I've said that for a long time.. .this community isn't helping the fight against DRM at all.

This unfortunately is true.

If we define DRM as an access control restriction to a single player game (e.g. by requiring a constant internet connection), then it's easy to convince people to take a stance against it, since I can see no way in which such a thing can be beneficial to a gamer.

When people start expanding the definition to include anything they're not happy with, like clients or microtransactions, it becomes a problem. Some gamers want clients (before Galaxy came out it was one of the most often asked for things) and some prefer a free-to-play model with microtransactions. And it's stuff like this that makes the anti-DRM crowd look to gamers like some tinfoil hat brigade who wants to take away their clients, cloud saves, achievements and MMORPGs.

It's become difficult to have a rational discussion on this, because the mere mention that "X is not DRM" to an anti-DRM person can lead to a long tirade about the evils of X.
I could be completely against X myself, I could hate it more than I hate DRM, but to that person saying "X is not DRM" for some reason means that I'm defending X. In their mind DRM = "Everything that is bad" therefore if I'm saying that X is not DRM then I must be saying that X is good.

Which is why I've pretty much given up discussing this topic on these forums. It pretty much leads to nowhere.

(And incidentally, just because Y isn't DRM, it doesn't mean that it's good to have Y on GOG...)

A statement like that would have calmed me down instantly

QFT. I really need to take that same advice and start staying away from these threads. I'll buy what I support and ignore eveything else. This community is going to tear itself apart with this nonsense.

Not everyone here is arguing about DRM with this, if you read back through the thread, its the abandonning of the core principles that GOG once held of respecting the consumer and fighting against the anti-consumer practices in the industry. You cannot get more anti-consumer than microtransactions. The no DRM thing is the only thing GOG has left, and GWENT as it currently is encroaches pretty damn far on that territory too, which has been compromised more year after year after year as well.

I think you're confusing micro-transactions with small bits of DLC. They are not the same. Microtransactions involve spending money in order to advance your progress in-game. Go watch the video of the CEO of EA talking about it earlier in this thread. It really is the worst of the worst because of how purposefully exploatitive it is.

Are you being willfully ignorant? The platform itself is inherently DRM as it manages the distribution of the games. It's obviously acceptable because there is no other way for them to run the store. It is understandable that a multiplayer game requires an account to play. The problematic kind of microtransactions are those that do not actually provide game content. In Gwent's case this would be card packs, but there are numerous other examples like time/pay gates. in-game curency, consumables, boosters, etc. This is not something that can be provided DRM-free as I could just achieve the same effect by using a third-party program. Adding DRM for the sake of multiplayer is okay. Adding DRM for microtransactions is not okay. It is unfortunate that GOG refuses to make a statement about this.

Just getting in here again for one quick question: How can it be a microtransaction if it's free?

Edit: ok, i have no idea what the problem is. I have trouble posting anything longer than a line of text.

Are you like being obtuse on purpose? The point was simply there are many forms of microtransactions, and not all of them clearly fall under DRM.

I never said microtranctions are a good thing or that ones that don't provide content aren't problamatic. Simply that this claim: Microtransactions cannot exist without DRM.

Is 100% false.
Again please educate yourself on the difference... here is a good article on it .

Quick question - the page for this called the item "limited" - does that mean it's limited to one per account, or that GoG will only be selling this Starter for a short time.

I haven't figured out if I'm going to take the Galaxy plunge for this game yet, but if the Starter is only going to be for sale for a short time I might buy it "just in case."

Also, anyone know if it can be bought as a gift just in case I never do get Gwent / Galaxy?

Why does transactions need to involve monies?

Exactly a transaction can be free. Even if something is free you are still selling it.

BKgaming already answers you, and again, that's an example of a bad microtransaction. Another good one can be Particle Fleet, where you pay a bit of monies, and you can make a company name to appear in game. Neither hinder gameplay, nor exploits anyone, but a fun function for those who would like to do so and at the same time support the dev