - nice to have this one day on Linux ... NOT. But hey: The client took over the thinking and management of software. :-)

Yes that is a major problem and if GOG now fails making a clear statement what Galaxy should become in the future we have here another DRM-platform in the making. Of course: After finishing this posting there will be more participants in here trying to tell me that online-multiplayer has nothing to do with DRM. :-)

As I said above, you act like GOG has always been fighting again online multiplayer DRM (which again I don't see it as)... they haven't. That is clear since one of the first games here had cd keys for online multiplayer. Not to mention the other games here with proprietary multiplayer system not made by GOG like AOW3.

I'll give up the DRM-Free struggle when that day comes. I'll install Steam and forget all about GOG or Drm-free for ever. We don't need another DRM with:

-worst service (Missing Linux version for example)
-worst customer service (and in my own language)
-worst online capabilities (games without archievements or people playin on line)

The only reason to exists GOG is DRM-FREE, without it Steam is better in all ways. We've tolerated a lots of games with fewer features only because they were DRM-FREE. If the solution is to convert Galaxy in a non optional client (even if only to multiplayer), then GOG is out of the game. Steam Wins.

And now Galaxy does't go to the correct way. There is no reason to Time tracker or archievements requires online conection, but the the reality is different. The client focus on online functions that really don't need internet. And now some games require Galaxy to play online, when they can offer an online-key to use (without the client) only if the owner wants, namely a true Optional client. (Do you remember that times?, when you had the power to choose, the power to decice if you use your own online key). The clients and DRMs blew up our freedom. Now you can't play with Lan option, now you can't decide if use your key to play online, now you can't Know your play time because you aren't connect. And so I want a future more DRM-FREE and less DRM-dependent.

If GOG Follows the trail of Steam, they are lost. Without DRM-FREE GoG can do nothing against Steam. The client dependent way is a losing battle against the gigant. In other words, if I must install a mandatory client to play online, it will be Steam. There is no point of comparison, it's better in all ways (and now the off-line mode is permanet).

For now I still continue in the DRM-FREE struggle for a better future, for a future with more freedom to customers and perhaps get it back the Lan option, like Good Old Games had. Because I'm convinced that the solution is to offer more options to your customer than the competition, not offer what the compettition offers. Thus you nullify any advantage you had.

sorry to ask here but when will the preorder dlc be able to download (for pepole who preorder the game ) ?

So you are saying it is not DRM because GOG has never cared about multiplayer in their DRM-Free definition? You are right that games with multiplayer DRM have been on GOG for a long time. The first game I bought with it was Two Worlds, and I only bought it because I was not aware of the DRM. GOG refused to refund me after the purchase. However you are incorrect that people did not oppose it then and of course the opposition has been ongoing. Most people don't even realize that there are any games on GOG with DRM because most do not, and so GOG has mostly gotten away with it for a long time.

Now with Galaxy, people are justifiably worried that this will become the new normal. We want GOG to succeed and if GOG just clones Steam it will fail as it provides nothing above Steam and a far smaller catalog. Galaxy is also undermining Linux support by not having a working version, but this is a different issue from DRM.