DRM component, probably. I've seen it distributed with other games, and sometimes crack packages include a cracked paul.dll file.

GOG ripped the hard work of game pirates?
This makes me feel all warm and cuddly inside. <3

There is a sweet sense of irony about it - nice one!

Hmm... I had a burglary back in February - should I thank the burglar for pointing out the weakness in my door lock, by kicking it in?

Same thing, really. Does a thief deserve praise for theft?

Define theft.

Refer to the legal system in your country of residence. The definition varies in detail.

Exactly.

And cracking a game is no different than installing a mod for it.

Cracking it? Sure. Making that crack available to others? Theft.

Nope. Sharing your mod. If cracks are bad, so are mods and unofficial patches.

Mods still require an original copy. You're perfectly aware of the difference.

There are unofficial patches that modify the game's exe file. Sounds similar to what a crack does to me. :p

I don't believe you are stupid enough to actually believe the pathetic and transparent argument you are making. I'm certainly not stupid enough to waste any more time on you.

What the hell? :)

Dude, relax.

Intresting thread.

Personally I think gog won`t sell any illegal software, so you buy a licensed copy. I don`t care how DRM was removed or if it still exists. As long as I can enjoy the game it`s fine for me as a customer.

Until today I`ve thought that the DRM was removed by the initial developer or publisher. If the cracker hasn`t forbidden commercial use of his crack...well, gog hasn`t done anytthing wrong. Generally I don`t consider hacking games for DRM removal is a good idea though

..I guess there is some discussion to be had about this after all. Bugbear, along with other developers, often don't have access to (or even ownership of) either the master/gold copy, or the source code.

On the other hand, even if they do actually own the license to publish the game, and have the original project files - actually rebuilding it and preparing it for a release might not make sense economically.

Maybe there could be problems legally as well with actually changing and rebuilding the project itself, rather than changing the wrapper and the launcher, while keeping the source files unchanged.

So we get the "various means" method that both the developer and gog.com agree to use. That would be perfectly legal and practical, but suck morally with gog.com's policies about drm, and potentially have all kinds of compatibility issues with different patches, mods and windows versions, wine, etc., etc.

Kind of disappointing that gog.com won't sacrifice a bit to do this properly as well. Since this will stop being a preservation project very quickly, and more of a repacked torrent dump.

I mean, I don't feel that great paying for a version that would be less compatible than a disc-version.

And I'd be perfectly all right with paying a bit more for a release that Bugbear would rebuild without drm, a better settings-application, maybe some compatibility fixes, etc. Frankly, since Bugbear exists as a studio..