Parts of galaxy are now required by games, even in offline installers:
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/gog_galaxy_required_in_certain_games

The thing is, your examples from then, like Niffelheim now apparently, fly in the face of what GOG's sister site FCKDRM.com says. Maybe they should update that site with a "just kidding, this only applies to singleplayer" disclaimer. That said, I do get your point. I know unfortunately there are many examples of games with what I'd call DRMed modes/content on this site. I even own some of them. Really it's just a bummer to kick off the year with another example like this. I probably wouldn't feel as bad if there were other big releases, without this sort of multiplayer DRM, to make up for it.
I have seen this topic and it does annoy me too, but I don't mind so much if they are bloating the installer as long as offline functionality is maintained (i.e. not the instance where cloud saves broke offline game or what have you). I think there is a relevant difference between having to have a bloated offline installer, versus online authentication. Even though of course a bare bones offline installer without bloat is preferable to both.

Well, one of the main issues I see with it, apart from size, is that it is adding extra requirements to games. Take for instance years back, when we had games which had additional components like securom (not saying this is drm or anything like it, just that these components were required) but it all worked fine. Come forward some years and M$ in their wisdom block those components. This meant having to go to dodgy websites downloading nocd and other patches to enable your product to work again. Jump forward to the present day where games which work fine now have this additional requirements which may in future break. Are we happy to go back to downloading dodgy files to patch this?
But anyway, I am misdirecting this thread so will post this again over at the other for any further discussion.

You're talking about the game; I'm talking about the thread.

The last four pages have been unusually full of cascading negativity compared to the average release thread.

The few expressions of interest are drowned out by talk of stripped-down versions of games, botched releases, soulless screenshots and bad devs. Just reading this thread you'd never think Niffelheim was a successful game.

This is in stark contrast to its Steam page, where the game clearly *is* successful. It has hundreds of reviews, predominantly positive. This hasn't changed between old reviews and new - opinion has stayed stable, despite old and new purchasers having differing access to the easy-mode DLC.

The only difference between the Steam and GOG releases? One paid DLC. You'd expect some discontent about missing content. You'd expect the occasional "meh" comment from people who'd played the game and didn't like it. But I'm honestly surprised that it turned the release thread into a lightning rod for anyone with a gripe. Usually that fate is reserved for new games with low-res graphics, or the first release after any particularly stupid "too niche" rejection.

One more time for the people in the back. GoG is not going to devote time, money and resources in addition to an all out marketing campaign where they plaster Galaxy all over their website and then not tell developers that they have to integrate with their client in some way. That is literally one the main reasons they developed Galaxy in the first place, to entice more devs to integrate their games with Galaxy.

In this respect they are trying to compromise by only having it done for multiplayer only. The clearest signal that this is how things are is when their own developed product, GWENT, requires Galaxy.

I'll let others debate whether that constitutes DRM-Free or not.

So why didn't they?
Care to explain why this would be a good thing?
There is no hate about the game at all. There's the issue with devs treating GOG different than Steam and there's no logical reason for them to not sell the DLC(s) on GOG as well. The list of devs who tries to get some extra bucks from GOG customers in tha past has just grown too big so that some of us are fed of this and try to prevent for it to getting it even better. Also, if you read this thread carefully you will notice that I suggested to buy the game the moment they changed this. I still have it on my wishlist as well and will buy when they give GOG the same possibilitys they already gave their Steam customers. And yes. they lauched the game with a good discount ... it has the same discount on Steam right now btw ... but it does not really change the issue. If we don't change our buying behavior neither GOG nor devs will ever change theirs regarding games that are either incomplete, not updated or have missing features and DLCs here.

Funny since SecuROM exactly IS DRM without any question at all.
Isn't it a pity that the actual game is drown in discussions about devs not treating GOG the same as on Steam? Well ... maybe if they did not this would all be about their game. If you'd ask me - that was deserved. But again: they still have a chance to turn this around.

I did not know how the coop mode was implemented in this game, so I asked. When I received the answer, I concluded whether the game interests me.
The fact that you decided that I was waiting for the development of such mode specifically for GOG version is just ridiculous (and simply speaks about your poor cognitive abilities).

I was being deliberately obtuse. Mostly because you were being obtuse. The fact that you weren’t able to pick up on that speaks to your poor cognitive abilities :)

Now you just showed that you are so from birth.

I wasn't being serious, I was in overreacting self-pity mode for us.

same here........ multiplayer was fun, many years ago, lan or online cnc red alert commandos (classic)...since the late 90's i only play singleplayer, games, offline , on my pc that's the way play now.

edit:

oops , i just read the rec. system

GeForce 900 (9xx) series (+_+)

according to Google:

(- GeForce GTX 950 (OEM), 2016, 1024:64:32, 935, 1203, 5010, 38.5, 76.99, 4096, 80.19, 1915, 76.99 ...)

I cant run recommended , and i don't want to run @minimum, its too 'frustrating' ‘︿’

Brassheart is the only game left on wishlist
but reccomended. is 3 ghz , so that might be to much for current setup
Anyway... maybe later when i get a new setup

Wow really? Cool I think I will then thanks for the info!

Yes i agree Securom is 100% DRM
but..... was it that bad ? i mean if a game on Steam really checks if the client is running ( thats a DRM imho) so Steam needs to be running in order to play the game or it won't run, ( many games don't need the client and those are the ones i bought).

Securom has been 'insecure' from the start they claim, funny how i never had any problems with any Securom on any windows, it all depends on what sites you visit i guess.
As for backups ... Securom was pretty easy to backup , seems it all depended on the hardware ( cd writers and software)

Games that check if clients are running are 'bad', even the offline mode steam offers, cause you had to go online again to update the game / buy more games, i dont mind a client needed to download games , especially if we knew from the start , it is welknown Steam had his client and anyone joining knew that.
The only reason i 'had' to join Steam was because retail games and other digital only games had games i that were not the kind of games i like to play and buy so i had to use Steam to get the casual games so at least i could play games i really like.

The minute i noticed GOG had my favorite casual games i instabought them , i have 3 copies of same game, one retail, one steam and a GOG version, the main reason why i hesitate to get win 10 is because many good games simply won't run, or too many effort has to be taken before it runs, and even then win 10 updates might mess it up again ( too many bad updates i guess for win 10)
that about sums it all up why i don't like win 10, and i don't like DRM.