Lou: My 2 Cents:

GOG has already conducted the survey and found out the will of those who participated. I do think they need to put a standard disclaimer on the Game Page since this title does not fully meet GOG's Stated "DRM Free" Policy. Something along the lines of: This Title Requires Online Account Activation for Online Multi-player Game Play.

EPurpl3: I would prefer A because I like the Good Old Games, not any new anonymous game. The only games I still play on this whole wide world are StarCraft 2 and Guild Wars 2, I buy games from GOG because I like to support them and also to support the high quality timeless classic games that I have played and I loved in the past (also I want to let everybody know what timeless gems where in the past). I have more than 70 games bought on GOG and I would and I will buy even more timeless classics under their good old marketing, no DRM, one price for any game, full content for every game (latest expansion patches/DRM, latest patch, even if is more expensive). If they want to be some kind of Steam than I will buy from Steam (or Humble Bundle, much cheaper). Lets be honest, they have a lot more crappy games with DRM and all the shit that GOG wants to offer lately. But my personal problem is that my personal collection is already on GOG....

OFC they can have games with DRM and without DRM but than I would feel like I was betrayed and lied, I didn't signed for this.
EPurpl3: Really, does GOG pay you? if not, they should. Is OK for them to sell games with DRM but they should change their advertising. If I would advertise that I sell Coke without sugar but actually I would sell Coke with just a few sugar people with diabetes WILL DIE. As I said before, you can play StarCraft 2 on a offline mode, without internet, but the game requires a online authentication for online play. Everybody knows that all the new Blizzard games have DRM even though you can play on single player without authentication. This games does have DRM and is against of what they say that they are selling.

EPurpl3: As I said before, you can play StarCraft 2 on a offline mode, without internet, but the game requires a online authentication for online play.

Gaunathor: StarCraft 2 requires online authentication for offline play too. You have to make a Battle.net account and register the game to it, and have to have logged into the account after installation at least once. Otherwise, you can't play the game period.

That's a big difference compared to AoW 3, where you can play the game offline from the start, without the need for any online registration or authentication.

Also, why are you and others only complaining about this now? The account-requirement for online MP has been stated on the storepage since the pre-order began, over a month ago. Why weren't you complaining about it back then?

Gaunathor: StarCraft 2 requires online authentication for offline play too. You have to make a Battle.net account and register the game to it, and have to have logged into the account after installation at least once. Otherwise, you can't play the game period.

That's a big difference compared to AoW 3, where you can play the game offline from the start, without the need for any online registration or authentication.

Gaunathor: Also, why are you and others only complaining about this now? The account-requirement for online MP has been stated on the storepage since the pre-order began, over a month ago. Why weren't you complaining about it back then?

deadpool223: I'll tell you why it's because they suddenly have this misconception that multiplayer account = DRM

by that logic here is a bunch of games that had DRM yet don't
warhammer 40l dawn of war
impossible creatures
genesis rising
sword of the stars
and any other game that used gamespy to handle it's internet multiplayer

AOW 3 does not have lan play yet, and when they add it will probably not need an online account.
same with PBEM that will hopefully be the same.

EPurpl3: There is not a misconception, if a game has DRM than it has DRM. That is pretty easy to understand, I guess. AoW 3 will require internet and authentication for LAN multiplayer, that developer said that :P. OFC you cant play over the internet without internet but for LAN? Gamespy WAS a 3rd party company that was not checking your serial number every time you wanted to play multiplayer. On AoW 3 2 game with the same serial number CAN NOT connect to Triumph server in the same time (didn't checked but I am sure of it). Now the games who had their multiplayer based on Gamespy (which now is closed) can not play multiplayer (that is what it will happen to AoW 3). But wait, you can use GameRanger. GameRanger provides free internet play for the games with LAN, makes a LAN peer to peer connection between games over the internet. But AoW 3 wont have that because the game will require authentication for LAN too and no direct TCP/IP connection as well. After the Triumph servers will go down you wont be able to play multiplayer at all, not on LAN, not on direct IP and not over the internet. And why is that? BECAUSE THE GAME HAS DRM!

