It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
We (still) want to hear from you!

We recently asked you guys for feedback based on some potential games that we may be able to sign in the future. The results were pretty clear--and we will be sharing them with you all soon--but we did want to ask you a single follow-up question with an actual real-world game example. One of the games that we would like to add to our catalog is Planetary Annihilation. This is an RTS with many modern gaming features, and we figured we'd use it as our test example.

<iframe width="590" height="332" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Xpze54xgqtg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Planetary Annihilation is distinctive for the following:

- Multiplayer and skirmish focused gameplay; there is no story-based single-player campaign, but AI skirmish matches provide a great single player experience.
- Optional persistent online features such as scoreboards, social features, achievements, and the online multiplayer campaign - a persistent galaxy-wide war; an account with the developer's online service is required in order to use these features.
- No activation, unique codes, or third-party accounts are required for single-player play or, LAN/direct connection multiplayer.
- A unique key is required for Internet multiplayer, and an account with the developer's service is only required for the persistent online features.

Now, that you know about the game's specifics, here's our question:
Post edited April 15, 2013 by G-Doc
I'm all for DLC and such but I actually voted no here. Games that are almost entirely multiplayer and online-focused seem out of place here.
avatar
Immoli: Arma 2. Pretty sure that doesn't even have lan.
Yes it does. But it does require a unique serial that isn't used elsewhere in the local network. Much like the other cases that JMich quoted (not sure about Tropico 3 though).
Post edited April 15, 2013 by jamyskis
I'm 100% fine with this and I'm glad GOG community is as well. It's just as little invasive as it can be - if somebody doesn't want to create some accounts, he can play online with his friends without a problem.

multiplayer focused games are ok as long as the buyer knows what he's buying.

not to mention - the game looks freaking awesome!

a lot of games on GOG already require unique keys for multiplayer. get your shit together, whiners (addressing this only to people who whine)
Post edited April 15, 2013 by keeveek
avatar
JMich: Far Cry? Neverwinter Nights? Heroes of Annihilated Empires? Sacred?

Edit: Tropico 3?
avatar
E1125: What features are lost in those cases?.
I can answer this for NWN. Access to (some?) multiplayer servers, if your key gets blacklisted, like the default GOG key.
Also for Sacred, you can't multiplay (lan etc) if each person doesn't have a unique serial. Not sure if there is a blacklist feature as well.

Haven't played the others yet, thus can't answer you.
I answered yes. As being stated here, I´m not going further. If is still DRM-free, with optional features that don´t "cut" the game and a justified code for multiplayer online purposes only, I say go ahead (besides in this specific case, this game is not my cup of tea). But beware: I believe this is the draw line, the faraway possibility with DRM matter. And, maybe more than DRM-free games, which I most aprecciate here is this direct and close interaction between you and your customers. Keep doing it!
GoG don't seem to be trying to draw a line here, but actively trying to blur it to bring fewer DRM free games. Leave this kind of stuff for Steam and GamersGate.

So I voted no.
I had to go with no. Any exceptions, no matter how minor, are lost ground in the DRM-free crusade, and any publisher could turn to this game on GOG and say "well, you let THAT game have online connectivity, so you can't have our game unless you let us have that."
avatar
gibbeynator: I had to go with no. Any exceptions, no matter how minor, are lost ground in the DRM-free crusade, and any publisher could turn to this game on GOG and say "well, you let THAT game have online connectivity, so you can't have our game unless you let us have that."
Could have not said it better. Once one game comes in everyone will want their DRM on our games.
avatar
gibbeynator: I had to go with no. Any exceptions, no matter how minor, are lost ground in the DRM-free crusade, and any publisher could turn to this game on GOG and say "well, you let THAT game have online connectivity, so you can't have our game unless you let us have that."
avatar
Feyjoo: Could have not said it better. Once one game comes in everyone will want their DRM on our games.
GOG can always say no (again)
avatar
GOG.com: - No activation, unique codes, or third-party accounts are required for single-player play or, LAN/direct connection multiplayer.
This is crucial to me. As long as the Singleplayer is free of online DRM and no third party is involved (*), I have no objections.

I'm also okay with optional accounts with the developer's online service for unnecessary nice-to-have bonus stuff like social features or achievements. But I would prefere if GOG finally comes up with an own optional client to keep as much of this stuff as possible internal!


