I just read this and lost my mind. Of course they went silent with the NMS problem, THEY MADE AN EXAMPLE OF THEM.

Oh the irony.

They should have made this "reward" a t-shirt that says "I installed Galaxy and all I got was this lousy t-shirt". That would have been fair.

I agree on that: it is not strictly DRM if it doesnt prevent you from installing the game offline and playing it offline.
Now we need some time playing the game to really gather data about the EAC behavior and to check if possible if, after some portions of the game, it doesnt "lock" your savegame/possibility to keep playing offline unless it can be allowed to communicated online even once/for some time

However, to its core, one major concept about (some ? many ? at least me then) people not liking DRMs is EXACTLY them being intrusive softwares that install themselves at some inner portions of their operating system with elevated rights (and potentially posing security threat in various ways), and transmitting/receiving data whenever your computer would connect online...

So Even if EAC strictly speaking is not a DRM that prevents you to play your game on single player mode (which still has to be verified), it "behaves" exactly like what the securom/starforce (and later) eras of DRM were behaving... (software elements that are on the edge of rootkit, sometimes on one side or the other, of said edge)
Therefore, it still has its place on this list, even if it is despite a mere "semantic" issue...

That's not what DRM means.

Please, at least read the full paragraph before trying to refute it: No matter what your opinion on EAC is, locking content (Boss re-matches, loot, combat techniques) behind an online-requirement is DRM. No matter how you turn it.

drm is clearly the future of gaming , better to accept your destiny now than later :P

Perhaps you should put the EAC at the end of the paragraph, rather than start with it.

What I find more baffling is the fact that the "my rewards" page states that not only pre-order items, but also later items will come as freebies solely there.

This makes me think of the free dlcs we had for the witcher 3, but this time around locked behind galaxy and internet connection, while locked for offline installers.

I might whine too much about the matter, but I find it a disgrace for a company who "fights" for drm-free, to go back to its words, and no, I dont' care if these are freebies, there is no reason that we can't enjoy them beucase we don't want to use this *optional* launcher.

At the end of the day ths is literally going against the preservation of games.

As there seem to be questions on it...

as per a google search from

[url=]https://searchcio.techtarget.com/definition/digital-rights-management#:~:text=Digital%20rights%20management%20(DRM)%20is,copy%20content%20they've%20purchased.[/url].

"Digital rights management (DRM) is a systematic approach to copyright protection for digital media. The purpose of DRM is to prevent unauthorized redistribution of digital media and restrict the ways consumers can copy content they've purchased. DRM products were developed in response to the rapid increase in online piracy of commercially marketed material, which proliferated through the widespread use of peer-to-peer file exchange programs. Typically DRM is implemented by embedding code that prevents copying, specifies a time period in which the content can be accessed or limits the number of devices the media can be installed on."

No dog in this fight from me, just thought as there were discussions on what it actually was, a definition could be useful.

This is sad to hear and I agree with you that if they do this, it would be an outright betrayal of the DRM-free cause and yet another move pushing me away from the site. The thing is, it seems that a certain segment of their user base simply will not be forced to use Galaxy. They would rather just leave. GOG really needs to get its collective head around that.

perhaps you could follow your own wisdom and read full post instead of only do a partial quote
of first line/sentence to make a point, especially when trying to ridiculize someone who, basically, was siding with your initial opinion...

but why should i ever be surprised or even be disappointed in what had to be expected: that's what gog forums had became for now several months

and if we have to go semantics, lets know i'm not completely illiterate dumb idiot as people obviously believe:
DRM stands for Digital Rights Management if i'm not mistaken
It so applies on a digital product (well, technically, it can also be implemented within firmware of physical devices, for same purpose)
whom rights does it talk about ? consumers/legitimate buyers' ones
management of said rights handled by who ? obviously not the allegedly target/beneficients of said rights... instead, it's management of end user's right by the seller of a digital product, to reduce/impair/hinder said end user in using said digital product...

DRM requires software components or hardware tech (which, basically, is just embedding a software component on hardware parts) to enforce said management of someone's rights by a third party.
see ? i can read and mmaybe understand.

now let me go back to my illiterate stupidity !

that is a definition that reduces the view of the DRM concept to it's most used/popular version.
but in reality, DRM is not just copyright/anticopy systems.. Region locking is DRM
And in theory, digital products providers/publishers/stores could come up with many different "creative" applications of DRM technologies:
from preventing you to play a game for too long time in a row, or at some given hours of the days (for example, a governement's ministery of work/economics could force a store and publisher to prevent that new uberhyped game to be played during work hours at release, to avoid too many employees calling "sick" or requesting to get their holiday/rest days during said game release period...),
to deciding not to let you use your digital product (game, movie, etc) if they can detect (webcam, social media scanning, whatever) who are with you at a given time, and decide you are not allowed to enjoy your digital product as long as said persons are nearby (patent already exists for example for microsoft kinect to refuse to play movies if more tha x number of persons are detected in the room)
to simply remove/delete said product from your ownership (with or without refund, they are allowed not to do it, in fact, you agreed on that), and possibly wiping out any derivative work you built upon your digital copy of the product (amazon kindle removals, already happened)

before ever trying to go somewhere for any definition, the acronym itself is rather self explanatory imho
Digital (product)
Rights (those i am supposed to have as a consumer/end user)
Management (clearly done "not by me/the end user", but by the one who sold me the product and patronizes me as if they were my parent, also strippign me off various common consumers/owners rights that would automatically comes to me according to legislation of my country, would the product be "physical")

Unfortunately, since they've been catering to the general public and pushing away that niche and discriminating audience for several years now, that segment is small and getting ever smaller, both as percentage, as the number of "generic" users increases, and as absolute numbers, as they've been leaving since this started and few likeminded ones arrive. And it's quite clear that the higher ups would just say good riddance anyway, finally being able to pursue their growth and profit at all costs goals without a bunch of annoying users pestering them about values, ethics, promises and so on.

As for them doing something like that for CP, entirely expected.

You're not whining too much at all to expect the same thing from a store which it openly advertises itself to be. Personally I don't own Cyberpunk 2077 and aren't even thinking about buying until it's finished (late 2021 / early 2022). If this "needs Galaxy for offline single player" cr*p is still in it by then, I won't be buying at all.

The problem is the world is "evolving" and DRM is being expanded by game companies themselves to include other stuff, eg, de-optionalising clients by "gating" content behind them in order to push them as the primary channel through which an increasing amount of in-game content is being sold as micro-transactions / online-only DLC is a new problem that we didn't have when the old 1990's era definition of DRM were invented for offline games (where the only issue was disc copying). Same goes with Sony Rootkit 2.0 cr*p which we thought died off years ago and no-one would be dumb enough to bring back, yet here we are in 2020 with Vanguard and other kernel driver based Anti-Cheat systems.

As someone pointed out, region coding on DVD's is a form of DRM, as is printer cartridge chips or tractor components, none of which are anti-theft devices for the actual device in question, they are entirely about overly-monetizing the sale of future products via artificial vendor / regional lock-ins. DRM overall is ultimately about post-purchase control, of which copy protection is one major sub-branch (but unlike the 90's, it's definitely not the only reason for it anymore).

The otherwise great DEX MACHINA wont save your highscore (thus unlocking further levels) unless launched through Galaxy.