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
GHOSTMD: I said it before and i say it again....
i still think, ppl who claim GoG Games have REAL DRM in them
quite missunderstand what DRM is.

I laid it out already in detail several times, i wont repeat myself here.
Just you guys know, i ll be the first to abandon GoG when:

The launcher isn t optional anymore
The games don t start via executable from the folder without internet connection
and without the launcher

That is my limit and yes i test EVERY purchase i make here with HARD disconnect
and open taskmanager.

And NO GoG Communication service isn t DRM either, they already explained what
that is for.
Some gog games objectively have drm. If you need galaxy or 3rd party paradox accounts to play multiplayer then that is drm, then there is situations like gwent where it's online only.
avatar
GHOSTMD: ... (yes GOGs Deus Ex HR and MD worked on start for me, with all the content) ...
It was confirmed, that Deus Ex MD DRM removal was done in hotfix.... So if you waited long enough before buying you had not problems, but others who wanted support developer of their favorite game...
avatar
GHOSTMD: Let me ask you WHAT should GoG do instead hm? To gain more customers? Hm?
I think treating them (customers) better would help a lot...
low rated
avatar
GHOSTMD: ... (yes GOGs Deus Ex HR and MD worked on start for me, with all the content) ...
avatar
IXOXI: It was confirmed, that Deus Ex MD DRM removal was done in hotfix.... So if you waited long enough before buying you had not problems, but others who wanted support developer of their favorite game...
not for me, on start it worked as intented without internet and without galaxy, some had problems
and i assume it was because they have crossaccounts with steam or other launchers.

Some also claimed the BREACH BS of Deus Ex MD not working and blamed GoG, but that was / is
fully on squeenix

Some gog games objectively have drm. If you need galaxy or 3rd party paradox accounts to play multiplayer then that is drm, then there is situations like gwent where it's online only.
Do you even read what you write? Multiplayer is NOT DRM what the hell outside of a PURE
LAN MP mode (those days are long gone except for a few exceptions these days) You NEED BY DEFAULT
and Account and either GoG or your Third Party has to provide the infrastrukture for the server and
accounts so you can play together OVER THE INTERET with others... how DAFUQ is this DRM.
Or preventing you from playing singleplayer? Ey? Did you EVEN TRY the way i TEST my purchases
here? [insertpicardfacepalmhere]

I think treating them (customers) better would help a lot...
Perhaps... but we re treated second class anyway just take a look at Panzer Corps 2 and the
promise to bring achievements to GoG... yeah here we are one year later.
high rated
Even though it says that GOG Galaxy is required for multiplayer in Blood: Fresh Supply you can play that just fine without it via direct IP connect. It even works with people who don't own the game on GOG and you can also make a proper username appear ingame.

https://www.gog.com/forum/blood_series/blood_fresh_supply_multiplayer_no_crossplatform_lobbies/post8
https://www.gog.com/forum/blood_series/lan_play/post2
https://www.gog.com/forum/blood_series/lan_play/post4
Post edited March 01, 2021 by Berzerk2002
high rated
avatar
IXOXI: It was confirmed, that Deus Ex MD DRM removal was done in hotfix.... So if you waited long enough before buying you had not problems, but others who wanted support developer of their favorite game...
avatar
GHOSTMD: not for me, on start it worked as intented without internet and without galaxy, some had problems
and i assume it was because they have crossaccounts with steam or other launchers.

Some also claimed the BREACH BS of Deus Ex MD not working and blamed GoG, but that was / is
fully on squeenix
Mine didn't work on launch and I had to open a Support ticket, then wait for the hotfix. Since you brought up treatment of customers elsewhere, do you think this is good treatment of customers? Making the customers who had enough faith in the store and desire for the game to buy day-1, look foolish for having such trust to purchase as soon as it was available? I'm glad they patched the DRM out of the game after it released with content locked behind DRM, but this was a significant oversight that should never happen on "the DRM-free store".

