Funny thing here is Gwent can run without Galaxy. Look at mobile. So the pc version of Gwent can run without it but they made it a requirement to sell Galaxy.

I make LAN parties every weekend, not so much now with the pandemic but one of the reason i want DRM Free MP. It's very stupid to depend on a online server when u can have everything locally and lag free ...
As long as i can't host my own server or play it on a lan based mode, or connect to a list of server or lobbyes without getting to authenticate behind a client like Galaxy that is asking you for a user name and password then that is 120% DRM.

And the "I just made this amazing discovery! This forum/website needs improvement and I'm informing GOG about, via this forum, so they can rectify their mistakes"....... Monday?

and sundays if its a public holiday in poland

Well, that makes not sense at all, you requiere an user to have an account here on GOG, with that logic, the simple fact of have an account is DRM, and pay for a game is DRM because if you don't pay you don't have the game in the account... I make LAN parties too I prefer it that way but not because I dislike a method to manage MP that automatically make it a technological protection measure, the problem is that it seem you don't know what a DRM is... You THINK that is DRM but that doesn't make it a DRM, I explain ot in the other comment, check for the definition yourself and maybe there you will understand.

Well... That's what the servers... are. You pay internet providers, that pay to server providers, that pay...(and ever.)

"Digital Rights Management" a.k.a. DRM, is all over the place.
That's exactly why we are here on GOG, right? Being able to play our games and have a copy of the license of our games completely offline?

To play online games, without any Legal-DRM intervention, we would need our own servers that need, well, Electricity providers ("EP"RM - Electricity Providers Rights Management...?)... and so on.

I understand that necessity of Galaxy to use online features in multiplayer games. But I believe that the problem actually is that GOG is using Galaxy as an excuse to push a future "Steam-Like DRM" which would kill original GOG's purpose as a store.

I don't think they will add a a Steam Like DRM, I mean, GOG Galaxy 2.0 is more DRM Free than before, I know people is upset because they have to use a launcher to play a MP online, but what they don't understand is that there is a big difference between have MP through a launcher and a DRM.
Developers often use launchers because they adapt their games for the Steam users, many user don't even know how to connect a game or creat a server (yes, I have witness that kind of things) so, make it through a launcher is way more easy for a developer, like, save you a toon of work, so they prefer it that way, so, when it comes to GOG they have two options: 1- Remove it; 2- Adapt it to Galaxy Client (this requires work but is much less work than implement a new MP system).
But here is the question, Galaxy doesn't implement the same DRM measures that Steam does, you can perfectly launch a game offline, without a previous connection to the servers, allow you to add third party games without account sync, and other features that make it DRM Free... Yes, you still have to log in to play a multiplayer game, but is to make a connection with the server, not to validate that you own the game, and that is the tremendous difference between one thing and the other, you can hate Galaxy or hate launchers in general but that doesn't make it a DRM measure like Steam, I hope my point is clear.

If you cannot play the game without it, it IS a form of digital rights management.

In such a scenario where in multiplayer is a server or at least a matchmaking service(duh) involved you cannot do this without some form of an account which in itself *is* tied to a license. There may be some form of stand-alone servers, but they are also tied to some form of external authentication via Steam or GOG.

The only scenario nowadays where no DRM is involved are "cracked" servers (dummyed out auth) or games which just use P2P connections. I don't count standalone servers from DOOM, Quake or the ones where the server protocols have been reverse engineered due to popularity and shutdown of the original servers.

Even in the latter case (and for anti-cheat reasons) they usually enforce accounts, which are then mostly self-hosted.

Mind you, GOG Galaxy (API) IS DRM and even in the more privacy breaching sense, more than Steam. For a litmus test, just remove one or two of your integration plugins, rename the data directory for backup and start GOG Galaxy again. Your games of your removed integrations will crop up again until you contact GOG support for purging them.

Each and every game info you add to GOG Galaxy - even for pirated ROMs - are transfered to their servers and in any case, this can get juicy if you are unlucky. If you insist having all your games in one place, use Playnite. It also has a GOG look-a-like installable skin if you want to make it look like it and is ten times more performant than it. In addition, all game information is stored locally and nothing of the metadata is transfered somewhere else.

I don't. To play multiplayer games online you just need an internet connection and a PC. One player acts as server and invites the others, who join the game via IP. That works, if the programmers include the option to set up a server. No need for any client or third party server.

Now, I get the advantage of having a third party server with accounts for anti cheat measures and of a client, if one belongs to the kind of players who want online achievements. But for a DRM-free game, those modes should always only be an option. Never mandatory. DRM-free multiplayer via direct IP or LAN should always be possible.

I am no fan of Galaxy, lets be clear about that.

But does Galaxy need to be connected to the web to play the single player element of a game?
I'm talking about for 99.99% of games sold at GOG.

If not, then it is hardly DRM ... not in the single player context. See the 4th etc paragraph below for my MP perspective.

You could claim its launcher is an added non necessity, and while I would agree with that, it is just another layer on top of the game's own launcher, so doesn't qualify for DRM on that basis, especially as every game I know of on GOG can be started independently of Galaxy anyway, from an EXE file in the game folder.

