It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionforcing galaxy at this moment is a terrible idea(108 posts)(108 posts)
(108 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
This is my favourite topic
Posted June 13, 2018
avatar
Kakarot96: You both say Galaxy is not DRM, but even you have differences in details of what should be considered DRM. He seem to like the client, you don't.
Hmmm... maybe I'm misunderstaing, but is the first sentence related to the second? What I "like" or "dislike" has nothing to do with what I consider DRM or not. That's my whole point: Many people consider DRM to mean "anything I don't like" which is just stupid. I can hate something but still that doesn't mean it's DRM.

avatar
Kakarot96: I agree it should be a consistent definition and that would make it all easier, but it isn't. It is not consistent in me, in you or in adalia.
You misunderstood me. I'm not saying there should be a consistent definition between different people; that's impossible and as you noted each of us has a different definition (though from the look of it, adalia's is pretty much same as mine).

My point is that for any person, his own definition should be internally consistent. If you consider X to be DRM and Y not to be DRM, then you should consistently consider X to be DRM in every case and Y not to be DRM in every case. The problem is people just use DRM to label anything they don't like and throw it everywhere haphazardly. Even if it's logically inconsistent.
Posted June 13, 2018
avatar
ZFR: You misunderstood me. I'm not saying there should be a consistent definition between different people; that's impossible and as you noted each of us has a different definition (though from the look of it, adalia's is pretty much same as mine).
Sorry for butting in. Actually, I see that there's a difference in Adalia's definition of DRM to yours too; in a post made above he said "To me DRM is something that is required every time you play a game." (which would imply Steam's online check totally ok because we can go offline for two weeks). Maybe he just used a broader statement and in a more detailed explanation that notion is taken care of, but so far I'm more inclined to agree with your view as a whole.

The way I see it, people who complain of Gwent's need for Galaxy are looking at stuff from a wrong perspective. It is (so far) a exclusively client-server game. When you get in you must know you're not in control of the whole setup. Not only you can't control the server, there's a reasonable need for a control over the client to prevent cheaters from turning the whole game into a nightmare for all other players. There has to be a check of some sort for an account, not only for authentication but also to load your deck, settings, stuff.

Seeing as CDProjekt had already coded authentication and matchmaking into Galaxy they decided to just incorporate it into the design rather than duplicate efforts. It saves time, it is less code to manage, and a bug corrected in Galaxy means it is corrected in Gwent too. But the thing is, those checks would be there even if Galaxy were not!

So IMHO there is no DRM into the usage of Galaxy in this stance. The "DRM" is inherent in the fact that it is a client-server game. As I said, in this case it's obvious upfront that the player just can't be in control, so we're not losing any rights which is what a Digital Rights Management tool does. If Galaxy were needed for single player however, that would be an entirely different beast.

avatar
ZFR: I can hate something but still that doesn't mean it's DRM.
Wait, so broccoli isn't DRM? :)
Post edited June 13, 2018 by joppo
Posted June 13, 2018
You people still in this ridiculous thread? Don't you have any backlog to play?
Posted June 13, 2018
avatar
joppo: Seeing as CDProjekt had already coded authentication and matchmaking into Galaxy they decided to just incorporate it into the design rather than duplicate efforts. It saves time, it is less code to manage, and a bug corrected in Galaxy means it is corrected in Gwent too. But the thing is, those checks would be there even if Galaxy were not!
Exactly.
avatar
mike_cesara: You people still in this ridiculous thread? Don't you have any backlog to play?
Hey, this (the last several posts) is one of the few times where the discussion on this topic is pretty civilised. Let me enjoy it while it lasts.
Post edited June 13, 2018 by ZFR
Posted June 13, 2018
avatar
mike_cesara: You people still in this ridiculous thread? Don't you have any backlog to play?
If I installed certain stuff in my office's computer my boss wouldn't be exactly thrilled.

Tell you what, if you convince him that it's alright I'm outta here to the library page in 3 seconds.
Posted June 13, 2018
Sure guys, have fun!
I can promise I will do my best to not interupt you! : D
Posted June 13, 2018
avatar
Vainamoinen: I... don't see how that's relevant...? :|
avatar
muntdefems: Excuse me, your rant totally sounded like you hadn't connected to GOG for a couple of weeks, saw the library changes, and flipped out. If you already knew about the announcement and still think the end times are nigh, I'm not gonna try to convince you otherwise.
I guess not connecting to GOG for a couple of weeks will be pretty much the standard case for most of the users of GOG.

I don't know any more how often I said to GOG that I'm not interested in Galaxy and that they rather should bugger off with it. They seem to be a bit dull on that ear. It's coming again and again into my field of view.
Posted June 13, 2018
avatar
joppo: Wait, so broccoli isn't DRM? :)
It sure is! It's a Delicious Raw Meal. :D
Posted June 13, 2018
avatar
joppo: Wait, so broccoli isn't DRM? :)
avatar
muntdefems: It sure is! It's a Delicious Raw Meal. :D
You say Delicious, I say Disgusting, there's going to be a disagreement about the actual meaning of the acronym here.
Thankfully GOG doesn't force me to have a portion of broccoli with every game I bought.