avatar
GHOSTMD: Do you even read what you write? Multiplayer is NOT DRM what the hell outside of a PURE
LAN MP mode (those days are long gone except for a few exceptions these days) You NEED BY DEFAULT
and Account and either GoG or your Third Party has to provide the infrastrukture for the server and
accounts so you can play together OVER THE INTERET with others... how DAFUQ is this DRM.
Multiplayer itself is not DRM. However, many modes and types of multiplayer are locked behind DRM: those are the ones that don't belong here. Examples of DRM-free multiplayer include; LAN, split-screen/hotseat, direct connect, play-by-email. Moreover, what's to stop the company from running a server that anyone can join, simply from clicking the "multiplayer" button in their game menu? Answer: nothing. The restrictions you mention are an UNnecessary extra step which erodes the future of game preservation. Every additional client check or app check or third party check, is an additional opportunity for "authentication" to fail, which is grating, considering it wasn't needed in the first place!

Also, maybe the flagship DRM-free store should be encouraging a revival of those "old" modes like LAN, instead of pouring resource-over-resource into making "the client to end all clients".
high rated
avatar
GHOSTMD: Do you even read what you write? Multiplayer is NOT DRM what the hell outside of a PURE
LAN MP mode (those days are long gone except for a few exceptions these days) You NEED BY DEFAULT
and Account and either GoG or your Third Party has to provide the infrastrukture for the server and
accounts so you can play together OVER THE INTERET with others...
Wrong.

By repeating a lie over and over again, it doesn't become true. The default multiplayer via internet used to be: one player starts a multiplayer game and acts as server, the others log in. No third party required. There are plenty of games where that still works. The claim that you need an account by default for multiplayer is just a convenient lie to justify multiplayer-DRM. Nothing more.
...

avatar
Berzerk2002: Even though it says that GOG Galaxy is required for multiplayer in Blood: Fresh Supply you can play that just fine without it via direct IP connect. It even works with people who don't own the game on GOG and you can also make a proper username appear ingame.

https://www.gog.com/forum/blood_series/blood_fresh_supply_multiplayer_no_crossplatform_lobbies/post8
https://www.gog.com/forum/blood_series/lan_play/post2
https://www.gog.com/forum/blood_series/lan_play/post4
That is good news. I'll remove Blood Fresh Supply from the DRM-ed Multiplayer list. Thank you for the update!
Post edited March 01, 2021 by Lifthrasil
low rated

Even though it says that GOG Galaxy is required for multiplayer in Blood: Fresh Supply you can play that just fine without it via direct IP connect. It even works with people who don't own the game on GOG and you can also make a proper username appear ingame.

https://www.gog.com/forum/blood_series/blood_fresh_supply_multiplayer_no_crossplatform_lobbies/post8
https://www.gog.com/forum/blood_series/lan_play/post2
https://www.gog.com/forum/blood_series/lan_play/post4
Thank you, this is in fact only possible with games that don't have ANY sort of DRM.
Ofc it is easier to claim drm when relying on existing infrastrukture, rather then do it on
your own via peer to peer and the tools and work needed.

By repeating a lie over and over again, it doesn't become true. The default multiplayer via internet used to be: one player starts a multiplayer game and acts as server, the others log in. No third party required. There are plenty of games where that still works. The claim that you need an account by default for multiplayer is just a convenient lie to justify multiplayer-DRM. Nothing more.
A lie? Thank you for your kind input, no it is not, all you claim is that i am wrong and that i rightout lie
to you. What you descriibe ABOVE is the OLD SCHOOL LAN MULTIPLAYER. Not the usual MMO
Internet MP that is around .... uhhhggg since Gamespy days? Thats the first instance i can think of
where "third party" provided some infrastrukture.

IF you insist on DOING it the "OLD" way then you have to follow the workaround Berzek said.
You have to do it all by yourself, via direct IP connecting, port opening, hamachi server providing
you name it...

And yes there are games like this out there, Grim Dawn for example is one of them that by default
support peer to peer MP, one is the HOST the other just join. But even back in the days with games
like Battlefield 2 that HAD a dedicated server file package you needed to provide ALL the extra work
your so called "THIRD PARTYS" provide these days, to have a ranked system working.
Completely with database, login accounts and so on. But yes you re right that was full MP DRM too and
i am the dumb IT Sys Admin here, who knows jackshit how things work yes?
(just in case you didn t realize, yes i am fucking cynical atm)

However what i said stands, i will be the first to abandon this platform once GoG Galaxy starts to be
mandatory for singleplayer games and also starts to need a internet connection.
Guess (AGAIN) why i test every purchase on exactly this, yes even without ANY gog
services running.

