Alright, if the patch/update really makes the items appear on the store (which is yet to be confirmed) then I'll gladly consider the issue solved. Sure obtaining the required QS in SP is a lot of grind but if the game is as enjoyable as its regulars say they'd be up to the task.

Pinging you because you will want to check the latest developments. Read post 282.
We're in the same boat, still waiting for a confirmation to resume purchasing here.

But there are people saying it's either not DRM at all so it's fine, or "clearly a part of multiplayer", or "yeah, whatever, as long as I can work my way round it it's not a problem". I take that as a clear indicator not everybody thinks it's really a problem that should be fixed. That's just where we stand all in all, I'm afraid.

"Divided we stand, united we'll fall" as far as condoning these kind of game mechanics goes.

Oh, it's better than that. As you can see it's not just people not seeing a problem. It's people outright fighting against anyone seeing a problem. "outrage mob", "bunch of idiots", "lynch mob, "braindead mob", "manchildren" - that's just a sample of the wonderful level of "debate" we can expect from now on when pointing out breaches of GOGs supposed rules. And that's how you know we're doomed. GOG not only doesn't need to worry about a strong backlash anymore, but what's left of the community will quench any backlash itself.

This particular issue may not be anyone's intentional attempt to bend rules, but it showcases brilliantly how well GOG's policy of slowly eroding their own principles worked.

Thanks for the ping. Yes, I am also waiting for confirmation and for a reaction - any reaction - from support or a blue.

According to the OP here https://www.gog.com/forum/general/no_mans_sky_isnt_fully_drmfree/post296 it's not fixed.

A shame.
It could be that it's only half-ass-fixed, like, only "new game", existing save games remain untouched - which would still be shit.
What's also weird is that the patch is labeled as "experimental" instead of a proper 3.0.2 like in the official changelog which mentions a fix to the Quincy store items unlocking.

No idea, really. It stays messy.

I saw that post but wasn't sure if the OP was talking of an updated installer, a current-but-actually-old installer or a patch. But it doesn't matter after all. Either way leads to the same outcome: still waiting for the "Now it worked" post.

Yeah, it's a confusing current state of affairs. But HG has shown the intention to fix the situation, so in the worst case we're just a few days away from the report of a properly working fix.

I bet that at this point, they gladly stay away from this thread...

I'm far less worried about Gog's "hands-off" moderation for this thread than I am about the very concerning fact that many users were advocating for Gog to water down their already flimsy DRM-free principle.

If a big part of the userbase won't actually revolt at the inclusion of DRM ( or at least some bug that acts like DRM which appears to be the case this time ) we know we're doomed next time they release another "GOOD NEWS!" post. Those who actually want Gog to stay DRM-free will be plainly ignored and leave in frustration while the majority will conform or even embrace the DRM.

That battle was lost long ago. A big chunk of the community never gave two shits about having an entire game mode (multiplayer) with everything it entails locked behind DRM, since day one. Just look how every discussion thread about multiplayer went. "You have to be online to play multiplayer, therefore DRM is not DRM! I don't care about multiplayer, therefore DRM is not DRM! GOG said so therefore DRM is not DRM!" As far as I can tell, there's only a handful of GOG players who care about DRM-free multiplayer. You gotta realize that for some of us, multiplayer is important, and playing with friends can be the only reason you'd consider buying a game at all. Kind of a big deal when that's all behind DRM.

Compared to that, hiding a few items and some ship and a mission behind online features seems like a tiny little thing; those things, unlike multiplayer, are never going the only reason I'd consider buying a game.

I think I made it clear that that's exactly my main concern. The moderation remark was just an afterthought.

You are the idiot here, other than spouting false information: the anomaly completely works offline, and the vendor is NOT split nor tied to the server; if it was, you wouldn't be able to easily change its item list.

I'm against the idea of calling it DRM, as it is not, this is solely a design decision which goes AGAINST an gimps offline players for no reason: all they have to do is to make all the items from quincy and daily quests available for offline plays, as those are made mostly in solo anyway, so restricting them to online only is a SHITTY DECISION.

I'm one of the folks who doesn't care *much* about multiplayer, but sometimes I want it. DRMed multiplayer is entirely the reason I haven't wasted money on Planetfall. I was already burned from AoW3. More time for Grim Dawn, which is DRM-free multiplayer!

Hmm I get your point and I'm not entirely alien to your plight, despite being primarily a SP gamer.

I really would like if we could get Gog to change the gaming landscape to turn DRM-free multiplayer as the norm, but it was hard enough to get where we are on singleplayer games. If the userbase were to unify and declare "DRM-free MP or Nothing", Gog would have to follow our decision... and the publishers would probably answer with Nothing. Gog would be even less significant among game stores. Would you still keep your stance if you knew that Gog would stay roughly the same size of Zoom and Fireflower?
Fair enough. I didn't get this notion from that last comment, but now that you mention it it makes sense with the rest of your posts here and on other threads

I appreciate your point of view and your concern. I don't entirely disagree. Today it's items that have no direct ties to MP. Tomorrow it's an entire continent in a game that has no MP implications. Then it's a whole game. The practice should be discouraged. Either make it unavailable off line (it's not, especially when a save edit can hack the items in with no problem) or make the currency required completely on-line only. Either solution properly gates the items properly in a way that they are not single player content gated by a arbitrary online requirement.

I've stated before, this instance isn't a big deal. But you don't not protest concepts based on principle because you like the results. That leads to situations wherein you ok people to do things in a bad way. When you like the results, it's ok. When you don't though, it's still ok because you told them that using these inappropriate methods was acceptable.