I haven't tried to install/play this game in a couple years but reviewing what's been said in the thread so far I have to say that any game that requires a CD key (universal or otherwise) be validated online in order to play the game is definitely a form of DRM. I fail to see how it could be seen as anything else even under the most narrow definitions of DRM out there.

I am glad to hear that GOG is looking into this and ultimately I trust GOG to solve the problem PROPERLY by removing the DRM completely. I don't want a universal CD key being checked online any more than anyone else does. That is just not DRM-free. If the developer of this game does not bring it into true DRM-free status on GOG, I for one wont buy any more of their games here or anywhere else just on principle and I suspect many others will do the same.

I don't have a problem with DRM related DLL files being present in a game's package but neutered through software hacks or switches so long as the DRM itself is completely neutralized and does not interfere with the game being played DRM-free nor interfere with the operation of other games or software or the computer it is running on. Some people are sensitive about such files even existing, but if they're completely inert 100% and just a "stub" to make the executable work without requiring source code modification and a recompile, I know some game shops are lazy asses and take this approach rather than properly cleaning their games up when going DRM-free, and if the DRM is truly disabled and inert it's just "an ugly but truly functional hack" and I wont be pedantic about it as some are.

But auto-phone-home to validate stuff is a completely different story. I make exceptions for keys needed for multiplayer personally because I understand the technical issues with selling games on different platforms and wanting a unified multiplayer experience rather than fragmenting into separate DRM-included and DRM-free multiplayer services so long as such does not in any way affect the single player experience and no single player options are made available only if using a key.

But from what I read here, this very definitely is in violation of the store's DRM-free stance, but more importantly in violation of the principle of DRM-free as a general value.

For now, I will give both GOG and the developer the benefit of doubt though that this is just an unintended goofup that came about by laziness and accepting temporary substandard solutions that have ended up sticking around longer than intended and are now going to be fixed properly or the game pulled from the store with either refunds or store credit for the game's policy non-compliance.

To the developer: Please do the right consumer friendly thing. Do it and you get a free pass and clear slate with me anyway. Do the wrong thing and screw gamers and you join Ubisoft and EA on my "dead to me" list of companies to boycott though. Now it's time to let your customer support people and policies shine and earn everyone's trust.

Except we buy games here on GOG.com explicitly because we don't want to have to hack and crack games that we have purchased legally and just want to play. That's the entire point of DRM-free, hassle-free gaming. Having to institute 3rd party virus and malware ridden cracks to play a DRM-free game makes it pointless to buy the game in the first place.

There may be workarounds, sure, but this thread is about finding a proper solution that justifies this game remaining in the GOG.com store as DRM-free, not finding hack workarounds.

I for one will not accept any kind of hacks to my OS config files, registry etc. nor having to download and install 3rd party cracks or hacks as a valid recommended way to play a game I buy here. I trust GOG to set this straight ultimately because I trust GOG. But I'd most likely stop buying games here if I ever had to second guess whether or not they phone home or contain active stealth DRM in them (active, not inert, and by my own definition/perception not someone else's). I don't think GOG would intentionally breach our trust on such an issue though. One way or another they will fix this somehow, they always have our backs in the end.

Are you willing to give what I mentioned a try?

You can even disconnect the computer from the LAN. I don´t have the game and can´t test it. I just try to help you tweak it ;)

About the DRM stuff, we are in sync ;)

If needed I can send you a bit more detailed instructions......

IF you are willing ;)

The weird thing is, Google tells me that there are cracks for DEFCON floating around the intertubes and GOG has used cracks before to remove DRM. Why not in this case?

Thanks skeletonbow, this would seem to be innocent enough as I suspected. Though as you say, if this feature is redundant it should be removed.

I will still watch with interest, I see you have made a further lengthy reply on the subject that is very relevant especially as the concerns regarding FEAR have still not been addressed.

The 'solution' was never acceptable. Not just because it fell far short of the technical definition of DRM-free, but more importantly, that if fell into the same trap that all calling home DRM will eventually. That's why the only acceptable solution is the complete nullification and removal of DRM. We're really not simply being pedantic about this, GOG.

As far as I am concerned DRM-free gaming is the ability to lock myself away from the world, install and play a game without any need for outside connections or authentication. I already have the bunker and food set up ;)
So yes indeed (as far as I am concerned) DEFCON falls under the title DRM-free.
What this is though is an oversight by GOG. They should have had the developer either kill or make redundant the call home facility until the game was asked for a multiplayer session. GOG must surely be aware that many people play games on their internet computers, connected to the internet whilse they play. So giving them a game that will attempt to call home and then kill their key is rather a slap in the face for those customers.

I see this as an oversight that I hope will be sorted. Although the problem does not affect me personally as I disconect my gaming PC from the internet when I play games, it is still a niggling oversight from an otherwise rather good company when it comes to working for their customers.
So whilst this does not affect me directly, I do sympathize with those whom are feeling the effects, as this can be seen as a soft DRM.
Any and all DRM should be nullified to rid us of its evil ways, and so I stand with my fellow GOGers to say this needs to be delt with.

The OP says that once invalidated the game won't start in full mode, just in demo mode. The expected user behavior case is to have internet active and not block the game in firewall, in case of said behavior the game does require you to validate online with a working key to get full single player as opposed to demo. The fact it doesn't validate if offline is a hole in DRM sceme, not the proof it somehow became DRM-free.

