This too, but for me it's also: "Can I download my game from any computer using ordinary means (browser, wget, whatever) and install and play them on another computer without any internet connection."

Because some people have to do it this way. Remember that guy working on a oil platform somewhere out on sea?

No, but having to verify your (single-player) game online to get content is DRM. It is an online-registration, pure and simple. And GOG decided NOT to put that content in the 'backup offline installers' that you can download through the webpage.

It even has to be registered through Galaxy, which not only breaks their DRM-free promise but also the 'Galaxy will always stay optional' promise.

good never liked freedom anyway , slavery is better

You are the millionth person coming up with that flawed argument, you are not the first one. The other million used the argument "electricity is DRM because you can't play without it, ha ha I am so funny".

Anyway, when talking about DRM, delivery is not part of the discussion. It is not DRM that in order to buy a game from a brick&mortar store, you actually have to carry the game to your home, or ask the post office do it. With digital games, delivery = downloading the game. So no, having to log into a GOG account in order to download a game is not DRM (and I don't think anyone claimed it is).

What is DRM though is that if you want to use that product (a downloaded game) years from now, when that store or GOG service doesn't exist anymore, you can't do it, or some of its content is missing, because you can't connect to those non-existent servers anymore.

So try to go online to unlock the CP2077 DLC, when there are no servers anymore which would unlock the DLC for you. That is DRM.

Just in case you try to come up with yet another overused argument "but you can't play the game in the future anyway if the servers are no more, because you can't download it, ha!", no, flawed argument yet again. As I said, downloading is part of the delivery, so naturally you have to deliver = download the game to yourself, before the servers and the service goes permanently offline.

It is the same that if you buy some physical retail game on some store but leave it to the store (instead of bringing it home with you), then naturally you lose access to "your" game if the store closes its doors permanently and "your" game is locked inside. You should have delivered the game to yourself when you still can. However, that is still not DRM that you can't deliver the physical game to yourself afterwards, when the store is no more.

Ok so first your argument was: "It is not DRM!", and now it has changed to "Ok so even if it is DRM, who cares?".

So does that mean you don't understand why many people oppose DRM, or what is your confusion? I am happy to educate you if you are just ignorant about the subject.

Note, I am not saying you SHOULD care about DRM. If you don't, I guess that is your choice. But similarly you shouldn't tell other they shouldn't care about DRM either, because you don't care either.

I am not quite sure if you don't care about DRM because you just don't understand what it means, or what its implications are.

I don't agree with the bolded part, but let's leave it to that.

I consider that to be about convenience, than whether it is DRM-free or not. Yes it is certainly more convenient if I have more choices to the way I download my DRM-free games. I personally use mostly gogrepo.py as it is the most convenient way for me.

Even holding that some files are hidden behind a log-in screen, which no one will ever receive the necessary credentials to log-in to, can be considered as being DRM so to protect said files from being shared by anyone otherwise; Yes, I can't deny that this could be considered being a DRM measure. What it is in reality is a non-issue because no one will ever get or need the necessary credentials to log-in to access the files and said files will only be available via Galaxy once the game has been officially released to the masses.

GoG staff/CDPR isn't that stupid to not realize what would happen if they were trying to nudge/force people into using Galaxy to enjoy some paid-for extras ... All hell would break loose in case GoG doesn't make these files available for download via their website. I'm only judging this based on the reaction to this non-issue which is protecting access to files until release date has finally arrived.

No, lots of apologists like you would say: "So it is DRM on a DLC. What's the problem? The base game is still DRM-free"
Or even: "This isn't DRM, because it only affects a part of the game I'm not interested in."
Or even: "This isn't DRM. It's only a measure to prevent those files from being shared." ... which, by the way, is exactly what DRM is. A method to prevent sharing.