Anyway, I can write a list with and without DRM 10000 times bigger than yours, but that is irrelevant. From your list only one game is sold on GOG and I bet that it doesn't check your serial number every time you want to play MP, i don't even know if it has a serial number :D.

EPurpl3: There is not a misconception, if a game has DRM than it has DRM. That is pretty easy to understand, I guess

Furyus: Except you're redefining DRM. You also keep saying it checks your serial number each time you play multiplayer when it clearly only checks it the one time you sign up for an account.

deadpool223: actually gamespy did check CD-keys for a few games such as star wars battlefront 2 you needed a valid CD-key for the gamespy connection otherwise it would display a message when attempting to join or host a game invalid CD-key.

i'm still questioning where the Developers themselves have stated that LAN will require you to log into your triumph account or the same for DIrect IP/TCP considering both of them wouldn't require the user of THEIR servers. seriously stop touting stuff because you are assuming stuff. for all we know when Lan is added it might not require log in same for direct IP/TCP . pointless scare mongering about features not yet reimplemented.

EPurpl3: First of all please inform yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management

I bet that 2 computers that have the game installed with the same serial number can not connect to Triumph MP server in the same time. For example, me and my GF can not play MP if we have bought only 1 copy because 1 copy has only 1 serial number. Any why is that? because every time you connect to Triumph MP server the server will check if a client with the same serial number is already connected. That is DRM. Next time when u want to say anything please don't bother :P, stop wasting my time!

Furyus: First let me apologize for wasting your time. It's clear you're a very important and busy person and a mere internet peasant such as myself should limit the amount of times I reply to your forum messages.

Now... lets look at the Wikipedia definition of DRM. Can you point out which type of DRM it is?

Is it limited install activations? Not even close
Is it persistent online authentication/Always-on DRM? Well... "Always-on DRM or always-online DRM is a form of digital rights management (DRM) that requires a consumer to remain connected to a server, especially through an internet connection, to use a particular product." and it gives a usage example of "Popular video games such as Diablo III and SimCity (2013) employ always-on DRM by requiring players to connect to the internet to play, even in single-player mode."

Of course we've covered the fact that the game has guest/offline mode ad nauseam. Anyone who had single player games calling home with SecuROM wouldn't call this DRM. So we're back to calling part of the game DRM? Can you get that definition written up and added to Wikipedia for me?

I wouldn't expect the same account could login to Triumph severs. It's not LAN, it's a matchmaking server and nobody is going to allow illegally downloaded copies of the game to use their servers. Would you pay for server costs of 1,500 connected users if only 1,000 were paying customers?

For the record I did test the copy on two PCs just now, it only lets you connect once but I can't think of any online gaming service that does let you login from multiple locations. I did read your link and it doesn't sound hopeful for LAN setup... I still wouldn't define this as DRM based on main stream definition of the term. It's just a crap decision.

Kardwill: Yup, it is

"Multiplayer notice: Currently, the multiplayer options available are: Hotseat and Online Multiplayer (requires a unique CD key, which will be located in your game shelf, and an on-line account with Triumph Studios)."

Not in 12 feet tall flaming letters (it's at the end of the game description), but not hidden either

Furyus: ...Anyone who had single player games calling home with SecuROM wouldn't call this DRM.

KnThrak: It's almost like you never read any of the stuff leading up to the game. Did you read the post about where the vouchers came from? With the publisher pressure and all?

Now, serious question:
Assume for a moment that gog.com cannot offer the game on the terms you want. Publisher's choice. Would you prefer:
a) Them not to release it at all?
b) Release it as-is?

If your answer is (a), please also expand on why you think your opinion is more valid than what was the result of the polls they did on this subject.