Okay, my bad then. As I said, the word "use" instead of "get" (or download, or apply) read (to me at least) like one can only use that patch while online.

In-game-only and client-only patches are the devil. Sure, so-called "easier patching" by them is great for many people, but it should never be the only source.

Manual patching is always better. You can stay at an old version if you want; upgrade on your own time when you want to... Download ONCE and apply to multiple computers if you play on them.

Oh good lord how it irritates me when I can't easily move an update from one machine to another. I have one program I tried to use that's PER PROFILE the way it updates.

To the Batmobile? lets GOG?

like the replies said: i guess sinces its all kinda new, things will be fixed, don't worry
There's no need to cry wolf.... not yet

as soon as you smell wolves or see the red of their eyes, then it is also possible to cry, for now just wait and see , i trust it will all be okay as promised.



true....
yup, when using more machines we always get move and transfer troubles.

It's really only a matter of time when GOG introduces DRM in some extent, they've given up nearly all of their other "core values" already.

But then again, that will give them more games to sell :)

To fewer customers..... (I hope)

I never say it is DRM free if your need the internet.

I even mention if you do not have to client you cannot play the game, then it is not ok, otherwise it is ok

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Unless they make it in such a way that without the client you cannot play the game, and your need to be online once a while to "activate" the client, I still think it is ok.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sorry if I did not make it clear enough

OMG! Only being able to download games I bought with my account on GoG is DRM! I can't believe I have to login to my GoG account to get access to games I own, the entire catalog should be on the honor system to let me download the games I paid for! This is ridiculous!

This is why the anti-DRM crowd is so funny. They get bent out of shape and paranoid that any form of people trying to protect what they own is wrong. I like the idea of DRM free, but I'm not so naive as to think that DRM free won't go back to people rampantly stealing. It's like a lock on your house. It means you have to use a key to get in, pretty inconvenient compared to opening the door. But it keeps many people out. Not people who REALLY want what's inside. Or you could up your security with an alarm system. Now you need a key and have to punch in your key code every time you enter. More inconvenient but it protects your things from most people.

Any form of security is about offering a high enough level of difficulty that your property isn't worth stealing. Nothing is unbreakable, it's just a matter of how hard it is versus what you'll get when you do break it. DRM is no different. I don't like DRM that negatively impacts a paying customer's ability to play their games, but then, the truth is you're not purchasing the games but licenses to play them these days, as is clearly worded in their agreements. I don't agree that that's right either, but someone has to challenge these findings in court before that really changes.

Stop being a doofus and actually READ what the thread is about.

This.

(Obligatory) patches that I cannot backup with the other data on my external HDDs and apply offline are DRM in my book.
This seems just as much as "testing the waters" as the beginnings of regional pricing here not so long ago.

PS: My gaming partition is always offline for similar reasons as yours (security, performance, no interest in 99.9% of online-gaming).

I'm not being a "doofus"

It was an exaggerated reply based on the idea that "The game's update engine makes me verify ownership"

It doesn't even do that. I can create an account if I illegally downloaded the game... It's not DRM if it doesn't make you verify your purchase, as it doesn't keep you from playing in that regard. In that respect, having to login to GoG to download your games is more DRM than the OP's claim of having to log in to a remote server to update the game's files automatically. That was my point. Then I explained why DRM in simplistic forms isn't the demon that everyone wants to make it out to be, even though many forms of intrusive and painful DRM are. I don't share many consumers' opinions on DRM as I am a content creator, and I don't like not getting money for someone using something I created.

Logging into GOG to download a patch is not DRM. The user still has a choice of whether to use the patch or not. GOG did say that even when GOG Galaxy is released that it will be optional, and the patches and games should be available to download separately from the game shelf. As for this Witcher issue, I would contact Support about downloading a manual patch.

The way I see it, the problem is that the game is suffering from a nasty bug and the patch to fix said bug is only available through the game's autoupdater, but not through the user's account. While not DRM, it's certainly a big problem that should be rectified as soon as possible.

I know that it's not DRM. It was an extreme example. And by definition it is more DRM than downloading a patch through and online updater.

On that note, there are a few games on GoG that utilize online updaters to patch. Why is this the first time it was noticed?

Because the game can not be played without said patch.