I preorder too and i could not enable dlc

So you want the choice of only steam? Because that's the choice you are asking for. It's not like gog waves a magical wand, and this multiplayer "drm" would be gone. To get rid of this "drm", the devs would have to write their own multiplayer matchmaking service, and that's not going to happen for the vast majority of games. So the end result would be that multiplayer games would not work at all on gog, or they would avoid gog. Gog is already the redheaded stepchild when it comes to patches compared to steam.

How come I cant install the game so far?
I am reading the posts and cant figure out am i the only one not getting the game on my shelf even though got it as pre order deal. I got on my shelf a sound track instead.
On GOG galaxy shelf the tag reflect soundtrack and on red 'Not Available Yet'
Tried to download it from the GOG site but cannot either.
Sent the support team since Sep 26 and no reply until now. I would appreciate some information on what is going on here?

How else would you handle cheaters or people who try to ruin the online community and such? The way I see it when it is happening on a companies servers especially (and not just p2p) then I feel they are well within the right to have some forms of restrictions as they are paying for the dedicated servers and hosting said traffic to offer you a better online experience. But even outside of that, if it was all done via p2p I would still feel the same way, most people would want these companies to take control over cheaters and people who ruin online communities, and the best way to do so is an account based system.

What else is there? IP Ban? Yea because we know how well that works....

And don't give me the "revoking" all accounts by shutting down the server... you know what you are getting when you buy games with a strong focus in online multiplayer that don't have LAN ect. That like complaining when a MMO shuts down and you can't play anymore. You knew what you were buying into.

Furthermore I'd argue for the amount of people that care about such things it just no worth preserving... how many games lose their online communities after a year or two. Unless it's a really popular game, typically the online communities are nearly non existent after a few years.

Again... has nothing to do with Galaxy. It has been here all along since GOG started in the form of CD keys for online multiplayer and other online account based systems. The only difference is the client... these games would still be here with or without Galaxy. All Galaxy does is offer devs a way to quickly keep online multiplayer intact when the move from Steam to GOG, which they probably would not have done without Galaxy unless they built there own system or used another third party system to accomplish the same thing.

Simple as that really. You keep saying GOG broke their rule set... no GOG never had a rule set for online multiplayer to begin with and your just having a really hard time accepting that.

Furthermore, as I pointed out to you in the Victor Vran thread which you ignored me on... GOG can't not afford to play dictator when it comes to denying games only on there features. It might work for now, but eventually they will run out of old games to sell, and these online connected games with account based multiplayer is pretty much the new standard today so nearly every new game with a multiplayer focus will have it. So either you accept it or we end up with a gimped version with no multiplayer down the road... I know what I'd prefer.

No I have not ignored you or your arguments but simple as that: GOG is talking about DRM-free. So for sure we could argue about having only some online-bound multiplayer-modes or not but in this case we are talking about bindings to a so-called optional game-client. That is nevertheless something very different from my perspective. And just to mention: There are so much more games to be sold. Have a look on the wishlist for that. You simply relativize the problem: There is nothing in common with dictatorship when a game is not sold here. You also talked about the business-model and that there has to be some kind of growth. In fact that is a modern lie: Stagnation is not a bad thing. The capitalistic view just realize that as some kind of weakness in the business-model. I say: This is the major problem. There cannot be growth forever or without letting loss on principles. Better that way having stagnation, selling Good Old Games and not this kind of game. So this is also my answer to your last sentence: I also know what I prefer and as somebody earlier talked about. If GOG is going more down that road I won't support that any longer. Easy as that I also know what I'd prefer. Not being some kind of puppy for the companies. ;-) Supporting good software with a fair model, no problem. Supporting intransparent applications? No way!

And you can argument as much as you want: This has to do with Galaxy - the so-called optional game-client, laughing very loud and bitter about that.

And GOG also gets to say what is and isn't DRM free.

And don't you think if GOG could get those games they would be here? Obvious answer is there are legal barriers to getting them here.

The is a big difference between stagflation for a while and no possible growth whatsoever. You point to the wishlist, but that is irrelevant, because we are talking about what is actually obtainable and if they are not here now as GOG says then there are legal barriers to getting them here. And if your not releasing new games because you refuse account based multiplayer games (which is most games today) then you having nothing to fill in the gaps while trying to obtain older games. And that point not only would you have no growth, you would lose customers... especially if were talking months or more for the time it could take to get releases. Either that or you release a gimped version with no online multiplayer which I'd argue would not maintain GOG's current level of customers, and it surely would not lead to any type of growth.

And if GOG was to start saying: "Nope sorry you have to redesign how your handling online multiplayer if you want your game here", which a majority would not do since GOG is a smaller market share, and that point they would probably even question if they want their older games here. It's one thing to take out DRM which doesn't evolve much extra work, it's another to design or re-design a game to fit GOG's so called "principles".

But we will agree to disagree because we have been down this road one to many times already...

Of course you need such mechanisms to protect a server. That's not the point, the point is the central, exclusive server where you can get blocked at will from the entire game (often even innocently or by collateral damage). That cannot happen with games which provide alternative, decentralized multiplayer modes like LAN, P2P or a dedicated server.

You know it? Where is the statement of the game publisher how long they will run the game server? Have you ever seen that on a game release? Really?
A publisher sells you a game and after you have bought it the publisher decides at will how long you will be able to play the game. Do you still remember:
It's not me who calls it DRM. ;)

On some games there are active game communities even after many years. But of course only when a game provides a dedicated server or any other game mode which does not depend on a central server.

Thank you! Please do s.th. about that preorder DLC problem.

Still the same problem. Tried account refresh several times but no avail.
Thanx for help

Well, I don't mind GOOD, NEW games, as long as they are DRM-free ;)

Yes they should. If the developers don't bother with implementing a DRM-free multiplayer mode they should sell their games elsewhere. GOG is a little bit like a fair trade shop: yes, they would probably make more money by just selling regular goods but then they would be just another discounter. No reason for me to prefer them over the competition then.

So let me conculde: You would rather not have this game offered here at all (in the current form where you don't need any client app for playing singleplayer, its completely YOUR singleplayer game), than having it here as DRM free as possible? OO

How much of an idealist can anyone be? Even setting the business aspect of selling games totally aside, what remains is I think a pretty childish attitude. Sorry no offense, thats just the impression I am getting.

This is not so much about idealism, my reasons are at leat 50% selfish. I like to to buy games on GOG because I don't have to search for hidden traps. It's much more convenient than searching the web to find out which registration is required for wich kind of usage. In my opinion that is (was?) one of the strong points of GOG and even made my buy games spontaneously on this site. A thing I would never do anywhere else.

I'm not asking for anything, I'm just calling it by its name: non-optional client app.