What's the point of partial DRM free releases? Is it even possible – it sounds a lot like a bit pregnant.

Anyhow – what's a DRM trolley? Sounds like a weird kind of shopping cart.

So would you rather bolster your numbers with people who have not considered things through properly and are bound to get sooner or later disappointed with the harsh reality of just how financially unsound it can be for publishers to retroactively fix DRM-free incompatible design, despite that far too often resulting with people announcing that from now on they will be buying their games exclusive from Steam?

Like it or not, GOG is not going to survive long with just customers who not only took the old 100% DRM-free promise literally, but refuse to accept that GOG's definition of DRM may not fully match with their definition of it.

When it isn't seen commercially viable to allocate the needed resources to perhaps many years later fix DRM-free incompatible multiplayer design choices from an otherwise great game, the pragmatic way of handling such cases is to consider the multiplayer design terminally ill and focus on getting any DRM removed from the single player side of that game, while hoping that a miracle may eventually happen and the terminally ill multiplayer support can be revived with for example an alternative engine and it shouldn't be too hard to see how not having access to any multiplayer related files or functionality with the GOG version might exclude any Steam averse GOG customer from contributing anything to the development of that alternative multiplayer support.

Have you really never heard of the basic trolley problem and its more complicated variations? For example of a DRM trolley problem it could be argued that buying a slightly imperfectly DRM-free game here could have far more impact in favor of DRM-free gaming than buying unofficially DRM-free games from Steam, especially if one has before bought DRM'ed games from there or if their change of purchasing practices in that platform were not noticed by any DRM agnostic publishers. And while not buying that game at all could be considered as a vote against DRM, unless we get a ballot box for such empty votes, the publishers would only know that for who knows what reasons some people didn't buy their games.

I'd rather stick to values, period, no ifs or buts or maybes. Same for GOG. I really supported anc actually cared about it when I saw it as more of an organization that fought to change the industry, in terms of both DRM-free and flat pricing, and which used a store to fund that battle as opposed to asking for donations or sponsorships. When they formalized their betrayal of their principles with the "good news" of Feb 2014, showing that it is business interests first after all and the claimed values just marketing, I became the vocal critic I've been since then. So I'll say again what I've been saying ever since, if they can't last by sticking to their values, they shouldn't last at all. Maybe at least that'd leave a space for some other service to fill, since now, when they're seen as "the" DRM-free place, their definition of the term, however diluted it gets, is enforced in the general view, weakening the position of anyone who'd want to actually fight for the real thing.

But, more importantly, buying a 'slightly' DRMed game here sends a message to GOG, that it is Ok to have partial DRM on their games. GOG is not your friend. They don't care about DRM free. They will sell any form of DRMed game if they can make a net profit from it. So they keep testing what level of DRM is still acceptable to the majority of their customers. And they push that limit bit by bit, because less self imposed restrictions means more possible games from which to make a profit. Hitman was one step too far, too early. There they got a backlash which forced them to remove the game. But you could have argued that having the game here was better than not having it here. Because somehow, magically, buying DRMed games here strengthens the fight against DRM. But I disagree. Accepting DRM always confirms that it is an acceptable method of securing your games. No matter where you buy it.

But more importantly: this thread wasn't created to discuss endlessly what your personal definition of DRM is and whether it is acceptable in small portions. But it serves as a warning that there actually is DRM on GOG. And I try my best to classify what content is DRMed in what way. Then everyone can decide for themselves whether that is acceptable for them or not.

I think it's best to keep this thread just for reporting games with issues. As Lithrasil said in the 1st post : "I will also include instances of 'soft' or 'only cosmetic' DRM, that don't really affect the gameplay. So everyone is free to decide for themselves whether the DRM (or not-really-DRM) reported is bad for them or not". So whether people here are happy to tolerate it on bonus / cosmetic / 'unimportant' minor content or form theoretical "trolley problem" thought experiments around their personal thresholds should at this point be off-topic, as all it does is encourage the same kind of derailing / thread-crapping we saw in the first few pages of this thread.

Reporting: Legend of Keepers: Career of a Dungeon Manager

Store page quote:

Newsletter

SUBSCRIBE TO GET AN EXCLUSIVE MONSTER

It may be just one in game item, but it does require third party verification! And that's not DRM-free.

Thank you for reporting this. But I can't see the notice on the store page. Perhaps GOG already removed it? Or is it location dependent? (which wouldn't make it better)

Can you check whether the notice is still there on your store page?

Yes here, at the top of game description:
https://www.gog.com/en/game/legend_of_keepers_career_of_a_dungeon_master

At least they are up front, and aren't trying to hide it.

This is weird. Now, after re-loading, I see the notice. It wasn't there a moment ago. Well, the mysteries of the GOG page.

Thanks for checking!

Just to check, I went ahead and did what they requested.

The process did not involve any verification. You just give an active email address, confirm it, and then immediately get a code in the email, which you can presumably feed into the game. This can be done by anyone, even if one does not own the game. One can then immediately unsubscribe.

I don't think just subscribing to a newsletter to get a portion of a game, as annoying as it is, can be counted as DRM. If it were, then every game gifted by GOG in the last couple of years would similarly count as one, as all GOG giveaways now require such a subscription.

Even assuming that the offer last as long as GOG stays around, someone is bound to raise an objection because all those others giveaways offered something that could be bought with money instead, if one preferred to not subscribe to anything even for a few seconds to obtain them.

Fair point.

However, if we add this to the list, shouldn't we add countless other games available on GOG that offer small in-games items or skins through codes redeemable inside the game, codes that are often made available by the publisher through some form of PR interaction, not via GOG itself?

Here is one example:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1127845689

When I previously tested this, I was able to use another person's code and vise versa on multiple devices. It worked basically like a cheat code.

Can you redeem the code offline as well or does the game need connection to a server to unlock the additional content ... just like rewards?

When I tested it way back, yes, it worked with the network adapter off and Galaxy never installed. Doesn't mean it didn't change though. (I found the game dull.)