... and here's where I insert myself into HunchBluntley's phrases out of context thread. :)
Posted June 14, 2018
avatar
richlind33: Is DRM and DRM-free mutually exclusive? No. Selling both could be problematic, but how many gamers are really that concerned about DRM, and how many companies aren't looking to increase sales?

On the other hand, I'm often left wondering if GOG knows whether it's coming or going, so I don't think we have much to worry about at present.
avatar
adaliabooks: Not at all, but the claim frequently made is that GOG are trying to sneak DRM into all their current titles, not release a few new ones that do have DRM.
That's not having the two side by side, it's replacing one with the other. And that's a tactic, from a business point of view, that makes absolutely no sense.
Not by me. o.O
Posted June 14, 2018
avatar
adaliabooks: Again, this is anecdotal because I've not done it myself but other GOG users have (legitimately too, for example a game bought on a partners account that is installed on the same computer); GOG will do nothing. Galaxy will recognise any GOG installation, from any source, and add it to the client. It will let you play the games and won't report your account in any way. The worst it does is suggest you buy the game. If it were DRM it would disable your account in some way for this behaviour.

I have no particular bias against DRM. I would prefer games to be completely without it and would always buy games that way when available. What I do dislike is games with DRM that adversely affects the legitimate end users.

I think the issue is partly in the change from physical to digital. To me Galaxy (or the website itself) is akin to the drive to the store or the postal service delivering a physical game. It is a delivery service for the end product, be that an installer that can be used again or an installed game. Once I have downloaded my installer through Galaxy I don't need any keys or checks to play my game, unlike a physical disk which requires the CD in the drive at all times and a key inputted every time I install it.
To liken logging in to Galaxy to a CD key is comparing two different parts of the process. Logging in to Galaxy is driving to the shop to get the game, not installing it when you've brought it home. The fact it does that too is a separate process (which doesn't need to be online or logged into anything if you don't want to).
But digital distribution combines buying, downloading, installing and playing all into one service. I happen to feel this is preferable, I don't need to store and care for CDs, or find them when I want to play a game (or change them when I want to play a different one). I can also redownload my game whenever I want or need to (as long as GOG is around), something that you can't do if your disk gets scratched, you've got to buy another one then.

Can a client be DRM? Yes, it can.
Is a client automatically and always DRM? No.
As i said, i'm unsure how exactly Galaxy works. If just recommeds you to buy the game, that's indeed great.

I also prefer the digital system, of course, i still have too much space occupied by physical games in my house. Too much, some since the 80's...lol

About the cd key and Galaxy, i know it's not the same but logging into Galaxy and entering a key someone gifted you, it's the same process, imo.

I still think Galaxy is a form of DRM. More kind than others, more permissive, less or not intrusive (as far as i know) like others, but a form of DRM.

Anyway, i don't have much more to say. I feel weird being in a discussion with you, given how much you helped the community here and i respect you a lot for that. Not related at all, i know :S
Posted June 14, 2018
avatar
Kakarot96: You both say Galaxy is not DRM, but even you have differences in details of what should be considered DRM. He seem to like the client, you don't.
avatar
ZFR: Hmmm... maybe I'm misunderstaing, but is the first sentence related to the second? What I "like" or "dislike" has nothing to do with what I consider DRM or not. That's my whole point: Many people consider DRM to mean "anything I don't like" which is just stupid. I can hate something but still that doesn't mean it's DRM.
lol nope, you are totally right, i knew that was a bit weird when writing it. The second part continues a bit. The first one just says that i think your definition is not the same as adalia. Similar, but with some nuances. In that second part i was wondering if the fact that you don't like the client could be the reason for those nuances between your definitions of DRM.
avatar
Kakarot96: I agree it should be a consistent definition and that would make it all easier, but it isn't. It is not consistent in me, in you or in adalia.
avatar
ZFR: You misunderstood me. I'm not saying there should be a consistent definition between different people; that's impossible and as you noted each of us has a different definition (though from the look of it, adalia's is pretty much same as mine).

My point is that for any person, his own definition should be internally consistent. If you consider X to be DRM and Y not to be DRM, then you should consistently consider X to be DRM in every case and Y not to be DRM in every case. The problem is people just use DRM to label anything they don't like and throw it everywhere haphazardly. Even if it's logically inconsistent.
Ok, but i was saying that you both have different definitions, imo. For you are consistent, mine is also consistent, but i agree that a lot of people use it against what they don't like in an inconsistent way and then say the contrary when they like something (when they like a company because the games they made, or the games a company publishes, etc)

avatar
joppo: Sorry for butting in. Actually, I see that there's a difference in Adalia's definition of DRM to yours too; in a post made above he said "To me DRM is something that is required every time you play a game." (which would imply Steam's online check totally ok because we can go offline for two weeks). Maybe he just used a broader statement and in a more detailed explanation that notion is taken care of, but so far I'm more inclined to agree with your view as a whole.
This is what i was trying to say, thank you.