It would behave like DRM distributions, e.g. if your key for Steam game was revoked, you could play it still while offline but the moment you go online you'd lose that, just the same. Does the ability to play Steam game offline make it DRM-free? Not to mention its behavior is that of a spyware (sending user data to validation server without consent).

That DRM definition is utterly ridiculous, everyone is free to believe what he wants, but claiming that any game with any form of copy protection is DRM free if you can install it in a bunker is extremely shortsighted... Includes all the code wheels and serial keys and booklet words protections, as you can scan those and store them on USB too. And hell, if SafeDisc would work on USBs it would pass the test too - it just requires you to keep said USB in slot. The fact you find it acceptable doesn't give you the right to rewrite the term DRM into 'what I think is unacceptable'.

The part where it won't invalidate when the servers are down is irrelevant, GOG is selling game claiming it's DRM-free now not in 10 years.

The main reason I'm complaining about it is, I'm afraid someone at GOG decided to be liberal with their definitions, pulling some nonsense like that and letting shit like this pass as 'acceptable workaround'. There's one reason why I was more likely to buy stuff here: that I expected I won't have to argue and demand refunds on games advertised as DRM-Free but infected with SecuROM, online activations and other junk because people's perception of 'does not require Steam/Origin/UPlay == DRM-Free' or such.

Yet first they put passwords on installers, then said dormant Securom (that is corrupting registry/filesystem just the same) is fine, now they say having online activation checks are fine... Did they think users here are just as ignorant towards DRM as the rest of the populace, I wonder. Perhaps the audience has changed in that direction enough.

Exactly, my point was that hosts/registry/file hacks are the same. Guess I'll just have to wait and ask around for every future purchase wether the installation fits my "ideological" definition, just like everywhere else I suppose...

No ;)

For this test, install wireshark from https://www.wireshark.org/

Don´t access the internet otherwise ;)

Make a capture of everything (might be best too REALLY find out the server, leave the internet connected)

Check the logs and see where the game tries to connect too. (might be a direct IP or www address)

It shall be just one IP or address.

Put in your hosts file this address as a loopback (so 127.0.0.1 whatever you found) in your hosts file.

To do this, you might have to create an empty file called the same, in like your documents (copy & paste the normal one). After modifying, copy it into your according directory, depends on your operation system. (as usual keep a backup just in case ;) )

Now without restarting (not needed), but you might have to reinstall Defcon, it shall not longer try to verify this key.

If you need help PM me ;) those logs might contain sensible data ;)


For the rest:

To maybe calm you down a bit:

It is said, but the companies DO NOT keep all the patches/software whatsoever. There was the case with Call to Power that the company decided to make it available to apolyton, but even the developer did NOT have all the information about the patches and soon.

I imagine that GOG is experiencing the same problem with certain games. And I do (benefit of doubt) they try the best to let´s say it this way, try to avoid similar situation as best as possible.

Will there be exceptions?

Yes

Can it be done in a way that we accommodate for?

I think yes, as this would be a prime example. What I/we are trying to do, has NOTHING to do with hacking or whatsoever. It would be UP TO THE USER to decide upon, so IMHO DRM free.

As simple as this: Do you want DRM or don´t you want?

Sorry for this lengthy reply ;)

Yeah, I misunderstood the nature of the suggestion. I thought it involved a modification to the game to redirect its connection attempts, but I realise now that it's an OS level thing. I agree that's not a fix and especially not something GOG could reasonably do.
See above.
See above also.

I misunderstood the suggestion.

Don´t get me wrong

I still agree with most of what you guys said.

BUT I am of the generation where you constantly had to change ini files autoexec.bat config.sys and whatsoever trying to get a game running (not going into Unix here, will we ;) ).

In those days it was NORMAL. The user was the admin and (most of the time) fully aware of the problem and situation.

So, yes the change (IF it works, would mean a bit of tweaking, but for what I suggested, it is nothing more than like changing comp. settings or similar.

It WOULD NOT change anything about the normal operation system or similar, we are talking about a change like in FF, chrome etc adding a site to a blacklist, nothing else.

UNFORTUNATELY this IS on the system level. Agreed, but for this you have to blame Windows, not GOG or the game. Other OS´s might even allow it to change it on a user level, but not Windows.

we would like to remove all of the DRM from our DRM-Free games, but unfortunately right now it is not possible for technical reasons, please bear with us and know that we understand your concerns?

if the game phones home to check authentication that the developer can just revoke whenever the fuck he so pleases... uhhh I'm pretty sure that's 100% DRM. with all the potential for abuse or just plain accidental fallout from the accumulation of time that regler DRM has. oh wait... this is regler DRM.

dafuq.

literally.

deleted

I thought I'd post an extra bit of information, and hope I didn't miss any comments after reading through this topic quickly!

I know most of the comments here refer to the Windows version, but I thought I'd give the Linux version a try after reading much of this topic.

It would seem that the Linux version works OK with the pre-authenticated key when connected to the Internet. It displayed "Authentication Status: Unknown" when disconnected, however it seemed to be OK, as far as I could tell, but I must admit I didn't test it much.

No, I'm not suggesting that people try to use the Linux version, but I thought, since it's available for both Windows and Linux, that it was worth mentioning.