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

×
avatar
Wishbone: Given that they have apparently known for the past 3 years that the game is not actually DRM free, I think the whole "let's cut them some slack guys" attitude is quite a bit more lenient than they deserve. This is a bit more than a "mistake". It's fraud, and it's both unethical and illegal.
avatar
BKGaming: Like DRM there is no set definition of DRM free, so you would have a hard time proving this illegal or fraud. Unethical maybe, in the spirit of the term. According to what GOG advertises, DRM free means "no copy protection, on-line checks, or any other annoyances". This was pretty much true of this game up until this point, you could copy it, you didn't need to check in online to play and generally there was no annoyances up until now.
You're grasping at straws here, but you're proving my point for me. The game contains an online check that can render the game useless. I'd say that blatantly violates both the "no online checks" and "no annoyances" part of the definition. And that is, as you say, GOG's own definition, the one they advertise to customers. And they've known about it for three years, and still advertised and sold the game as DRM free.
avatar
Ciris: DRM check in DEFCON has been removed by the developer.

The game still does seem to try calling home at startup, but that in no way influences single-player mode.

This is DRM check was enabled by a mistake by the DEV. We had a similar problem some time ago with DEFCON but it was fixed, it's back now and we've just been made aware of it. We've asked the developer to create a custom build for GOG in which this is prenatally fixed, unfortunately it will take some time for that to happen.

We apologize for the inconvenience - this is a situation that should not have happened. You are of course entitled to request refunds for the game due to this situation.
avatar
rampancy: I miss the days when we had The EnigmaticT here. At least he would have had the decency to be upfront and honest about matters like this. Now, all we have is contradictory and ultimately meaningless double-speak like, "Wow, now the online DRM in our DRM-free game works the way it should! You should be so happy now!"
You crack me up, little buddy!

Don't get me wrong I liked TeT too but IIRC it was him who made the term "Good news!" famous around these parts...
avatar
Wishbone: You're grasping at straws here, but you're proving my point for me. The game contains an online check that can render the game useless. I'd say that blatantly violates both the "no online checks" and "no annoyances" part of the definition. And that is, as you say, GOG's own definition, the one they advertise to customers.
And as I said this was true up until this point. The "online check" likely refers to the game needing the be online to be activated or to be be played (ie Steam), as I stated in another post if it referred to key checks, MP games have been going against GOG's drm free stance for a long time then and what they advertise. Regardless the point still remains proving fraud or this being illegal is very far fetched because there is no legal precedent really from what is DRM and what is DRM free. If there is I'd gladly like to see it. Furthermore as I also said in another post their TOS covers them really in this situation honestly, which we all agree to it by using the site.

That's clearly up to interpretation though because "online checks" could mean nothing more that what I stated.

avatar
Wishbone: And they've known about it for three years, and still advertised and sold the game as DRM free.
This actually is not clear. They may or may not have known. One can't say for sure that they didn't have the online check removed once and it was re-added via a patch ect. All that was said is a universal key was used and that it was made invalid by an online check, it does not mean that the universal key's sole purpose or it's purpose at all was for the online check. That's something that is being assumed.

Regardless I do agree overall with you and what you stated, GOG has handled this rather poorly. But it's one game, this is far from one of those "Hey we got good news, DRM is coming to GOG to get more games" type of news post. That's the real issue here, people are afraid that will happen and that why there so ticked off about this.
Post edited July 03, 2015 by BKGaming
Just a heads up. Refund was processed immediatly, just got asked if I want store credit or a real refund. Chose store credit obviously (I do love gog ;) - just trying to send a message to the developer, hope he recieves it.

Also I will repurchase the game eventually if and when the drm is completely removed.
avatar
Wishbone: And they've known about it for three years, and still advertised and sold the game as DRM free.
avatar
BKGaming: This actually is not clear. They may or may not have known. One can't say for sure that they didn't have the online check removed once and it was re-added via a patch ect. All that was said is a universal key was used and that it was made invalid by an online check, it does not mean that the universal key's sole purpose or it's purpose at all was for the online check. That's something that is being assumed.

Regardless I do agree overall with you and what you stated, GOG has handled this rather poorly. But it's one game, this is far from one of those "Hey we got good news, DRM is coming to GOG to get more games" type of news post. That's the real issue here, people are afraid that will happen and that why there so ticked off about this.
Maybe GOG's QA team should start testing all patches for CD-key requiring games with banned keys in order to differentiate a reintroduced online key-check from other online access that some players might wish to allow, like updating the leader boards? How else could they find out about this kind of pointless DRM, that only works if the game has a bad key while it is able to connect to the verification servers?