Anyways, you guys n gals a free to believe what ever you want to believe. I presume everybody has
their own limit what they allow and what not, with the games they purchase. I told you mine and i
think that is pretty solid anti DRM limit. Even more so since i don't buy on ANY other shop that has
broken this limit.

If you really think GoG is pushing real DRM, then you don't have seen DRM yet, i think. But hey
again, you are free to believe what you want to believe on that.
Post edited March 01, 2021 by GHOSTMD
high rated
avatar
GHOSTMD: A lie? Thank you for your kind input, no it is not, all you claim is that i am wrong and that i rightout lie
to you. What you descriibe ABOVE is the OLD SCHOOL LAN MULTIPLAYER. Not the usual MMO
Internet MP that is around ...
No. Multiplayer via dedicated server or direct IP is not the same as LAN. And yes, the claim that DRM is necessary for multiplayer is a lie, that is often repeated. So often that many people, you among them, actually believe it. And not all multiplayer is MMO. You are confusing terms here.

So, let me educate you:
LAN = Local Area Network. A form of multiplayer, where all computers that participate are part of the same network. Either cable based or wireless.

Direct IP / dedicated server: One player starts a game in server mode and shares his IP with other participants. Works via internet, without everyone being in the same network. Works well for games with a limited number of players. (FPS, strategy, puzzle games like Trine etc.)

MMO stands for Massively Multiplayer Online. The 'massively' meaning that there is a huge number of players. This kind of multiplayer does require a central server, since most private PCs and connections wouldn't be able to handle the massive load. So this kind of multiplayer and ONLY this kind of multiplayer does require an account. But still it doesn't require DRM. It is entirely feasible to have a central server where you can just register an account without proving that you have bought the game. The coupling of a MMO account to a store account is usually done for financial and is not an absolute requirement. The first MMO games like MUD were open source and free, using the resources of university computing centers. Of course later generations of MMO games require way more computing power and bandwidth, which in turn makes some kind of income necessary.

One other reason why a certified account might be desirable even for deathmatch multiplayer is anti-cheat measures. But again, that is an option, not a necessity. Especially not when playing with friends.


So, you see. The claim that multiplayer requires DRM is false. Some people make this claim because they want to justify multiplayer DRM. Some people don't know better. I'll assume that you were in the latter category and I hope that you are able to understand and accept that you were wrong. ... We'll see. (the ability to accept that one was wrong is very rare in the internet, after all)
high rated
avatar
Lifthrasil: But still it doesn't require DRM.
True.
avatar
Lifthrasil: It is entirely feasible to have a central server where you can just register an account without proving that you have bought the game.
If you are trying to imply that this makes it "not DRM" then you are wrong: If that central server is under someone elses control (and no open source etc) then it is also DRM. One of the most obvious negatives from that is that the server owner deciding to shut it down will shut down the multiplayer game. No amount of "not needing to prove to have bought anything" will help you then.

avatar
Lifthrasil: The first MMO games like MUD were open source and free, using the resources of university computing centers. Of course later generations of MMO games require way more computing power and bandwidth, which in turn makes some kind of income necessary.
Even if income is "necessary" - that doesnt automatically make DRM "necessary".
And computing resources (for running the game) dont necessitate DRM anyway - for example you could release the server code.

Edit: clarification
Post edited March 01, 2021 by Zrevnur
low rated

No. Multiplayer via dedicated server or direct IP is not the same as LAN. And yes, the claim that DRM is necessary for multiplayer is a lie, that is often repeated. So often that many people, you among them, actually believe it. And not all multiplayer is MMO. You are confusing terms here.
Did you even read what i wrote? I didn't claim LAN MP is dedicated Server MP although the system i described
for BF2 (the ranked server one) WORKS in full "offline" LAN, hence the bloody reason you as HOST has
to provide all the work the "THIRD PARTY" usually has to do. And yes it WORKS like that IN a seperated
hardware local area network, without internet. But yes it is not the "usual" LAN MP like CoD or Diablo 2 had.
Because this system provides the same experience you have usually only ONLINE.

