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

×
high rated
Interestingly enough, I just noticed that GOG took down FCKDRM.com. It now just redirects to GOG.
avatar
Blastprocessor42: Interestingly enough, I just noticed that GOG took down FCKDRM.com. It now just redirects to GOG.
I wouldn't read too much into it, normal thing for companies to do when an ad campaign is over.
avatar
Blastprocessor42: Interestingly enough, I just noticed that GOG took down FCKDRM.com. It now just redirects to GOG.
avatar
wolfsite: I wouldn't read too much into it, normal thing for companies to do when an ad campaign is over.
If that is the case then why are they selling epic games on galaxy.
avatar
wolfsite: I wouldn't read too much into it, normal thing for companies to do when an ad campaign is over.
avatar
Truth007: If that is the case then why are they selling epic games on galaxy.
Maybe to get Epic users to try Galaxy (since the goal of Galaxy 2.0 was to be a central hub for all of your games not just GOG games) and then Epic gamers could see "Oh there is another store here called GOG and they have a bunch of games not on Epic and I don't have to use a client if I don't want to."

It can be seen as a good maneuver to introduce GOG to Epic users.

Casual and mainstream users will take convenience, being able to visit all stores and all your games in one place is very convenient, so it can be used to bring people to GOG, at the very least getting more exposure.
avatar
Truth007: If that is the case then why are they selling epic games on galaxy.
avatar
wolfsite: Maybe to get Epic users to try Galaxy (since the goal of Galaxy 2.0 was to be a central hub for all of your games not just GOG games) and then Epic gamers could see "Oh there is another store here called GOG and they have a bunch of games not on Epic and I don't have to use a client if I don't want to."

It can be seen as a good maneuver to introduce GOG to Epic users.

Casual and mainstream users will take convenience, being able to visit all stores and all your games in one place is very convenient, so it can be used to bring people to GOG, at the very least getting more exposure.
You missed my point. My point is the website the person mentioned used to mention what is bad about drm,etc and gog supports drm by endorsing epic games. People who use Epic dont exclusively use it, they most likely use Steam as well. All games arent really in one place since the client still has to open up and you arent going to visit all stores since steam is the main one and it isnt there.
low rated
avatar
wolfsite: Maybe to get Epic users to try Galaxy (since the goal of Galaxy 2.0 was to be a central hub for all of your games not just GOG games) and then Epic gamers could see "Oh there is another store here called GOG and they have a bunch of games not on Epic and I don't have to use a client if I don't want to."

It can be seen as a good maneuver to introduce GOG to Epic users.

Casual and mainstream users will take convenience, being able to visit all stores and all your games in one place is very convenient, so it can be used to bring people to GOG, at the very least getting more exposure.
avatar
Truth007: You missed my point. My point is the website the person mentioned used to mention what is bad about drm,etc and gog supports drm by endorsing epic games. People who use Epic dont exclusively use it, they most likely use Steam as well. All games arent really in one place since the client still has to open up and you arent going to visit all stores since steam is the main one and it isnt there.
I didn't miss your point, the website was part of a marketing campaign, and like all marketing campaigns they eventually phase out and are no longer used. Just because a website is retired does not mean they gave up on DRM-free.

Many companies build alternate websites to promote a product or movement and after a while they are left dormant and then removed with the URL re-directing to a main website. This is normal in marketing.

And your games are in one place Galaxy was built to be a hub so you can click a game and start it and Galaxy handles the rest (starting/closing other clients,etc). That was the idea for 2.0, to be a hub for all of your games across all platforms in one place.
Post edited February 11, 2021 by wolfsite
high rated
avatar
wolfsite: I didn't miss your point, the website was part of a marketing campaign, and like all marketing campaigns they eventually phase out and are no longer used. Just because a website is retired does not mean they gave up on DRM-free.

Many companies build alternate websites to promote a product or movement and after a while they are left dormant and then removed with the URL re-directing to a main website. This is normal in marketing.
Sure. But, consider this - when recent developments cast your DRM free policy into doubt, going so far as to cause many users, icluding some long time reliable customers, to limit and even discontinue entirely their patronage of your store, and assuming you are actually still commited to that DRM free policy is "silently remove the website of you DRM-free focused campaign" really the option you go with? I mean, really?