The way I see it, Galaxy is just a facilitator ... albeit a bloated one.

Even if Galaxy no longer works in Windows Z in ten years time, so long as you downloaded and archived your games, no problem. Only problem is if you rely on Galaxy to get your games and install them, rather than get the Offline Installer alternatives. This is presuming GOG isn't around in 10 years, so no updated Galaxy for Windows Z.

Yes, you could call having to use Galaxy to play MP, as a kind of DRM, but honestly, unless you are playing offline (LAN) then you already have an Online requirement, so what's the big deal? It's almost like saying GOG has DRM, because you need to login to your account to download your games.

I'm not a person who does multiplayer, so I guess my perspective is different.

All that concerns me, is that I can play my games in 10 years time, on a PC that supports them, and don't require some online requirement to do so in single player mode. As most of us know, many games no longer have servers to play them 10 years down the track, so whether you need Galaxy for MP or not in those instances, is not going to help.

Plus I care that GOG gets good games here, even if that means tolerating no MP aspect or that aspect requires Galaxy. MP for me and certainly many others is just a secondary consideration.

In all reality, GOG probably have little say over the MP aspect of a game, and they just go with whatever the DEV or PUB wants. They know most of us want the game and don't really care about DRM MP, so that would certainly figure in the deals they make with DEVs/PUBs, and it would hardly be wise for them to avoid a popular game, just because it has a MP DRM aspect that some of their customers don't care for.

When you consider the likely numbers, many customers here also use Steam and are unlikely to care about any DRM Galaxy requirement. Then the old brigade who mostly don't use Galaxy and just download Offline Installers, don't even bother with or care for MP. So that leaves very few here who actually care about MP DRM ... at least in my estimation.

It's astounding that people believe DRM is needed for multiplayer. This is a lie on the level of "the Steam client is needed for PC gaming". Since it has been explained (in this topic, even) that DRM is not needed for multiplayer, there is no excuse for anyone still persisting in that false belief.

If a connection to a remote server is required for multiplayer, than it is of course DRM. Because the game is 100% non-preservable and the developer is effectively retaining a remote kill-switch for the game. The day they decide to switch off their server, that MP game will be unplayable for anyone who has bought it. You can't have a stronger form of DRM than that.

The line about 'DRM is required for MP' is total and utter drivel. Multiplayer can be facilitated by LAN and direct IP, or devs could give players the ability to set up and host their own servers: bundle the server application with the game. How hard is that? We need to be encouraging multiplayer game developers to do this, for the sake of MP game preservation.

I mean Stadia's streamed games is more DRMN than that, as you can always hack around a closed server (Battlefield 2, original Demon's Souls anyone?) but good luck accessing files you never had to do anything with a game you only ever streamed video of to your own PC. I'm so glad Stadia is an abject failure.

I'm 100% with you there. Any game that requires a third party service to play multiplayer will become unplayable in multiplayer somewhere within the next 30 years (probably a lot sooner than that).

This is the cold, hard reality. The multiplayer capability of such games has a lifespan.

If the game has a hardcore dedicated following, maybe someone at some point will reverse-engineer the game and patch a proper multiplayer on top of it (at some point, nobody will care about the ip anymore), but it is not certain, it is a real hassle and you can be sure that even if it gets done, there will be a time between the moment multiplayer stops being supported and the moment a charitable soul completes such an undertaking when the game will be unplayable in multiplayer.

PS: The whole piracy argument is total bs anyways. Terraria and Factorio are among the most successful games out there and they both provide a self-hosted server binary (and both will always have a special place in my heart for having done that). Heck, Terraria made extra money from me out of it, because I purchased my gf who is currently in Japan a copy so that we could play together.

PS2: It boggles my mind in a way that indie developers would limit their creation in such a way. I mean, big studios, I get it. Those calling the shots are well removed from the creativity behind the game that is getting made and they don't really care what it. They just see dollar signs. But someone who goes to the trouble of creating a game from scratch themselves... for sure, they want to get paid like everybody else, but surely they also see the human value of what they are creating. I can't imagine they wouldn't feel at least a bit of regret knowing that their entire creation or even part of it will just disappear in, say, 30 years.

No, it is not. DRM still (I hope) means Digital Rights Managements. If the galaxy client do not check fi you are allowed to play the game (the managment of your rights to play this game....), but rather just provide a framework for online conection, then it is not DRM.

Many games in this world have various dependdencies or requierments they relay on the be able to run, be this needing Windows, or Linux, or Direct X, or a certain graphics cards, or amount of RAM or indeed electricity. if you put one type of dependencies as DRM, then by the same logic all this becomes DRM as well. This turns the term DRM meaningless, as it removes every single letter of the term exept Digital..... and instead it turns into: DRM=Things I do not like.

edit - I have not idea how galaxy works, I do not play MP. The point being that requier it, or if a game requiers an online conncetion, does not autmatically make it DRM. Yes, I think it is bad planning and coding if a SP games needs online conncetion, but this is stupidity - not DRM