Fair enough, but that one major gaffe aside, communication between the more corporate side of GOG and the rest of us was a lot better with him around.

Well, this is good. Not much more to say, but still feel like I should say that at least given that I complained in the beginning.

The only think I'm not sure is if the 30 days refund falls into here, or if anyone can request a refund so long as the game is sold with DRM? Anyone know for sure? Has anyone gotten a refund after their 30 days were up?

Just wondering...

It seems to be viable, based on another person in this thread getting a refund in store credit despite the purchase being over a year old.

mine was 5 month ago. Went flawlessly.

Okay thanks didn't see that post. :)
Thanks for the info. :)

My refund request was accepted and is being processed. This is despite my original purchase being approx 1.5 years ago, though I have never actually installed the game.

Yes, I described my findings in a post shortly after Ciris's. I don't expect you to go and find it now though, this is a long thread. In short, the key has been unrevoked but the game is still phoning home. This is why I took issue with Ciris saying 'the dev has removed the DRM check', because the check hasn't bee removed in any way.

I'm suddenly reminded of a simple little API change i'd make to all OSes if i could. Adding a single byte as permissions all programs get, and you can customize it per exe (and scripts are effected that way too). This includes if they are allowed to read from the drive, write, access any networks, print, change video settings (for games), access sound, etc. With default permissions where you need to explicitly give permission (once per program/script) phoning home wouldn't happen unless you gave it permission...

It would also prevent viruses/keyloggers from doing anything either...

That makes me think of SELinux.

It is probably a problem to set that up manually, but yes, you do get a much more secure environment.

However, the problem is that you can't always know what information is being transmitted. E.g. is it probing the multiplayer server, uploading a high score or checking the validity of the authentication, while sending information about the hardware, list of programs installed and configuration setup?

It wouldn't be that difficult, having a default mask on all new files/programs installed.. And it's more meant for a first line defense, if you're doing more complex multi-player or specific control, probably a firewall is a better choice. But 99% of the time that's not important. I mean if your calculator program is phoning somewhere, it's obvious it probably shouldn't.

That's one thing i LOVED about zone alarm before they put a bunch of extra advertising and crap in it, is all programs by default couldn't use the internet. You'd open a program and a popup would come up with 'Did you know this program wants to access the internet?' and i'd ask myself 'Why is Nero DVD burning asking for internet access?'.

Actually makes me really want to get zonealarm again now... But my idea was more than just the internet, it was basically first line defense for everything.

I got DEFCON in a sale back in October. Unless this situation gets corrected, I'm surely not going to use that game. Yet, wondering whether to ask for a refund or not, if only to send a message of discontent

No, it probably shouldn't. However, maybe it does currency conversion, and it's updating the currency values.

I really wish that developers were more open regarding this issue. It is one of the things that pushes me away from the mobile ecosystem. Why is a fart app accessing the contacts list? My podcast app always tries to connect to the internet upon opening? Is it just refreshing the episodes, or is sending usage and preferences data to its makers?

With open source at least I can gain some control. It seems I'll have to start gaming on an air gapped machine.

I didn't consider currency, i was meaning the pure simple no-frills calc that windows comes with, or bc for unix flavors.

But yes having them more open would be nice, if not to show the code, then letting us know why it needs the internet, even if it's just for statistics of how many concurrent players it is vs something useful. Although anything mobile there's a good chance it's for ads...

I have the feeling we're getting way too [s]interlaced[/s] integrated with the internet and network connectivity. I just think to Diablo 3, and the single player campaign and you have to be logged in and can't mod the game at all, and it is way overboard. There's many people who don't have internet, who don't need internet, and yet it's being forced on as a requirement rather than an option.

I totally agree with what you say. It is enough already that we get our games and other software (and updates) in that way. I don't care about internet multiplayer games, so why should I put up with stupid arbitrary restrictions?
Wasn't SimCity that also said it required constant internet connection (as if it was a technical limitation), and later said "you know what, we can do without it, after all".

Well, I'm not going to go that way (unless I'm mislead, as for what happened with DEFCON). And I don't think I'll be giving GOG any more money until I know that they can own up to their mistakes. They can either be trusted or they can't. And once trust is gone, it is very difficult to gain it back.