ALSO thank you for providing the proof that Multiplayer is not DRM, i kindly thank you for this.
aka:

MMO stands for Massively Multiplayer Online. The 'massively' meaning that there is a huge number of players. This kind of multiplayer does require a central server, since most private PCs and connections wouldn't be able to handle the massive load. So this kind of multiplayer and ONLY this kind of multiplayer does require an account. But still it doesn't require DRM.
Yes it doesn't and yes it isn't as Grim Dawn proofs right these days.

Selective reading at its finest, i do say, i can do it as well see? However, as i said in the end,
i have my limits when they are broken i ll bail. Still believe it is a solid anti DRM approach.

You guys have yours, thats fine. See you around o7
low rated
avatar
Lifthrasil: It is entirely feasible to have a central server where you can just register an account without proving that you have bought the game.
avatar
Zrevnur: If you are trying to imply that this makes it "not DRM" then you are wrong: If that central server is under someone elses control (and no open source etc) then it is also DRM. One of the most obvious negatives from that is that the server owner deciding to shut it down will shut down the multiplayer game. No amount of "not needing to prove to have bought anything" will help you then.
I agree with your point about preservation. Having a developer-operated server for multiplayer games that allows anyone to connect, with no identity/purchase verification is better, but I would still class it as DRM, since the developer still has ability to pull the plug on the entire game, as and when they please, rendering a game that users have purchased no longer playable. I.e. the game has a critical dependency on an external service that is fully in control of the developer.

Imo, we should be pushing back against all DRM and remote servers in MP games. We should be encouraging and rewarding developers that provide tools that allow users to set up and host their own servers, for those MP games that need them.

I would love to see GOG taking a lead on this as well, but it ain't going to happen if they can't even hold the line on SP games ...
Post edited March 02, 2021 by Time4Tea
avatar
rjbuffchix: Also, maybe the flagship DRM-free store should be encouraging a revival of those "old" modes like LAN, instead of pouring resource-over-resource into making "the client to end all clients".
Hey, you know what?
Maybe it was supposed to be read as:
"the client (software) to end all clients (loyal GOG customers)".
IMA head out /s

avatar
GHOSTMD: And yes there are games like this out there, Grim Dawn for example is one of them that by default
support peer to peer MP, one is the HOST the other just join. But even back in the days with games
like Battlefield 2 that HAD a dedicated server file package you needed to provide ALL the extra work
your so called "THIRD PARTYS" provide these days, to have a ranked system working.
Completely with database, login accounts and so on. But yes you re right that was full MP DRM too and
i am the dumb IT Sys Admin here, who knows jackshit how things work yes?
Well perhaps you gazed too deep into the abyss and stopped seeing world outside of your designated ruleset.
I have 2 things to say to you:
1.The "my rewards" is actual singleplayer content. No matter how insignificant it is or how much SPECIFICLY YOU "don't care", it is STILL an actual singleplayer add on content (dlc if you will) that is gated behind 3rd party server connection.
It's significance and value in regards to gameplay in this so far singeplayer game actually doesn't matter.
It's about PRINCIPLES - a concept vast amount of people worldwide don't want to fight for unless it affects them personally.
2.Multiplayer by itself isn't DRM.
Whether multiplayer has DRM or not highly depends on implementation.
To give you an idea what I'm talking about:
it's ENTIRELY possible to create multiplayer netcode that doesn't rely on de facto 3rd party (in regards to game developers' efforts) piece of software called "GOG Galaxy".
And you DON'T actually have to use direct IP to achieve that.
It's enough if you create your own server backend to which your game's netcode communicates.
Then let people join lobbies based on nicknames.
Would that introduce piracy of GOG builds? Yes.
One way to avoid that is multiplayer token of sorts, say, serial key.
Which IS a form of DRM if used for singleplayer and could be seen as a form of DRM if used on multiplayer (I would say it's debatable). Still, better solution than Galaxy.
And if you happen to code UPnP into your game's netcode then you don't have to give a single C about any port opening (most customers worldwide are ignorant enough to leave their routers on default settings so it would work for majority ootb, and for those security conscious people, they either would get this working themselves, put the game on DMZ, or refuse to play the game alltogether per their own "ruleset" called "principles").
While having central server the game communicates to with hardcoded netcdode values, holding a list of self-hosting servers (obviously you would have to make them work, but again, now is not "past" just present, standards are different now and I see no problem with publicly hosting docs for configuring self-hosting servers for your game online, this would be a problem for some people 15-25 years ago, but not anymore) would ensure "game survival after official servers are shut off". You could also make the netcode value overrideable by cvar cfg file so that should the "central server list server" die some day people can offspring their own and redirect to it.

