That's just stupid... and you know it is. Like this discussion. You jumped to a conclusion based on how the explained it would work (which is does for certain games) and thought all games would be that way. That's on you. Not GOG.

Just like you jumped to the conclusion that it would work (which it does on tuesdays) and thought all days of the week would be like that.

That's not "jumping to a conclusion", that's "making a reasonable assumption from the information given".

From the presentation: They said quite clearly that crossplay is a function of Galaxy. Of Galaxy. Not of the individual game. No conclusions jumped to, no speculative interpretation involved. Hence, if a game uses Galaxy's multiplayer system, it should feature crossplay, since crossplay is a feature of Galaxy's multiplayer system. Only it turns out that's not the case after all.

Yet, e.g. PookaMustard didn't understand the OP similarly as you, but was suggesting he wanted clientless(?) multiplayer instead.

The OP said he didn't want multiplayer that requires "Galaxy", but he didn't make clear if he had an issue with having to run the Galaxy client in order to access the multiplayer part, or being restricted to play only with other GOG players (ie. being locked to the GOG userbase).

The "B)" part suggested he had more issue with the latter one, but in that case his blabbing about "DRM-free" didn't make any sense at all, as being able to play with Steam users has absolutely nothing to do with the DRM-freeness of the game. That part actually veers the meaning of the OP that his issue was really with the client, not so much the userbase/service.

His initial message was just quite confusing and contradictory, that's why I asked what exactly is he demanding from GOG. Not to sell the game on GOG at all, if the developer will not implement crossplay?

May be. Then again, there are other PC multiplayer services which to my knowledge are not connected to Steam multiplayer either, e.g. EA Origin and UPlay. So maybe GOG should follow their way and allow multiplayer games on GOG only if the multiplayer is GOG-only?

I'm not arguing with you. I really don't care. You claimed what they said was not true and it perfectly was regardless of the assumption you made. Could it have been more clear maybe? Sure, I agree perhaps they should have been more clear here. Doesn't change that fact that they told you what Galaxy was capable of then delivered on it for certain games and nowhere did they claim it was for every game.

If that is the case then every game on Steam should use DRM because it's a feature of Steamworks... that' literally how silly that sounds.

He begins the post with something alike "Deliver us from DRM and whatnot." He then continues with "You abandon the concept of DRM-Free, and then ask me to choose between a huge community for MP or a minority community. " And finally, he closes it with the iconic last comment. "I'm sure we'll see someone try to rationalize A with an argument along the lines of "you don't have to play MP if you don't want". You're technically correct, and technically an ass."

As such, I believe that if he was given a clientless method to play multiplayer of that game, that mostly he wouldn't have had an issue, as according to what he said, he'd be then basically choosing between DRM-free multiplayer or a large multiplayer community, or an advantage vs an advantage, as opposed to the scenario he talked about, which is the small community vs. the large community, or a disadvantage vs an advantage. Other than that, yeah, I agree with you that his initial message just didn't deliver his points well.

----

As for Navagon's comments about pirate copies ruining everything for multiplayer, there's Terraria and Minecraft. Back before I had a pirated copy of Terraria before I got it on Steam, I could actually connect to any server with it, and it'd work without an issue. As for Minecraft, things get a little bit varied. There are either premium users (those who bought the game) or non-premium users (those who didn't buy the game), and there are servers that allow only premium users (this is the default setting) or those that allow both premium and non-premium users. Premium servers accept only premium users, and non-premium servers accept both premium and non-premium users. Despite this, obviously Minecraft's multiplayer is still kicking butt and overall healthy. And these are just two recent games where piracy doesn't seem to be a really huge issue for multiplayer games. In fact if you were worried about floods of pirated copy owners messing up everything, there's a plugin in which you can enable a password for each username that joins in, and if you don't use the password, you're not entitled to playing as that username.

Actually there a few games that already use crossplay with steam on gog.com so I doubt its just a development item.

These games at least.

- Grand Ages: Medieval
- Rise of Triad 2013

To get DRM free games of course, why else would I be here?

But you hate them.

Ah so now you know me as well. Yeah. I'm not gonna waste my time discussing with morons. Bye bye now.

So this is a compliment? :P

http://www.gog.com/forum/general/gog_galaxy_is_no_longer_fully_optional/post65

So how come there is still no official answer to any of this from GOG?
Why do I have to search the forums to find out if maybe the developer of a game posts if the game supports crossplay? This is unacceptable! GOG needs to address this officially and on every shop page of a game that doesn't support crossplay.

Additionally I think it's not in the spirit of GOG and goes against GOG's customers (and against GOG in the long run) to allow non-crossplay titles in the shop in the first place.

Update from Frogboy (Ashes of the Singularity dev) So it sounds like they had no idea that they could even do crossplay with Galaxy. So hopefully they will add it soon.

fully support the removal of such games.