I understand and really respect the desire to involve the community in this type of minor "change in direction" from the original mission statement. If nothing else, it shows that even as GOG moves towards some of the things they were created to be against (DRM type systems). However, I think this is proof that GOG can be trusted to introduce new ways of playing in a fair manner. I doubt we have to expect something like "The War Z" on this site anytime soon.

Let the users decide.

If the game has offline single player and (duh) online multiplayer, I see no reason why it can't be added. If you don't want to make an account with a third party service, then stick to playing comps on single player. Hell, I spent ages playing against bots on Unreal Tournament before dabbing my feet in multiplayer and it can be fun, even if there's no story attached to it.

Also, that trailer there is pretty kickass. I wonder how different would the results of the survey be if the trailer had not been added to it.

As long as it's DRM-Free and I can play skirmish with AI without the internet connection and requirement to be online is meaningful because of the multiplayer component than why not? I don't see anything wrong with it.

Don´t you think it would be more helpfull to ask MORE questions?
Like target pricing, bonus material, ect.?
DRM is not a problem with this game, cause direct connection internet is avaible!


BTW, I´m a 30$-BAcker of this game, but I´d buy it another time if it would come to GOG!

Single-player, LAN multiplayer, and Internet "type an IP manually" multiplayer work with no key needed?

Perfect. That's all I ask for.

Not sure if I'll buy it through GOG since I usually wait for native Linux versions of new games to appear via a site like Humble Store, but I'll be happy to see you guys offering it.

if multiplayer is free to play, I would say probably, but I couldnt quite tell from the info given

All features of the game should be accessible independent of third-party services if it's to be termed DRM-free. I don't expect the server software for running a private persistent galaxy-wide war will be made available. So no.

Indeed, which is why I felt that it was a question that couldn't suitably be answered with a simple yes or no, and which I thought I should discuss on the forums for you guys to read.

There's a reason I don't bother posting my complaints about Steam on the Steam forums :)

Which is fine, just as long as this doesn't preempt a flood of games that would otherwise have been self-contained single-player experiences but are influenced by an online experience that necessitates authentication by the developer to satisfy business interests. Like Mass Effect 3.

And as long as GOG doesn't start suffering from the Steam syndrome of having countless multiplayer-focused games - many of which die a slow death within a few months of release - at the expense of quality single-player experiences.

I'm predominantly a single-player gamer, but I don't begrudge multiplayer gamers their fix, just as long as devs and publishers don't forget in their trendy fervour that not everyone is an online gamer.

I don't have a problem with multiplayer-centric games on GOG as long as the game is still usable when the developer's servers go offline.

Not really, GOG already has a lot of games which require a unique key to access multiplayer.

You should be able to sell whatever you want GOG. It doesn't matter if you want to sell games or movies or songs or steaming piles of feces with a sprig of parsley... it's your site. No matter what kind of games you offer, somebody will buy them. Therefore, when asked if a particular game or kind of game can be sold on GOG, my answer will always be yes.

I am not obligated to buy anything I don't like and I certainly don't want to stand in the way of fellow gamers being able to buy games they want. Keep in mind though that GOG is known for certain things, such as only offering DRM free games. If / when you start selling games different from your usual selection (such as adding Mac games to an all-Windows catalog) you should make such differences CRYSTAL CLEAR on the gamecard page.

One of the easiest ways to get people upset is to fail to be upfront with customers as to the nature of a product. Let everyone know the relevant details about alternate games, such as how much of the game is multiplayer vs single or what parts of the game require keys or online activity and there shouldn't be any problems. The more you tell us about a game before we buy it, the more informed a decision we can make, and thus the happier we will be with our decision to buy it or not.

I answered "Yes" to the survey. Here's why I think a game with these features is fine:

"No activation, unique codes, or third-party accounts are required for single-player play or, LAN/direct connection multiplayer."

Without this, I would have voted "No." But, with it, it means that, if I buy the game, I can install and play it from release until Doomsday if I want to. That, to me, is what DRM-free is about: The ability to install and run something I've paid for on *my* terms, not the publisher's.

Requiring a key to use the developer's servers is no big deal. It costs money to provide that service, after all, and it's not the first game on here to require it.

It doesn't seem to violate the principles of gog... it's MP/online focused but as long as there are no nonsense bundled with it I'm OK with that.

It's basically how old MP games used to be. Click MP -> choose username and PW -> then play.

If you add it, just make sure it's clear in the description though!

I would say yes, but would like to add something.

Since there is no single-player offiline campaign and only a mulitplayer online campaign, I would suggest having a 1 month subsciption built in with the purchase price for people to be able to try the online aspects of the game.