The real problem IMHO, is that there are quite a large number of things that game companies do with their games which are either anti-consumer in many people's eyes, or to which many people find unpleasant and disapprove of. This includes things that are both free and cost money. Ultimately people need a way to express their displeasure towards these many industry practices and people tend to lean towards short and sweet ways of putting things rather than finessing over language. As such, a large portion of gamers tend to call anything they dislike or disapprove of done by game companies with their games whether for free or for money to be "DRM" because there is no other universal term that means "industry practice that I disapprove of".

So the term DRM as popularly used by the masses no longer has a meaning that reflects the words of which it is comprised of. It is short and sweet, easy to say, and easy to throw out there in conversations rather than some mouthful like "industry practices that I disapprove of", and so people freely misuse the term because they have no other simple alternative.

What's perhaps most amusing, is that because of the lack of a wider vocabulary of more descriptive terms, people who otherwise might even agree with each other about a given non-savoury industry practice will get broiled in debate over defining or redefining the highly misused term "DRM" with the religious fervour of a thousand cults.

:)

I think I'd prefer "consumer non-friendly business practice" and abbreviate it as "CNFBP", although that doesn't run off the tongue well either. How about.... anti-consumer behaviour, ACB? Hmm, that shows more promise. DRM would itself be ACB, however everything that is ACB, is not DRM.

Yeah, that.

Ok, now everyone argue and fight about it below please. I bought popcorn and be damned if I'm not going to get my money's worth out of it!
:)

Galaxy, according to it's EULA, is a service, and at this point in time Gwent can only be accessed with Galaxy; so, is Gwent a prog, or a Galaxy file?
.
If you *have* to use a proprietary service to access the game, it's DRM'd; if you don't, it isn't.

For me, it boils down to intention, so a client may or may not constitute DRM. It depends on how it's implemented.

How do you see it?

*shrug* gOg is a service (check the EULA) so I guess you don't buy / own anything on gOg either....

Depends on whether or not it can only be accessed via the service. At this point in time I think it's safe to say that GOG is "flexible", but maybe they won't go all the way over to the dark side. Guess we'll find out when Cyberpunk releases.

I'm not totally certain, but I think I may have shared my opinion about it in the forums in the past. Truth be told though - my opinion doesn't matter really. Not because of anything to do with me, but rather nobody's opinion matters including mine insofar as nobody's opinion has any value at changing anything that people care about, and rarely does one person's opinion ever influence the opinion of others on the matter as people have already made up their minds about what "they think" so to speak.

So for the time being at least I choose to not share my opinion as I feel the topic only contributes to endless pointless debates between people going in circles trying to convince each other to see it in the eyes of the other person and nobody ever changing their mind. Not that that matters. What does matter, is not what label someone puts on a particular industry practice or another that people dislike. What matters is whether or not companies continue to do a particular practice and whether or not people can use their time and energy to try to have an effect to change the industry or even one single company to choose better more consumer friendly practices.

Abbreviations are convenient, us humans love'm. Especially three letter ones. I think instead of using and discussing abbreviations though, the more important conversation is the one that does not involve any abbreviations and instead focuses on the specific behaviours that people dislike, and what might be able to be done to have an effect on changing that in the industry.

As for what can be done with regards to just about any consumer non-friendly practice that one disapproves of, my opinion is that if an individual both expresses their dislike of the practice both publicly and directly to the one doing that practice, and then follows up by not spending money on the product in question, that is the best thing an individual can do to try and combat the problem. In short, if we all vote with our wallet, and there are enough people who do actually care and actually do it, voices can be heard. If it's just 50-100 people complaining on the Internet in a forum though and then spending their money to buy a given product anyway, companies have no reason to change what they are doing that we may disapprove of.

That's the important part of all of this IMHO.

That's a way of looking at it. But i dont mind the starter pack at all. So i did support them.
And devious and sneaking is such bull. People have control over their own actions.
If you don't like it don't buy it, but don't act like they made you do it.

So are we now approaching the point of:

"I like it, therefore it is not a service" and "I don't like it, therefore it is a service"?

gOg games can only be accessed via gOg (the service) ... (unless you pirate them,that is....)
Crap... I just realised my board game of Monopoly is not a game, and that when I play hide and seek with the kids, we are not playing any game... not to mention when I watch a game of football, I am no longer watching a game...

And you don't have to accept it. Game is still playable without it and would be no different to any other single player game without DRM. Also again twisting my words with regard to the niche market.

Oh just give it a rest fgs. You're now changing every accepted definition to fit your narrative. If that's the case then nothing on here is "sold" as a game and nothing belongs here.

/s Oh don't say that. An installer you download is something you can touch and it doesn't disappear when you switch of your pc or log out of whatever service you are using.

Same as Steam. They can remove your ability to download game files but if you've already downloaded them it means squat. You can even remove the checks and play them. I'm sure you can do the same with Gwent. Really man the mental gymnastics here is just astounding. You're arguing against people that have done this and know what they're talking about.

What they call it is irrelevant. Galaxy is software that provides a service. Get your terms correct before arguing against people that know them.

You can only download (legally) install files through the GoG service. You can only download Gwent files (legally) though the Galaxy service. Honestly don't know where you see a difference. In both cases the files remain on your PC.

Good post, but unfortunately nobody will take notice of it. Funny how this was sparked by one sentence. "Once you purchase the GWENT Starter Pack, the items included in it will automatically be added to your account and become available the next time you log in to GWENT."

Nobody even bothered to think what it is that this means and just jumped straight to it being DRM. For all we know it's no different to regular GoG games where it gets downloaded to the game folder but you won't know this because you have to log in to a server as it's a multiplayer game.

By "game" I mean GOG's DRM-free versions. Once they're on your HD, you don't need GOG or Galaxy to access them, which isn't the case with Gwent. Gwent is basically a Galaxy file, tho maybe they'll open it up at some point in time.

So we've got endless, pointless debating, and long-winded, virtue-signaling peacockery.

Hey man, flavor is good! ;p


BTW, I did read your post and appreciate the points you raised.

Online needs a server, which always requires some sort of login, whether the client was built into the game or not.
The login is on the server side, not in the game itself.
That's not DRM, and by labelling it as such it detracts from the actual issues.

My objection is that the client you have to use is a generic store client, and not built into the game.
In my view, requiring store clients, to access online parts of games, is worse than in game DRM, but ithat doesn't make it DRM.
It's a differtent thing entirely, and calling it DRM doesn't focus onb what it actually is.

A single player game, with a multi-player mode, is still a functional single player game.
Personally, I've never ssen a good Multi-player mode to a SPG, or vice versa, so would ignore such a mode entirely.

THe issue remains, as is made clear, with multiplayer only games, that don't have a built in client.
That's a broken game, on any store site, but only on GOG is the store Client supposed to be "Optional".
It's not true for multi-player anymore. Suddenly Galaxy has become a requirement.

That's the real issue, and it's got nothing to do with DRM, it's a lack of basic game functionality.
When that functionality is required to play the damn game.

I have the same objection to any store client, not just Galaxy, and rarely buy, or play multi-player games anymore, as a result.
I'm just sick of all the DRM claims obscuring the real problems, when they need exposing, and publicising.
I know most of you mean these real problems, but by always claiming "DRM", when it's not, the debate sidetracks into "What is DRM ".
I want to discuss the real problems, not use counterproductive labels.

OK, why do you think they're requiring the use of store clients to access online functions?

Damn, this thing is so popular, it's on gog's "Most popular" list TWICE! :D

Number 2 and number 49

Gambling infused gaming mania, bro. Works every time. o.O