Dear GOG,

I understand. You are looking into the Hitman issue and it may take weeks for you to do so.

But here is something you can do right now.

As currently written, the banner at the top of the game page reads:
"Please note: Internet connection is required to access Escalation missions, Elusive Targets or user-created Contracts. Story and bonus missions can be played offline."

This is misleading as it gives the impression that the amount of online-locked content is small, whereas --- as you already know --- it's quite the opposite, with the bulk of the gameplay gated behind an online connection.

Here is a suggested alternative banner, which I believe is much more accurate:

"Warning! Internet connection is required for all game meta-progression, such as unlocking weapons, disguises, starting locations, etc., which in a sandbox-like game such as this forms the bulk of the game. Additionally, internet connection is required to access Escalation missions, Elusive Targets (no longer available), and user-created Contracts. Story and bonus missions can be played offline, but only with the default loadout."

or you can write your own.

Think about it. It's the honest thing to do.

Yes GOG, this is something much easier & faster to do than all the clean up you made for what you called "review bombing"!

I disagree with that statement.

What is there that requires them to "take weeks to look into," exactly?

They know the game is full of DRM.

So there is no need whatsoever to spend weeks "looking into it."

Rather, they should have declared on the same day it was released that either it will be made 100% DRM free, or else delisted off of GOG if the devs don't agree to do that.

There is nothing complicated about this matter whatsoever. It's every bit as simple as my previous sentence stated it to be.

The only possible reason why they may need "time to look into it" would if they are trying to negotiate a fudge, wherein they allow some DRM to stay in, and remove just enough of the DRM to appease most GOG customers (or at least, that seems to be what they are hoping).

OP should be opposing the idea that they "need weeks to look into it," not co-signing with that dubious & false premise.

We all know they will do nothing of the sorts and probably nothing at all about this game.
They already knew what this game contains and what parts of it are available offline and what parts require online connection.
They just didn't expect such reaction considering that GOG Galaxy 2.0 is now pretty mandatory and folks are online all the time; but when news hit the online game journals, then investors got scared, so they had to write something.

But, it doesn't matter; they will probably silently change their "review policy" and remove 1* reviews that mention only DRM in it. Then, silently change GOG EULA; one sentence will be changed about this "problem" somewhere on page XYZ.
And after, that, nothing; maybe HITMAN 2 in a few months time.

I remember back in the day, when "many" real "massages from many gamers" on this forums meant something and GOG changed their bad decisions; e.g. when they put GOG Galaxy 1.X install files in every offline installer and after gamers on this forums raised their voices against it, they changed it back, to "old" installers without Galaxy and even apologize.

Sadly, that days are long, long gone and so is DRM-free and clientless GOG!

4 days since its release and GOG continues to sell this game with a highly misleading game page banner.

Considering contracts and money involved, there is very little about this as simple as your statement.

The longer Gog let that DRM infested abomination stand as it is the more embarrassing it gets :(

will that change anything? It looks like gog doesnt care

I do not know but neither think or expect that my current opinion on Gog changes anything. But I'm 100% sure not stating said opinion will change nothing.

I actually think they're working on something given how strong the backlash has been and the bad press, but we need to keep up the heat just in case.

I this point, my guess is that this situation is probably a hot mess indeed.

Companies do sign binding contracts and once those are signed, they can't do whatever the heck they want (not without lawsuits).

I'm guessing that IO Interactive probably got quite a bit of leeway to negotiate based on the fact that they own a lucrative franchise with previous titles of that franchise also on GOG.

Whatever choice GOG had would have had to be exerted BEFORE the game got here (assuming existing contracts for prior Hitman games didn't dictate some terms already).

At this point, a solution for this mess needs to come from a joint agreement with GOG and IO Interactive and I'm guessing that will take a bit of time (I doubt that for their part, IO Interactive would be happy with just de-listing their game).

For a technical solution, if they decide to go there, it depends how they coded the game, but if they coded the game in such a way that the server dependency is an immutable truth of the game and it is deeply embedded in their code's architecture, then yes, that may take some time as well.

However, I'm really hoping that the current situation will be a lesson for both parties concerning what not to do in the future (this will be a condition for my continued purchasing of games at GOG).

I didn't expect anything to happen during the weekend. Today could be interesting. Or not.

I suspect this might be not strong enough. It is quite possible that unlocking perks and changing the loadout is the intended way to progress through the story missions, and the average player is not expected to succeed at some of them with the default loadout and thus will not be able to "complete" the story either.

GOG: "Buy this 100% DRM-free cactus juice!"

Secret product label: "70% DRM-free pear juice concentrate, 30% apple juice concentrate*

*may contain trace amounts of DRM, content locked behind an online-only gate and other allergenic substances"

Sadly it's not the first, nor I expect the last, time something like this is "vaguely specified" at best.

I've made a habit of putting off my purchases as long as possible (sometimes dependent on discounts), to give time for other GOG users to discover any potential foul play in new releases. Point being, this kind of behavior of "bending truth by omission" is becoming something regular on GOG.

Somehow I don't think they're getting the message - perhaps the "Hitman scandal" will change things. One can only hope.

What's funny is that past experiences with things like Gremlins Inc. and Armello have shown games which depend on online-only content do not belong here. How does one gauge what works and what does not these days? Why have we gone back to a point where it is OK to launch a crippled single-player game?

The impression is that a Supermarket is selling products for Vegans and products for Beefeaters, but why is it on the same shelf?
If the installer becoming a client (to connect with anything) there is no DRM-free.
Everything must be included within the offline installer, while the extra content should be available as DLC (free or not).
...and if a company likes to give extra content in exchange for data it has to be described properly. Agreed for many reasons.
I like this place and to defend it I demand honesty.
Honesty is cool.