It's hard not to see that as (yet another) indication that they really don't give a rat's ass about the whole DRM-free thing anymore. Of course it could be just blind stupidity of GOG's PR/marketing, nothing new there, but still - it looks the way it looks.
high rated
Huh. Must say, the timing is... interesting. Not in relation to the Epic thing, or even to other DRM-ed games "slipping through", but to CDP having the on-line check in CP2077. Darn hard for them to still maintain that argument with this hanging over their heads. And must remember that it was the launch of CDP games that made GOG drop its core values in the past, geolocation and regional pricing first being a temporary and hard fought against exception for Witcher 2, then discarded for good for Witcher 3 (even if AoW3 and D:OS were actually used to lead the way to it), now you have on-line checks for singleplayer components, first having a couple of "slips" from other games and then CDP's current flagship following.
low rated
avatar
wolfsite: I didn't miss your point, the website was part of a marketing campaign, and like all marketing campaigns they eventually phase out and are no longer used. Just because a website is retired does not mean they gave up on DRM-free.

Many companies build alternate websites to promote a product or movement and after a while they are left dormant and then removed with the URL re-directing to a main website. This is normal in marketing.
avatar
Breja: Sure. But, consider this - when recent developments cast your DRM free policy into doubt, going so far as to cause many users, icluding some long time reliable customers, to limit and even discontinue entirely their patronage of your store, and assuming you are actually still commited to that DRM free policy is "silently remove the website of you DRM-free focused campaign" really the option you go with? I mean, really?

It's hard not to see that as (yet another) indication that they really don't give a rat's ass about the whole DRM-free thing anymore. Of course it could be just blind stupidity of GOG's PR/marketing, nothing new there, but still - it looks the way it looks.
You are assuming a lot, everything here is speculation at best.

Your scenario would be like if you went to Burger King for Whopper Wednesday because they are at a lower price but then when you get there they discontinued the Whopper Wednesday marketing program you say "That means they don't serve whoppers anymore" then yell at management despite the fact that Whoppers are still there.
high rated
avatar
wolfsite: It can be seen as a good maneuver to introduce GOG to Epic users.
More likely GOG is getting paid by Epic for the games they sell for them. It's rather the other way round: to get Galaxy users buy Epic games. Why would Epic users care or even notice that they now can use another client to buy their games instead of the one they have been using all the time?
avatar
Blastprocessor42: Interestingly enough, I just noticed that GOG took down FCKDRM.com. It now just redirects to GOG.
avatar
wolfsite: I wouldn't read too much into it, normal thing for companies to do when an ad campaign is over.
An "ad campaign" that went on for nearly 3 years?

https://web.archive.org/web/20180501000000*/https://fckdrm.com/

Bottom of first archived version:
"FCK DRM is an initiative by GOG.COM to promote DRM-free art and media. If you're the owner of a 100% DRM-free source and would like to be featured here, please reach out to iwantto@fckdrm.com."
Post edited February 11, 2021 by Vendor-Lazarus
low rated
avatar
Vendor-Lazarus: An "ad campaign" that went on for nearly 3 years?
And nothing happen on it for years, so it's not really surprising they finally dropped it.
avatar
Vendor-Lazarus: An "ad campaign" that went on for nearly 3 years?
avatar
Gersen: And nothing happen on it for years, so it's not really surprising they finally dropped it.
Not true. Compare the list on the bottom between the first and last archived entry.
low rated
avatar
Vendor-Lazarus: Not true. Compare the list on the bottom between the first and last archived entry.
You mean the list that was last updated in September 2018 ?
avatar
Breja: Sure. But, consider this - when recent developments cast your DRM free policy into doubt, going so far as to cause many users, icluding some long time reliable customers, to limit and even discontinue entirely their patronage of your store, and assuming you are actually still commited to that DRM free policy is "silently remove the website of you DRM-free focused campaign" really the option you go with? I mean, really?

It's hard not to see that as (yet another) indication that they really don't give a rat's ass about the whole DRM-free thing anymore. Of course it could be just blind stupidity of GOG's PR/marketing, nothing new there, but still - it looks the way it looks.
avatar
wolfsite: You are assuming a lot, everything here is speculation at best.
What "everything"? I am only speculating on one thing. Same as you. Neither of ours interpretations of the site's removal is less speculative than the other's.

avatar
wolfsite: Your scenario would be like if you went to Burger King for Whopper Wednesday because they are at a lower price but then when you get there they discontinued the Whopper Wednesday marketing program you say "That means they don't serve whoppers anymore" then yell at management despite the fact that Whoppers are still there.
Uhm... no. That's a terrible analogy. If anything it would be like going to a vegetarian restaurant, seeing they removed a "100% meat free" poster that was always hanging in the window, saying "that means they're not 100? meat free" and then yelling and the management because indeed meat is now on the menu.