A) As long as the offline installers work as intended (that is: without the need for Galaxy to be used) I(!) really don't see the problem.
B) If Hitman or any other DRMed game would be here, I(!) still would not have to buy them. So, again: no problem.
C) Funny, I thought me contacting support directly and asking for a change would have had something to do with that.
I wasn't aware that bitching and moaning on the forum was the deciding factor.
There must have been a lot of direct requests to that regard in those days, I'm sure.
The same for my direct contact to support to remove the public display of the number of my "games owned" from my review(s), btw.

That statement is factually untrue. "Fully" means 100% of the game's content, and you cannot access, nor play, 100% of Cyberpunk's content without first jumping through the Galaxy DRM-gate hoop that GOG put into it, and now ditto also for Witcher 3 too.

Your characterization of the DRM-gated content as "dumb cosmetics" is no excuse for it being DRM-gated content.

Maybe some of us like "dumb cosmetics," but do not tolerate DRM. Maybe some of us don't agree with your descriptor of it being "dumb cosmetics." Maybe some of us expect our games that are (falsely) advertised as being "DRM-free" actually to be DRM-free, which Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk 2077 definitely are not.

No, you can't. Without that verification at runtime, some items are not available.
It might still be 99.76%, but there are pieces missing.

Finally something that makes some god damn sense on this forum!!!

I don't care if you see the problem. I'm not going to derail the thread and explain here what has already been discussed in excruciating detail over hundreds of forum posts back then. It's pretty much obvious you're incapable of seeing the obvious at this point anyway. The point is others saw the problem, and protested against it, and got the result they wanted.

Breaking news: more than one factor can influence something. The Hitman incident was a great example of how voicing our concerns in public, where they could be seen and quoted by various gaming news sites and youtubers, can be pretty important.

Gotta love how it's always 0 or 1 with people on forums.

DRM's are bad, but not everything is a DRM. Notify me if something actually worthwhile gets barred behind their garbage launcher.

Because it's not a goshdarned matter of opinion, even though some people seem to have thoroughly deluded themselves into believing that "online activation required to access content" is not DRM. Stop focusing so much on the "something worthwhile", step back, and actually engage the ol' noggin. And maybe try reading and parsing what's been said.

I mean, come on -- it matches even GOG's own definitions of DRM from the FCKDRM archive linked up there!

I did, and your pathetic attempts at insults do nothing but affirm what i think.

You want to get angry at nothing and shake your fists at the clouds? Be my guest, but know that a corporation doesn't give a damn.

I get your point, but some people don't want DRM to CREEP inwards, so they rail against every time a "little bit" ends up in the games.
Constantly relenting and telling yourself and others that "it's just a little thing" and compromising on what you accept as DRM is how platforms eventually allow things that you once found distasteful.

So I applaud those who take a strong stance against "the silly little unimportant bits of gated content", because it's voices which influence purchases and purchases are what corporations DO care about.

It's worthless stuff for two games made by a company that's owned by GoG's CD Projekt. I understand where you guys are coming from, but overblowing THOSE things is just weird. Yes, gog introducing more and more drm stuff IS concerning, but this thing isn't. It's just a dumb incentive for people to download their launcher.

I believe there are limits to the outrage, or at some point it just makes people look silly. I'm glad people are speaking about this, as they have every right to do, but perspective matters.

Again, if gog ditches the drm free mentality even further, customers should ditch THEIR ass and go somewhere else, that i'm pretty sure we can agree on.

Been curious where the survey is, i'll take it and add my input to it. (Assuming they have the appropriately written options)

GOG's parent company. And it is a big deal, not because of the content itself but what the restriction of it represents. It's the "foot in the door"/"thin end of the wedge"/"camel's nose under the tent"/"whatever-you-want-to-call-it" that will be used to justify progressively more egregious use of DRM later, by which point it will be far too late.

We've already seen it happen this way before with the other so-called "core values" that GOG eventually dropped, and it's happening again now with DRM-free. There has already been escalation in the scope of the DRM they allow:

* GOG used to be 100% DRM-free for single player/offline mode
* GOG decided to start partnering up with Epic to sell fully DRM'ed Epic Store games through Galaxy back in late 2020
* Shortly after the Epic deal, CP2077 released with DRM'ed content that required online activation - but you didn't need to go through Galaxy and you didn't need to go online to do this every time you started a new game, just once per install
* TW3 now includes DRM'ed content requiring online activation, now only via Galaxy, and this must be done every time you start a new game

There's also GOG's increasing tolerance to DRM'ed content in third party games which goes beyond mere cosmetic content (accidentally or deliberately, makes no difference if GOG won't enforce it) as shown by the DRM on GOG thread: https://www.gog.com/forum/general/drm_on_gog_list_of_singleplayer_games_with_drm/page1

Apparently it's being emailed to "GOG's best customers", which sounds like it'll be exclusively targeting users who continue to spend lots here despite all the BS with Galaxy, DRM etc. and thus will have less of a negative opinion towards those things...

It seems to be for selected users. Probably people who bought a lot game's this year.

That was my thought as well. They don't want a consensus from the community as a whole, they only want opinions from people who don't have enough issues stopping them from buying. Speaks volumes of GOG's direction.

I own more than 700 games here and spent ~560€ on GOG games in 2022, but no trace of a GOG survey in my e-mails.

I guess that it might be related to never having even downloaded Galaxy, so this is not my opinion that they want to hear. It is easier to sell DRM to people who already accepted to use an "optional" games client on their own.