If you have red pens and sell pens exclusively, great. But in some countries they won't buy red pens because red is the symbol of death (korea, maybe china and japan) so they can't use it for anything except in the morgues. So in order to broaden their usage/popularity they switch to the more common black or blue. Some people will get annoyed they can't get red pens anymore, but the function of the pen hasn't changed.

Neither has the function of DRM.

It thought we were talking about changes in policy due to trying to get a larger client base, not about DRM in this case...

But who said that regional prices really got them a larger client base? I mean after all you always have to subtract those who are not happy with a policy change. I bought considerably less since the introduction of regional pricing because I see it as a rip-off.

Indeed, I have held off buying a game many times due to it being regionally priced.

Surprise! I got a reply from Itroversion!

[i]Hi,

There is minimal DRM in defcon. It does require a key that is integral to the game. Unfortunately this can't be removed. Sorry.

Kind regards

This contradicts GOG. Where do we stand, now?
There is still no Linux version upgrade.
[/i]

EDIT: Odd. Why does the itatlics show up, instead of affecting the font?

Does it? In what way? Introversion mentions that the game requires a key to run, but if GOG has pre-activated the game with a generic key and removed the phoning home requirement, it isn't contradictory.

The Mac offline update was released 2 days ago. We'll probably see the Linux version next week.

True... But they have been able to add a number of newer titles they wouldn't have gotten before, or at least would have taken a while longer to get. A number of publishers were refusing to join until regional pricing was an option, and although they were added it's apparent those that disagree strongly with it the extra titles don't mean much (while in areas where regional pricing makes no difference they'll see normal sales).

I'm not saying it was the best choice that's been made, but at some point GoG has to grow.

Well, whatever minimal DRM really means, one thing is sure: That key is not really integral to the whole game and could easily be removed in the single player part. There is no reason is should phone home while just playing for yourself. I mean, just look at all those other games here on GOG that manage to work without a key.

But then I also thought GOG fixed the problem?

The point I was trying to highlight is that Gog is starting to be selective in what principles it advocates and what it now actually preaches.

One world one price has now gone and in my opinion this latest issue with DEFCON DRM is a worrying trend.

I do not wish to debate one world one price as that is now a moot point.

What should be up for debate by all is the definition of DRM free. Not DRM workarounds. I have had my refund processed but believe the issue is still in the wings.

There should have been a much bigger response by Gog to this thread. Now I see from another poster that they think they can get away with 'lite' DRM and an 'offline mode'. Now where have I heard that one before?

It really needs to be sorted out once and for all.

So minimal DRM is a thing now? I love it...

Just what the fuck is 'minimal DRM' now? How the hell can 'a key' be integral to single player game?

They openly refused to remove DRM entirely yet keep selling it as DRM-free. What sort of bullshitting is this? Too much work to remove CD key checks, yet not too much work to take people's money eh.

The 'excuse' of having such shit in old games where noone has source code or it would be too legally problematic to crack it does not work here. A 6 year old could remove the check in 3 years they had. And then they wonder why people resort to piracy...

Things like these are the reason I don't buy from GOG anymore. To me, they would have to go back to their princilples before I start to buy from them again. This way they are going in the last 1-2 years reminds me of Steam and I would just bet anything that once they have "captured" enough dumb sheeps, the last principle will fall too.

The developer says there IS DRM in the game and it WILL STAY that way. GOG said the game was DRM FREE, then said "OK, problem fixed", then said "no, NOW it will be gone any day now".

Of course, we can go to some lengths interpreting these statements. "This can't be removed" means "we won't remove it" and "DRM free" can be read as "it may contain traces of DRM, but they should be harmless". For some reason they never clarify what it truly means, and of course it is on purpose.

Now, I could live with a pre-entered CD key. But can I really trust that that DRM won't bite me on the future? If I ever click on "multiplayer", will my single player ability be at risk?

I guess GOG would say "No! Of course not! We don't have DRM on the games we sell!" Introversion would say "That sort of thing only happens to pirates! Shame on you for asking. What is on your mind? You wouldn't steal a car now, would you?"

And there is one reason to make it optional: respecting the user. OK, two if you count "avoid a lawsuit for breach of privacy".
I like to know what is being sent and why. I may even allow it. But I don't like to be left on the dark about it. It is MY data that is being sent.
For all I know, they could be using my machine to mine for bitcoins!