How did they lie. the company said the following: We will not force companies to decide to never use any online components. It be wrong to order developers to use only Lan connections and direct file management for multiplayer and user-created content. It be wrong to deny competitive games the ability to validate matches or have them on central server hosting. GoG has said it be wrong to order every game that wants to sell GoG that they can never have any subscriber bonuses of any kind. They realize that playing hard-ball absolutes when their competition doesn't do that is not going to be viable. They can compromise by saying it needs to run and run as advertised.

Now Hitman released in a state that was, on paper, perfectly in line with that. The problem is they not only lied about the things locked behind DRM, so much of it was removed and what was remove so important, the game was non-functional in it's original design. But you'd have to dig into the game a little to know that. And GoG's moderation and negotiation can't be expected to know the long history of every game and all potential pitfall. I cant demand "you should have known how the original game worked and played the game before putting it on the store," it be unreasonable. Even if they did play it, 50/50 they actually recognize and understand it.

But as you said, the people here are great, and were willing to explain in detail what the problem is and make clear this was not okay. GoG depends on us to keep this up and stay vigilant, because no human on earth is capable of checking every game that comes out and understanding game design enough to recognize proper DRM. I hope to continue to be able to be part of that, because it's worth doing.

If you mean GOG as a company by "GOG moderation" above, then no......they should know if a game has DRM or DRM like components/aspects within it before putting it on the store......as that's GOG's main selling point and something they've been doing(vetting games as DRM free) for YEARS.

Tbh, I have little to no doubt in my mind that they(GOG higher ups/etc) knew the game had such aspects in it and decided to sell it as is anyways, and are now back peddling after the fact to save face. Now I admit that the removal of the game is a good step towards sticking to their ideals/promises(DRM free), but let's not kid ourselves here and pretend like they just figured it was DRM free and sold it without checking it at all.

Yes, it would be naive to think GOG was anything but fully aware of the situation -- and it's highly probably they expected some very harsh criticism. But my guess is they didn't expect that criticism to grow outside of the GOG boards and ecosystem. Once it hit Reddit, YouTube, and social media, they had a REAL PR problem that was probably much more of an issue than the number of sales they could make upon release.

IOI has been a "horrible" proponent of DRM the last few years. If GOG can get IOI to "unlock" Hitman, I'll be impressed... but don't expect it to happen.

This is why I suggested several times for people to push the issue of that prior game(y'all know the one) off the boards and onto social media as well, as I knew it probably wouldn't get anywhere if most of the efforts were centered on these forums....but not many seemed to want to try it. Maybe if they had, we'd have seen something done about that as well.....

But I digress.....back to the main topic!

My guess is that IOI would rather choose to not release any more such games here. I mean, there is a slight chance they might make the game offline capable so they can sell it/more games here(and that would be a nice change of pace/etc), but I don't think it's as likely as them just "packing up and heading out from GOG".

There were thousands of copies sold. I wonder how many refunds there were.

Good riddance to bad rubbish if that's the case.

While it is good that the game is removed, I am frankly disappointed in the response from some of you here. I don't think we can just "file this one away", as it were, without more information. While I understand we are not going to get access to corporate negotiations, etc, there are other answers we theoretically should be able to have and that some of us need in order to feel comfortable spending money here.

How did the game get to be here in the first place? We need to keep pressing GOG for an answer to this question as it directly bears on where they are going in terms of a DRMed direction or not. How do we know our existing games won't be "improved" in updates with "innovative" "evolved" features such as online requirements? I have asked multiple times in these topics and even made my own thread.

Has anyone noticed nowhere in GOG's response did it specifically mention the phrase "DRM-free," let alone "offline installer"? I feel this isn't just a coincidence.

Yes but I put it to you that this topic is now dead. GOG gave in, removed the game (after waiting far too long imo), and the issue is now resolved for them. You won't see another comment from GOG in this thread or related to this issue.

For those who care about DRM proliferation on GOG, you can either:
* waste your energy posting here and get frustrated that GOG won't reply to your legitimate concerns.
* make a mental note and adjust your view of what GOG is (and maybe realise that GOG is not what it once was) and save your energy for any future fights.

Thanks for this decission, gog, it was the right one. Please do always keep in mind, why we as costumers have been keeping coming here over all this years.

I am not aware of these particular words having been mentioned. But other words such as "enrich" "compelling" "grow" and "essential" have been mentioned in the context of bringing 'online' to CDPR games. And there is intent to connect this with GOG/Galaxy. See evidence from post https://www.gog.com/forum/general/the_reason_behind_gogs_recent_awful_decisions/post29

https://www.gog.com/upload/forum/2021/09/6f1b71ac77962be9c5521ceb941610a94f1908a9.png
https://www.gog.com/upload/forum/2021/09/f97204fc832e4fcdd6748b51648ec248aaa7c3ce.png

It clearly says "We're still in dialogue with IO Interactive about this release." in https://www.gog.com/forum/general/release_hitman_game_of_the_year_edition_11093/post1936 . How do you conclude from this that "the issue" is now resolved for "them"?

I assumed that line was added to shift the blame to IOI - no expectation that IOI will actually produce a DRM-free version - i.e. just GOG absolving itself of responsibility for this whole mess.

But time will tell.

Thank you for your response.

But it does leave a lot of burning questions, some of which, at least, should be clarified.

Reflecting on the announcement, I am pretty sure GOG knew the game had some DRM (but to what extent I do not know, but to be as charitable as possible, if they can have curation as incompetent as they do, is it possible they didn't actually properly play-test Hitman too?), but in their arrogance, expected the anger to exist only in a little corner of the forum, they were not expecting it to blow up all across the internet, so they flew too close to the sun...

I'd like to believe the apology was in earnest, but I've quickly returned to the once bitten, twice shy position, and we need to hammer GOG on all fronts if they ever try anything this stupid in future. There's a reason why even though I felt excited by an actual reply from GOG, I didn't actually remove myself from the 2021 boycott... I need to see the ball roll and follow through on that better communication promise.

What if instead of envisioning it as some DRM hell, Galaxy is going to increase game subforum visibility and activity? You know, the thing the dead forums need...? That way we don't have to go over to Steam forums to ask questions and discuss games when it should be GOG's forums and community that does that?

How many times have these DRM-free purists been wrong all these years, but they just bury their mistakes and hop onto the next conspiracy with no consequences? It's no different than those guys who thought the world was going to end in 2012 and kept shifting goalposts.