But - as I reported: All
the patches were gone from my account, even the three patches I already installed. There was no patch at all, only the new installer and the new content. If you saw it differently in your account, something is fishy, since obviously we purchased the same things.
I do not use the GOG downloader, I do not like 'tools' who do things 'automatically'. I have no troubles to do this by hand, so I manually download files and patches, store them and use it.
For me the patches for the base game ware, as expected, in their regular folder.
Just checked and both in GOG Downloader and manual mode I see a link for a patch.
But then one point: I use the French version of AoW3, so maybe that's where the difference comes...
Also you made me smile about you attention about doing everything manually since I feel about the same. Only that I accepted that we just can't craft and carry on ourselves every network packet from one CPU to the HDD on the other side :p So I accept that we can sometimes use tools. But I carefully examine what a tool do and on what purpose. On the specific matter of GOG Downloader it's just a simple download manager that do the same things, including proper files/folders organization, that I would have done myself. Basically I also trust GOG about their intentions and means and until now I feel this trust is well-earned.
Also the GOG Downloader does nothing on its own, it just handle the download when you click on the link and store it in a well-sorted folder.
Now I think you are totally right in your approach to try and limit the number of tools we are dependent of, and beside to be conscious about what we do and what it implies.
Here you are wrong, IMHO. Requesting an account with Triumph is not DRM per se, but receiving a key from GOG and registering this key with your account, and pointing the game to this account and the key is DRM, since it is necessary to use the game in multi player at all. There is nothing to discuss - the game is locked for multi player, and unlocked by an external Triumph site with your account and key.
You are right if you say, that single player mode is DRM free.
Yeah. What was wrong in all those yelling were mixing technical issues and claiming blindly that one needed an online account and that this is DRM.
Now per definition the key is a sort of DRM since it limits the numbers of accounts one can have on the server. This is the only point, which is, as we agree, not relevant for the core game.
I do not
think that this account is necessary for any logical reasons (scores, ranking,...) - the account could be optional if somebody wants this and the account in itself with a name and password is enough to identify a player. The key is not needed for this - it is DRM.
Well, I am in the network and server field with good background in all the stuff involved here and frankly a kind of handle is needed to be able to keep together all data linked to a given player. This handle is usually implemented as an account and protected with a password but this is just a detail. Now sure if one just want to connect and play with random peoples each time, you can just setup a brain-dead hub :p
But I'm afraid they would not get many customers this way ;)
Concerning the ability to use LAN at home without Triumphs site (you cannot use the game in multi player on your private LAN if this LAN does not have an Internet connection too):
. Yet - you cannot play the game in multi player, because you need Internet to authorize all your games - and this is per definition DRM.
Well, I'm not so sure if this won't be implemented. LAN party and online play are two different beasts. LAN game is between friends, people that know each others and have enough technical skills to setup a VPN or the like create their private network. This does not give any other feature an account on a persistent online server brings to you (ease of use, permanent availability, meeting other peoples, keeping track of your past games, friends, ladder, social networking, a community,...).
Also keeping up and running a dedicated online server, maintaining its software, ensuring its security and technical support for users requires a lot of resources, and money, per month. So imho the fact they limit to one account per user on such server does not mean they would not implement a LAN feature that basically costs them nothing to maintain.
But for sure an online server is more attractive to the majority of users so it's natural they focus on that first and the LAN feature may be done later.
I only stated, that the game has DRM, and I think this is true. I too am a single player person. So I do not really care! But please let us name the things with correct names: The games multi player mode is protected with DRM.
I do not yell at GOG - I understand it. I understand Triumphs line of thinking, and I agree, that since the game can be played DRM free in single player it fits to GOGs policy.
So I think it is a good compromise what they did - but it still is a compromise.
There was a post which called all persons who said that the game has sort of DRM liars. This was the reason I chimed in. The game has DRM. It is acceptable and I can live with it - and even if I would play multi player I would find it acceptable. But since GOG says all its games are completely
DRM free, I think it is important to state, that this is not true for this game.
And I agree with you. The lies were in those all-out attacks stating the game was crap, did not work and is locked away by DRM. As I said, what made me chimed in was this is a messy bundle, while your analysis is correct and interesting beside that :)
People like you, who say that the methods used are not DRM make an error, IMHO: The gaming industry will try to use methods to protect their games. If you accept AOW3s DRM by saying it is not really DRM you open the door for DRM protected games on GOG! So lets call things by their correct names, even if we accept them!
Well, basically I could not agree an online account is DRM when it's a technical requirement to satisfy some needs.
Again all depends on the intent. Even if you don't have an account with Google, Microsoft, Apple or the like they still track your every moves and act based upon this, worst of DRM with no explicit key registration ;)
Now the interesting point you raise is about compromise... What is or is not acceptable ?
Can we expect from anybody, including all those who shouted so loud at the start of this thread, to pay the initial and recurring costs of an online server for all those wishing to use it ?
So yeah, I follow your point about the fact that this is natural to allow one account per game.
Also I think we need to keep in mind one very important point: DRM-free does not mean we can be any kind of thief.
We know all software cost a lot of money, time and effort to make. This is a huge investment and the deal is that each and every people using it participates in refunding the creators for their efforts and investment.
Now what is bad in DRM is that it basically assume we are all thieves until we manage to prove the opposite... and the actual tendency as you point out with being online each time we want to use a software is to consider we are always suspects, potential criminals needing to be constantly monitored...
This lead to the paradox that real thieves using cracked versions of the software have a much more easy way than the regular users, human stupidity unleashed by control freaks :)
So yeah I feel you are right, vigilance is always important, especially nowadays, but an all-or-nothing approach is not always needed, not a good thing.
In the end I agree with you, this single key to ensure only one account per user can be an acceptable compromise here. One can still install on all his computers and play as he likes with no control. We are obviously not in the real bad use of DRM.
Now let's work for a better world where even this kind of compromise will no more be useful ;)