How many copies were refunded?

Right. The vast majority buy on Steam. You're posting on the GOG forums. This is a store where the sole selling point is DRM-free. If you didn't care about Hitman being DRM-free you already bought it on Steam years ago.

Hahaha, this is PERFECT!

Especially their delightfully appropriate choice to illustrate the article with a picture of 47 wearing a clown outfit.

Honk fucking honk! xD

GOG has already been in their crosshairs for the debacle with tweets, and then the handling of Devotion on top of really slow customer service in the wake of Cyberpunk's release.

CDPR is a sister company. CD Projekt is the parent company to both.

Reenactment.

Something else I'll do is: I want to play a game when it's hot or newer, so I'll just "buy" it where it's at. So, if it's on Steam, it's on Steam - yeah, I'll grab it over there.

If I don't like the DRM elsewhere (on Steam, Epic, Origin, etc) and say it comes to GOG - especially if I didn't spend a good deal on it; or I really like the game a ton - if it comes to GOG and I'm looking for it DRM-FREE, I'll re-buy it over here on GOG.

Sometimes on GOG - there's fixes not in other version; way less patching non-sense and/or DLC chasing to do (think NWN2: Complete); nice mods equipped out-the-box (Vampire: Bloodlines comes w/ Wesp's Basic Patch, which is what I use the most for that game normally); and/or other things worthwhile in the GOG version, which aren't elsewhere.

Obviously, I'll re-buy a game b/c a game is DRM-FREE on GOG - but sometimes it's more. For example, I re-bought Saboteur for the mini-map fix. I bought Riddick: Dark Athena to get away from its crap DRM. I re-bought Jade Empire: Special on GOG to get away from its disc-DRM. I bought Vampire: Bloodlines b/c it comes w/ Wesp's Basic Patch. I bought NWN2: Complete to have the game entirely patched-up and get away from its insane patching process; and to collect Mysteries of Westgate (yep, I was missing that DLC).

Like others I was excited to be able to buy the game here when I spoted the email. Then saw the online components of play and thought yeah no.
While I'm normally online anyway I still don't like that tie in for a single player game. Plus for me I have so little time these days I might get to a game years down the line.
So last thing I want is a few years from now install the game (my offline files) start it up and find that the original online service servers are now offline as the company that made it closed up, were aquired, or otherwise didn't see the value in running the servers. Now I have a game lacking things I bought with the expectation of them being there for game play.

So no sale on this game for me, and I'll join the chorus of disappointed customers.

i'm too..

but only if they make it clear and unambiguous if games have DRM or not and as you already mentioned, if they further support the DRM-free movement.

maybe they should reward publishers for DRM-free with better contract conditions and for my sake DRM-free products could be more expensive in comparison

as an alternative GOG could release games here on day one with intact DRM-protection and later if the publisher gives his approval, they could offer a DRM-free unlock option by demanding an extra fee.

i prefer GOG as it was before and hope they don't choose the wrong direction

You know, I don't buy that much on Gog, but it's about to be a lot less.

For starters, drop the smart ass behaviour and approach the situation like an adult.

Second, start using official channels first to establish a communication line (most people just send a ticket and sit on there butt waiting), after that try direct forms of communication like phone calls and company e-mails.

Do not give up after the first few tries, do not become a rage dispenser and avoid using insults as your primary method of presenting your argument.

This could be done, but most GOG forum users are kids or young adults who lack experience with actual company interaction.

for what? to getting automated text modules?
btw. i'm 40 years old.

Based and redpilled ;)

https://www.google.com/search?q=gog+hitman&tbm=nws&source=univ&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiIwbLBu5vzAhX4F1kFHZITAbsQt8YBegQIDhAG&biw=1920&bih=975&dpr=1

The problem with this is though that GOG opening its store up to DRMed games is in itself inherently damaging to the DRM-free movement. Because, by signalling loud and clear that they are ok hosting games with locked content, it will make it more likely that other publishers will follow suit with releases like this, rather than making the effort to release games properly DRM-free. This is why the precedent is extremely important - in allowing 1, 2, 5 (whatever) DRMed games onto their store, GOG is effectively signalling the end of their support for DRM-free.

This is why I also strongly believe that proposed middle-ground solutions, such as 'labeling' of DRMed games are fatally flawed: because the precedent of allowing any DRMed games onto the store makes it far less likely that we will see DRM-free releases.

The fight against DRM is an all-or-nothing war. There can be no middle-ground, no compromise with DRM (it is that insidious).

I wouldn't say that is "based and redpilled," because they are using the sensationalistic & inaccurate phrase "review bombed" as clickbait in their article titles, and thus giving their readers the misleading impression that GOG's position on this matter has some merit, which it doesn't really.

You are aware that you're talking to someone who, IIRC, actually travelled to Warsaw to meet the people of GOG, or aren't you?