Yes, there will be an outcry. But in the end, GOG seems to have calculated that by now the user base that really cares is small enough. Let the loud minority cry out all they like. As long as the majority still throws money at GOG, they will be fine. At least that seems to be the rationale behind this move. Alienate the DRM-free crowd and try to be a small copy of Steam. With less and slower updates, a smaller catalogue and somewhat higher prices on average.

We'll see how that works out for them.

Well I don't care in this particular and very limited case because this is something no one will ever be affected by or is being harmed in any way, shape, or form in that something's taken from anyone they paid for. Just because you can't download something before release and it is locked for the time being you can as well consider this whole preload spiel one big-fat DRM measure because it is only available via Galaxy.

In general I do care about whether there are DRM measures present in games necessitating for instance an account on a website or use of a client without which I can't play anything at all. This is why I made the move buying my games here and pretty much abandoning Steam, Uplay, or a combination of both of them ... Buying a game on Steam and using the client is one thing. But buying a game that needs a third-party client is quite another. This is how I understand DRM which I avoid at all cost. ;-)

Not 100% sure what you mean but GOG already confirmed Galaxy-only content:

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/preload_cyberpunk_2077_today_cfffe/post117

Found the above link here: https://www.gog.com/forum/general/why_does_cyberpunk_require_galaxy_for_singleplayer_content/page1

I officially apologize if what I said was stupid because I really got from reading about this was a non-issue hence arguing my position the way I did. I just find misleading to read available to anyone but to claim a log-in is required with Galaxy

Add: All down votes coming are well deserved!

In nomal conditions you need to verify your game ownership/account to download a dlc, at least once, later you would be able t run it offline f you want. The same like this specific case, but this time it is nothing important for the base gameplay.

I am only reading reductions to the absurd and exceptions trying to be the rule. And a lot of drama storming every day

So, I do not agree.

Talk about "leaving the church in the village", yes, it's a free, cosmetic and meaningless DLC intended to "reward" people having/making a GOG account. Nobody actually pays for it, nobody will be missing anything if they buy the game elsewhere and don't want to make an account here for some silly t-shirt.

Did somebody say multiplayer? ;-)

Well, those files will be shared anyway. A one time login requirement will not prevent this in any form. Which makes it an even more weird decision to not provide offline installers for the stuff.
The only reason is to promote Galaxy - which is silly because most people will use it anyway, and the die-hard client-haters will not be convinced this way.

In normal conditions, GOG makes any DLC downloadable just like the base game & extras, and after you've downloaded them, there is no need for any sort of authentication ever again.

Well, GOG clearly states that the Rewards will not be available in the offline version in the Goodies FAQ: Let me repeat that: "the local version of Cyberpunk 2077 that you can download via GOG will not support MY REWARDS."

That means it isn't "until release", it isn't "the offline installers will get the Rewards DLC later" it is a very clear: "The offline installers WILL NOT get the rewards."

So, the rewards-DLC is Galaxy exclusive.

Alright I got that now. Again, sorry. I find that this isn't a smart move and is DRM even though it is only cosmetics. It is paid for and when there is an offline and physical edition GOG account should suffice to claim them. No one should be forced to use this as promotion to temporarily increase use of Galaxy. One time only for many I guess?

I don't think this was about not having offline installer preloads. I personally am fine with the idea that the offline installers will not appear until 10th. Someone else might not be if he wants to play the game as soon as possible without Galaxy, and doesn't want to wait hours downloading the game on 10th.

The issue is that the pre-order bonuses, to which I am also eligible for, can't be obtained even after 10th of Dec unless I install the Galaxy client, download and install the game with it, and run the game at least once.

And even after doing all that, I still don't have that extra content with my offline installers. If I want to play with that content on another PC, I again have to install Galaxy on it and download/install/run the game with the client.

It is not the end of the world if I don't have access to that cosmetic DLC, but slippery slope and all that. Plus, GOG is still claiming that the Galaxy client is optional (which I take to mean "for single-player content", we all know many multiplayer games require it), but it isn't optional for getting that DLC that I am eligible for.