Which reminds me, does anyone happen to know any decent 64-bit Windows 7 compatible firewall that do not automatically allow known popular software to connect to the net without first asking permission from the user, while also when a "this session only"-permission is given for a web browser, new tabs and links can be opened without being harassed with new permission queries?
avatar
micktiegs_8: Anyways, I checked last night by installing the game without internet connection then starting it up. It showed down the bottom 'authentication status unknown' however I had no limitation on gameplay this time.
avatar
BKGaming: This support's that view honestly, otherwise if they just lifted the key ban it wouldn't say that since you have an authorized key again now.
Do you actually own the game or have any experience with the DRM used in it? 'Authentication status unknown' is what it always showed if you made sure to run it without an internet connection (unless the devs had deactivated your game, in which case it displayed 'Key Revoked' regardless of the internet connection).

This doesn't remotely support your theory, how would it say the poster has an authorised key when they clearly state that in that test they installed and started without a connection?

This is DRM check was enabled by a mistake by the DEV.
avatar
BKGaming: Self explanatory, but clearly says the check was a mistake NOT the banning of the key was a mistake.
That reads very much like misunderstanding or spin to me.
Post edited July 03, 2015 by SirPrimalform
avatar
mchack: Just a heads up. Refund was processed immediatly, just got asked if I want store credit or a real refund. Chose store credit obviously (I do love gog ;) - just trying to send a message to the developer, hope he recieves it.

Also I will repurchase the game eventually if and when the drm is completely removed.
Looks like mine was also acted upon quickly. However, with caveats..

Here's the message I received (and haven't yet replied to):

Hello
Of course requested refund in this situation is accepted. However unfortunately there are some problems with it. Because your order was made 2 years ago we cannot process refund as a standard procedure since our system allows it only for the orders not older then a year. In this situation I can propose you one of the following options:
- We will refund your payment with a store credit you could use to purchase games in our store (amount 1.99 USD)
- I will exchange your game for a different title available in our store at the initial price of your game (9.99 USD)
- And of course we can return your payment as a standard money transfer to your bank account, however it might took up to 2 weeks.
Please let me know which of the proposals you'd prefer most.
I tend to be extremely careful with bank info - and this isn't (to me) a cause worthy of disclosing bank details for a wire transfer - so that's out.

Trading the game a, basically, full retail, is a good offer. But then I have to choose soon which specific game.

Store credit allows me to 'bank' the refund and then later when I naturally buy something anyways I can use it then.

Will have to think on it over the July 4 holiday (here in the US)..

But it's a bummer that their 'system' has the 'one year for refunds' limit, because I mostly just wanted a credit back to my credit card.
avatar
mchack: Just a heads up. Refund was processed immediatly, just got asked if I want store credit or a real refund. Chose store credit obviously (I do love gog ;) - just trying to send a message to the developer, hope he recieves it.

Also I will repurchase the game eventually if and when the drm is completely removed.
Still nothing for me... nor any kind of reply to my ticket.
avatar
Martek: Looks like mine was also acted upon quickly. However, with caveats..

Here's the message I received (and haven't yet replied to): I tend to be extremely careful with bank info - and this isn't (to me) a cause worthy of disclosing bank details for a wire transfer - so that's out.

Trading the game a, basically, full retail, is a good offer. But then I have to choose soon which specific game.

Store credit allows me to 'bank' the refund and then later when I naturally buy something anyways I can use it then.

Will have to think on it over the July 4 holiday (here in the US)..

But it's a bummer that their 'system' has the 'one year for refunds' limit, because I mostly just wanted a credit back to my credit card.
I think it's quite normal actually. If it was a recent order, they could reverse the transaction, a bit like a chargeback but initiated from the other end. Since it was so long ago, that transaction is set in stone.
Post edited July 03, 2015 by SirPrimalform
avatar
BKGaming: <lots of text>
You're guessing similarly to me, but with a strange approach of trying to read into a lot of text instead of just stating that you are guessing. It's .. odd.

Of course requested refund in this situation is accepted. However unfortunately there are some problems with it. Because your order was made 2 years ago we cannot process refund as a standard procedure since our system allows it only for the orders not older then a year. In this situation I can propose you one of the following options:
- We will refund your payment with a store credit you could use to purchase games in our store (amount 1.99 USD)
- I will exchange your game for a different title available in our store at the initial price of your game (9.99 USD)
- And of course we can return your payment as a standard money transfer to your bank account, however it might took up to 2 weeks.
Please let me know which of the proposals you'd prefer most.
avatar
Martek: [...]
Will have to think on it over the July 4 holiday (here in the US)..

But it's a bummer that their 'system' has the 'one year for refunds' limit, because I mostly just wanted a credit back to my credit card.
If it didn't look like this was likely to be fully corrected anyway, I'd probably be a dick about it in your shoes. In other words, so far it seems like GOG knew about this problem for years, and didn't tell us, so they should offer full refund regardless of any problems they have.