About the rest of your post, i can understand that they use a tool they already have and works, as it is Galaxy. I agree, i think i have said the same in a previous post, and exactly the same about the SP part in Gwent.

avatar
mike_cesara: You people still in this ridiculous thread? Don't you have any backlog to play?
I don't think it's ridiculous, and i was enjoying the discussion. As ZFR said, a civilised discussion is always welcome.

Yesterday i had too much work, but today i'm going to follow your advice and play something :D
Posted June 14, 2018
avatar
mike_cesara: You people still in this ridiculous thread? Don't you have any backlog to play?
avatar
Kakarot96: I don't think it's ridiculous, and i was enjoying the discussion. As ZFR said, a civilised discussion is always welcome.

Yesterday i had too much work, but today i'm going to follow your advice and play something :D
Well, I didn't follow the whole thread since the whole paranoia about Galaxy doesn't sound serious to me. Still the conversation can be civilized : D
For a change I have no time for playing games today.. Wish you a great playtime!
Posted June 15, 2018
I don't consider Galaxy to be a form of DRM, I see it as a desktop client that makes it very easy to buy, download, and install games you get from GOG. You are not required to use Galaxy to buy and play games from GOG. I hardly ever launch my games via Galaxy, I just launch them from either the applications folder, or the dock, (I'm a Mac user). You don't need to open the Galaxy client to play your games. Just the other night I was playing games on my MacBook, I was logged into the guest account, therefore, when I launched Galaxy to see what would happen, it asked me to enter my username and my password. The Galaxy client does not start when I start my computer, I have to launch it manually, and that's what I want to happen. On the other hand, if you're using Steam, you must use the desktop client and you cannot play your games without it. I understand that even if you do launch your Steam games from outside the client, the client will still be launched. I personally really like Galaxy, but I don't always use it, if I just want to quickly check if a game is available on GOG, i'll just quickly go to the website and look. You don't need to be online to launch at least some of the games from GOG, certainly, you don't need to be actively connected to the Internet to play the DOS games available. I think if GOG were to force us to use Galaxy, I wouldn't be happy about it, but Steam force everyone who wants to use their service to use the desktop client, but people still use the service, it's the number 1 game distribution service on the Internet, so people must be OK with it to some degree at least.
Posted June 15, 2018
avatar
Kakarot96: As i said, i'm unsure how exactly Galaxy works. If just recommeds you to buy the game, that's indeed great.

I also prefer the digital system, of course, i still have too much space occupied by physical games in my house. Too much, some since the 80's...lol

About the cd key and Galaxy, i know it's not the same but logging into Galaxy and entering a key someone gifted you, it's the same process, imo.

I still think Galaxy is a form of DRM. More kind than others, more permissive, less or not intrusive (as far as i know) like others, but a form of DRM.

Anyway, i don't have much more to say. I feel weird being in a discussion with you, given how much you helped the community here and i respect you a lot for that. Not related at all, i know :S
I think you miss my point about Galaxy and CD keys. In the modern digital era Galaxy is the means to purchase a game, it is the storefront and the equivalent to the physical 'journey' to that storefront. That part is the process that requires you to log in to access the (free) service. Once you acquire your game (download the installer) you can log out and play with no restrictions. Therefore the game does not contain DRM, and whether you use Galaxy to play it or not does not give it DRM.
The line is blurred because the log in required to access the service and the storefront (and retrieve your purchased files, a new step in digital purchases that doesn't necessarily have an equivalent in the old physical system) is seen by many as a log in required to play. Unlike on Steam (where that is the case, and it is therefore DRM) with Galaxy the log in is only required because three or four different processes are bundled together into one application.

As ZFR said, it's just nice to have a civilised discussion on the topic, it doesn't really matter if our outlook and opinions are different :)
avatar
joppo: Sorry for butting in. Actually, I see that there's a difference in Adalia's definition of DRM to yours too; in a post made above he said "To me DRM is something that is required every time you play a game." (which would imply Steam's online check totally ok because we can go offline for two weeks). Maybe he just used a broader statement and in a more detailed explanation that notion is taken care of, but so far I'm more inclined to agree with your view as a whole.
Actually having read your post I realise there is an error in my definition of DRM, it should be;

"Something that can be required every time you play a game"

Which means that Steam allowing you to go offline for a few weeks is nice, but doesn't stop it being DRM because they could still lock you out at any moment, just because they don't check every time doesn't stop it being DRM.
avatar
richlind33: Not by me. o.O
Perhaps not, but it does seem to be what most people who claim Galaxy is evil and a form of DRM are suggesting will happen, or at least that is my impression of the situation.
Post edited June 15, 2018 by adaliabooks
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionforcing galaxy at this moment is a terrible idea(108 posts)(108 posts)
(108 posts)