I can give you 2 examples. Both are DRM-ed games but I want you to focus on netcode and the used implementations.
1.Hitman 2016. The game authenticates DLC statuses and some minor data through Steamworks but outside of that relies entirely on connection to developers' (IOI) servers for checking and authenticating challange progression as well as afaik entire portion of non-singleplayer content.
2.Destiny 2 (and I will not talk about things like their down right INSANE ban rules).
I will TLDR the C out of this as net structure of this game is really complex.
Basically they use UPnP based P2P combined with some centralized server aspects for stuff like user authentication.
It's far more complex than that but in short that's it.
Of course the game uses account authentication, and it's pretty unavoidable considering scope of the game (you need SOME form of stats preservation that doesn't risk unauthorised other-user access).

My point is, it's ENTIRELY possible to create multiplayer netcode that doesn't rely on 3rd party LAUNCHER.
CDPR could have 100% made Gwent not utilise Galaxy at all and instead having in-game GOG account login or as far as just nickname-like based authentication with no account login.

Oh, and just so you know, I am atm quite busy making a deployment, so at a certain point in time I will dissappear and will not show up for at least DAYS.
So don't expect me to respond "immediatelly" should there be a need for it.

avatar
GHOSTMD: you as HOST has to provide all the work the "THIRD PARTY" usually has to do
Your convenience or inconvenience specificly in regards to making sure your network infrastructure can handle things ootb or not is 100% irrelevant to the definition of DRM or lack thereof.

avatar
GHOSTMD: You guys have yours, thats fine. See you around o7
Such bait is utterly useless without specifying your designated timezone. And the "from" flag under the avatar is worthless since anybody can set anything there.

avatar
GHOSTMD: (just in case you didn t realize, yes i am fucking cynical atm)
I suggest Matcha for stress relief.

avatar
GHOSTMD: If you really think GoG is pushing real DRM, then you don't have seen DRM yet, i think. But hey
again, you are free to believe what you want to believe on that.
You are free to remain ignorant and stay in your comfort zone for the sake of not hurting your ego by admitting you may be mistaken.
Nothing personal.
Peace.
high rated
avatar
GHOSTMD: ...
Well, as expected you're incapable of admitting being mistaken. Whatever. At least you agree that DRM isn't necessary for Multiplayer. Not even for online multiplayer.

As for what your limits are, that is entirely your call. You are still comfortable with the amount of DRM that GOG allows. I'm not. The only sad thing is that many, who are ready to accept this level of 'unimportant' DRM, feel the need to jump through hoops and define it away. Probably to appease their concience. "Nahhh... that's not REALLY DRM! ... DRM is something I'll define for myself so that it doesn't get in the way of me continuing to shop here. Anyone who disagrees with my conveniently constructed definition of DRM obviously doesn't know what DRM is."

That is kind of pathetic. If someone is comfortable with DRM-ed DLCs being sold on a 'DRM-free' store, they can just say so. But the fact is, that GOG isn't DRM-free anymore. Sure, it's only partial DRM so far. (A significant part in the case of Absolver and Nex Machina, only cosmetics in all other cases). But partial DRM still is DRM.
.


avatar
B1tF1ghter: Hey, you know what?
Maybe it was supposed to be read as:
"the client (software) to end all clients (loyal GOG customers)".
Well, THAT sounds like a fitting description of Galaxy! :-)
Post edited March 03, 2021 by Lifthrasil
low rated
Apparently, based on this thread, Streets of Rogue requires Galaxy for multiplayer (therefore doesn't work on Linux).
Post edited March 09, 2021 by Time4Tea