However, since the promise is to fully fix it, I would probably wait about 1 month to see what becomes of it.

Obviously your decision is your own. I'm just idly commenting.
Post edited July 03, 2015 by jsjrodman
avatar
SirPrimalform: Do you actually own the game or have any experience with the DRM used in it? 'Authentication status unknown' is what it always showed if you made sure to run it without an internet connection (unless the devs had deactivated your game, in which case it displayed 'Key Revoked' regardless of the internet connection).

This doesn't remotely support your theory, how would it say the poster has an authorised key when they clearly state that in that test they installed and started without a connection?
Sorry you are correct it was late and I didn't fully read that because I was tired, I missed the part that said he started it offline. My apologizes, I thought he got that message by trying online now. And no I do not own the game, it's a game I am interested in but have not gotten it yet. And yes I have dealt this type of DRM before. I've been a gamer for over 20 years, there is not much I haven't ran into before, granted the last time I've owned a game that checks online like this has been a long time because I only buy from GOG now.

Authentication status unknown, means that it could not authenticate against the server but I thought he got that online which would have supported my view that they (the dev) disabled the authentication in the backend. I am currently working on a degree in computers with a strong focus in programming & database, so I'm not a complete idiot to what these things mean. Lol ;)

---

Have you tried it now though online? After Ciris last message? I'm curious if it will work now or if the key is still revoked or if it gives any other type of message.

avatar
SirPrimalform: That reads very much like misunderstanding or spin to me.
Just pointing out what was stated.

avatar
jsjrodman: You're guessing similarly to me, but with a strange approach of trying to read into a lot of text instead of just stating that you are guessing. It's .. odd.
Well it's much better than stating that and not supporting why you think that or at-least to me anyway. Sorry I just like to support what I am saying when I can. Lol
Post edited July 03, 2015 by BKGaming
avatar
rampancy: I miss the days when we had The EnigmaticT here. At least he would have had the decency to be upfront and honest about matters like this. Now, all we have is contradictory and ultimately meaningless double-speak like, "Wow, now the online DRM in our DRM-free game works the way it should! You should be so happy now!"
avatar
Geralt_of_Rivia: You crack me up, little buddy!

Don't get me wrong I liked TeT too but IIRC it was him who made the term "Good news!" famous around these parts...
Yeah, that amount of nostalgia is pretty funny.
I just emailed Introversion. I don't expect this to put much pressure on them, but I still expect this to be better than nothing.

I'm wondering now if I should ask for a refund. I understand that the ball lies with Introversion now. But how much time will it take them to fix the issue? What if they never do? GOG will continue to sell a game with DRM that "works". That is not OK with me.
I'll probably give them a few more days to sort out this mess, but I'm not expecting much.
avatar
Gede: What if they never do? GOG will continue to sell a game with DRM that "works". That is not OK with me.
I'll probably give them a few more days to sort out this mess, but I'm not expecting much.
That wouldn't be okay with me either, I think we maybe should give them ample time to provide a proper solution but they shouldn't drag there feet either. A few days probably isn't enough time, as simple as some people believe it to be, stripping out code for such DRM like online checks can sometimes be a pain. Sometimes that code is deeply integrated into the game and could even require a re-write of certain portions of code. I think giving them a month or two would be ideal (but it might not end up taking long at all) as long a temporary solution is in effect like unbanning the key for the time being. Just my 2 cents.

But if you take issue with that then I would most defiantly talk to GOG about a refund. :)
Post edited July 03, 2015 by BKGaming
This feels like a quick and dirty workaround for the DRM was implemented, then it fell to shit. So now people are pissed off.
The seemingly easier path isn't always the best one.

Thinking I'll give this a month to get resolved, or at least receive something regarding the developers moving in the right direction.
If they don't, I'll get a refund, then make sure to not purchase anything from them in the future.
Probably not something the developers want customers to start doing in droves. They aren't exactly a large company.

As for all the rest of it, I still believe in GOG as a company. If I didn't trust them, I sure as hell wouldn't keep giving them money.
If it reaches a point where that trust is lost, I won't spend time complaining on a forum. I'll just stop buying.

But, considering that it's because of GOG that I've been able to accumulate an eight year backlog while avoiding full-on homeless poverty, I'm not quite ready to start kicking them in the teeth at every opportunity.
avatar
madth3: F.E.A.R. calls home too?
avatar
PaterAlf: No, F.E.A.R. has some inactive leftover Securom files (which is not a big deal in my eyes).

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/fear_installed_securom_all_over_my_computer_does_anyone_know_how_to_get_rid_of_it
It is a big deal in my eyes. And what is even more important is that GOG said, that they are working on a fix. Then the thread is forgotten and nothing happens. The same will happen with this thread and game. I guarantee it!