(*) I somehow misinterpreted this when it was asked at the previous survey. It was the last question. I voted yes and realized my mistake in hindsight but couldn't undo my vote. So note that one "yes" on this should actually have been a "no".
avatar
E1125: What features are lost in those cases?.
avatar
JMich: I can answer this for NWN. Access to (some?) multiplayer servers, if your key gets blacklisted, like the default GOG key.
Also for Sacred, you can't multiplay (lan etc) if each person doesn't have a unique serial. Not sure if there is a blacklist feature as well.

Haven't played the others yet, thus can't answer you.
Beyond 2 players, Painkiller also requires players to have unique serials on a LAN which means that I cannot setup a LAN party on my old computers at homes.

My copy only allows 2 players and even if my friends came with their own keys, they could not set it up on my old computers (they'd have to bring their own laptop, for those that have one).

Furthermore, I'll have to eventually get around to ask GOG support for my own Painkiller serial key (I bought the game prior to GOG adding the key automatically in your game library and they did not retroactively add it to games you purchased prior to that feature).

Anyone got a complete list of games that require keys for any feature? I figure I might as well send GOG on big request for all my keys when I get around to it.
Post edited April 15, 2013 by Magnitus
high rated
I have no problem with keys to play a multiplayer game, as long as it is just a key without any online activation. I have a few GOG games that already have this type of key. This simple method can help eliminate the scenario where one person buys a game, then gives copies to their friends to all play multiplayer.

I'm also OK with optional features that require a third party server, as long as that server is only for optional features.

For me it's all about one question.

Can my game continue to be installed and played, single player AND multi player, if GOG and/or the publisher/developer disappear?

If the answer is yes, then it fits GOG.
avatar
Feyjoo: Could have not said it better. Once one game comes in everyone will want their DRM on our games.
avatar
JMich: GOG can always say no (again)
Yes they can but just the work of making this poll and having the meetings or whatever the gog team does with the developers happen is not only taking even if its a small time for other great games to work their way to gog but it also can change the gog mission completely. Just in case you don't know the reason GOG came to be is to bring old games that stopped working on the new OS and DRM free.

A good exception to bring profit to help on the mission was the indie category just because indie are more willing to make their games DRM free just to get the publicity and gog is great for that. But if the mission was not to bring only old games but to make all games in the catalog DRM free why is this poll actually happening? DId GOG forgot it's roots? Their ideals?

The problem here is not if the games comes in or not but just for giving the opportunity for it to come in with DRM MP features will give a reason for other developers to force their DRM's into GOG making this on two possible scenarios,

1. Less games released because developers are not willing to give it without DRM

2. More games but DRM in most of the new realeses making the customer less happy just because GOG forgot their mission.
Post edited April 15, 2013 by Feyjoo
avatar
gibbeynator: I had to go with no. Any exceptions, no matter how minor, are lost ground in the DRM-free crusade, and any publisher could turn to this game on GOG and say "well, you let THAT game have online connectivity, so you can't have our game unless you let us have that."
Makes sense, but in this case, the features gated behind DRM are features that I would never use even if they weren't. Its like when they charge extra for anchovies as a pizza topping. Gross, I'm not going to pay extra just so I can vomit (very precise DRM analogy ;) ) So why would I care what it takes to get leaderboards and multiplayer versus strangers?

I'm as anti-DRM as you can get, but this DRM doesn't bother me because it literally doesn't bother me. As I mentioned earlier, I would have bought Diablo 3 twice if only the leaderboards and matchmaking were behind the DRM. I only wanted that game for LAN and direct connect anyway.

Also, for people that want to play online with all the extra online bells and whistles... I'm a little confused at how the account is bothersome, shouldn't that be expected at this point? My biggest gripe with DRM is the un-necesity of it. Don't take me online when I don't need to go online... but in this case, the people wanting the online only features, are the ones not wanting the DRM... Again, I'm not a fan of DRM, but isn't it more justified here, in a multiplayer focused game? AND, there are non-drm options to fully play with friends.

I voted yes. I'll save my 'no' for if/when that line truly is crossed.
avatar
Magnitus: Anyone got a complete list of games that require keys for any feature? I figure I might as well send GOG on big request for all my keys when I get around to it.
[url=http://www.gogwiki.com/wiki/Category:Games_with_multiplayer_keys]The GOGWiki is supposed to have one[/url], but it's far from complete. Guess I'll have to try and update it at some point.