CENSORSHIP!!!

no they should focus on old triple A titles, i dnt want this site turning into an itchi.io or whatever it is, with unknown games and developers. ofc having some indie games is good but you need triple A titles to actually be noticed as a platform

Hey @GOG:

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/drm_even_beats_tron

The linked story is something that probably happens every week but a lot of times just goes unnoticed.

It sad to see many people don't really get what DRM is. If you browse around top comments on some of popular YouTuber on this particular issue, lot's of them thinking: "Physical disk =! DRM" or "Steam is the lesser form of DRM". DRM is still DRM, no matter in any shape of form, and owning the physical copy doesn't guaranteed you lifetime access to the game either. GOG.com should goes all out with this FCK DRM campaign.

They won’t, as they actually support DRM use.

And lots of the games they sell come with some (implicit like being server based or explicit like serial numbers) DRM if you want to do multiplayer. So I would even say its questionable that they put themselves onto that https://fckdrm.com/ site.

The FCKDRM campaign does little to educate, just merely a cheeky giggle at the name and that's about it.

Be much more efficient to make an actual attempt to inform rather than get that 'hehe naughty word'

This is nice to show what steam do, maybe more will finally leave it.

My first post here.

"We strongly believe that if you buy a game, it should be yours, and you can play it the way it’s convenient for you, and not how others want you to use it."

This is a lie.

I bought a GOG game yesterday, managed to get it working through WINE. Went to play multiplayer and was told I needed to download a proprietary client to connect to a proprietary server to play with other people. This is DRM.

The original non-GOGed game supported multiplayer via LAN as well as online.

FCK DRM and FCK GOG. I won't buy another product from GOG as long as they are nerfing the multiplayer mode in games to force their DRM'd proprietary system on users.

Which game?

A couple of points:

1. The DRM-free promise has only ever applied to the single player portion of games.
2. GOG doesn't add Galaxy support, the developer or publisher does. If previously existing LAN support has been removed, it will have been done so by the developer or publisher.

People can probably offer more information if you say which game it is.

Please find me where it says that on FCKDRM.com. The standard to be featured on that site is "100% DRM-free". Not "singleplayer DRM-free". Not "most of the games are DRM-free". Not "well, you have to have multiplayer DRM or else people might cheat". 100% DRM-free.

And before anyone says other games have third-party authentication, it's not just Galaxy-requirement that's the issue, yes, those games are at issue too in terms of violating the 100% DRM-free standard. DRM-free forms of multiplayer include: direct connect online, play by e-mail, LAN (without arbitrary restrictions), hotseat, splitscreen, etc.

One thing that's been swept under the rug in recent years all across gaming is that multiplayer modes DO NOT REQUIRE DRM. Yes, developers and publishers insist upon them for various reasons, but in theory there is no reason we couldn't have DRM-free multiplayer.

It's been limited to single player on GOG.com since inception as far as I'm aware. Even before Galaxy games frequently required a serial key in order to access multiplayer.

With that being the case, why are you even here if you find it unacceptable?

Of course DRM-free multiplayer is possible, no one in this conversation is suggesting it isn't. But my point is that GOG doesn't guarantee DRM-free multiplayer and never has.

You tried, but your aim was way off. I wasn't saying "only a Galaxy requirement is DRM", I'm saying that GOG has never had a 100% DRM-free standard according to your definition.

The original vision of the store having always included games with DRM'd multiplayer, gotcha.