Keep it clean
If you believe that a wish duplicates another one or is not meant for the category, use Options button above to report a duplicate or spam.
Add your wish
If there is an item you wish to have on GOG.com and it’s not yet on the wishlist, please add your wish
Remove Armello - DRM Free Edition from the catalog please completed
Added by
Kristian For a while certain developers and/or publishers have treated GOG customers as second class citizens and that is absolutely something that they should address. But this? This is taking it too far.
tfishell Hey, I guess this can be marked as completed.
DragonSpleen Reading this thread just settled my mind on whether to buy it or not.
Rixasha Yes, Armello was removed April 7th 2017.
I thought this was marked completed shortly after, but apparently not.
Lone_Scout Has this wish already been fulfilled? Armello seems to be nowhere to be found...
MegapiemanPHD It's a shame since Armello is a fun game but the developers can no longer be trusted.
chilinux @nate1222, yes, when a company is up front from the beginning about their limitations, that people that buy the product do so accepting those disclosures. What you seem to be missing is the bait and switch. League of Legends made the sales by using marketing material which promised the DLC for "Armello" without any distinction for the last two years as to GoG's Armello being any different. Even when they must have reached the point in the development they didn't have the resources to ever release the DLC for GoG users, they still didn't disclose it until the day of the DLC release. So even if the initial marketing material was honest to begin with, at the point the situation was known to have changed, the claims which where at that point fraudulent remained uncorrected. That probably is because League of Legends saw no downside to leaving the claim they had no intention any longer of honoring. They know most people won't request a refund and some of those that due will use the refund to buy the game on Steam. In either of those cases, they get to keep the money. For other people that get a refund and never re-buy it, the developer gets a zero interest loan off of users that believed they would be getting DLC. This doesn't just cheat the game players, it cheats all other game publishers. Players have a finite about of time and money, if it is going to a game sold on invalid marketing material, that takes away from players focusing on the legit games. Now that we know League of Legends has such little respect for GoG and it's users to have left the DLC issue of "lacking resources" undisclosed for so long, why do they still deserve a spot in the same store as great games which honor their promises?
chilinux @Megmarock, not only is the game not the same quality, they never will provide what they promised in their promotional material for the game. For the last two years, they said Armello would be getting a second set of heroes as DLC. It wasn't until the day they actually released the DLC they got around to announcing GoG won't be getting the DLC promised for Armello users (Kickstarter backers where even supposed to get it for free including the ones that choose to get the GoG release). The offensive re-branding is just a side-effect where they use "DRM-Free" in their posts to the Steam community forum to indicate GoG users choose not to get the real Armello. The problem with that claim is they never disclosed any issue with the game or re-branded it until the day of the DLC release. Their excuses seem to indicate that GoG users should have known DRM Free would have limits much as if that is the same as if it was a "shareware" or "lite" release. Also, even if you accept their excuse they simply don't have the resources, they must have known long before August 2016 that they didn't have the resources. How does a game company support DLC on FIVE (5) different APIs (Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, PS4 and Xbox One) without knowing until the day of the DLC launch they won't be able honor their promise of the DLC for the DRM-Free release? If a college student waits until the last day of a class to tell the teacher that they simply don't have the resources for the major paper required to be turned in and have no intention of doing it, then they get a failing grade. If they work with the teacher earlier, they can discuss dropping the class without any grade or doing something else for extra credit. But to promise to do the course work and waiting until the last day to claim it really should be consider a minor course so it is ok not to do the work doesn't fly. That behavior deserves a F and GoG shouldn't have F grade developers on their site.
Dartpaw86 @Magmarock, that's the issue, it's not the same quality. The dev team has abandoned GOG and stopped updating and stopped distributing DLC. It's the principle of the thing. But personally, I would rather GOG insist the devs give us the added content rather than remove the game entirely.
bead181e bait and switch is bad. whether its video games downgrades, or ice cream ingredient downgrades, it's always bad. This is the video game equivalent of ice cream made from corn syrup, modified milk ingredients, triglycerides, and artificial flavor.
I just want the game to not be a bait-and-switch.
NateJennings75 If you don't like it, then just don't buy it.
Enneagon @Magmarock, it's about offensive attitude not any term. Research the details, few comments down is quite good summary of why this happened.
Magmarock For fuck sake peopel are you guys really make a wish list over an offensive term. Do you really have nothing better to do with your time. As long as the product is of the same quality who the fuck cares.
Cabzx Yeah Gog, don't take this from anyone.
Kristian " As long as the game is good and up to date they can call it whatever they want for all I care."
The point is that this is an inferior version of the game that won't be receiving DLC and other things that Steam version will be receiving. That combined with calling that inferior version "DRM Free Edition" which would otherwise normally either be a badge of honor or frankly superfluous given that this is GOG, THAT is what some of us take issue with. Some might take issue with the mere fact that it is an inferior version but this wishlist entry doesn't take a stand on that issue one way or the other. But this is NOT the same version of the game as it is on Steam.
Magmarock Stop complaining over nothing. As long as the game is good and up to date they can call it whatever they want for all I care.
skeletonbow Nothing personal against the developers of this game, but I find the use of the term "DRM-free Edition" for the purposes marketing a "lesser" neutered version of a game to be a subversion of what the term DRM-free means. Call the game what it is "Reduced Functionality Edition". My qualm isn't so much with the game being here, but rather the way it is being marketed as if it is some "better" version because it is DRM-free, when it ultimately is a lesser version. It's elusive marketing spin. The reason people are outraged is because they see through this and want respect.
Crayons1920 no
chilinux Everyone is bringing up really good points and issues. However, at 55 comments, the wishlist thread has become a mess. It provides no concept of paragraphs or other things expected to have a lengthy discussion. At this point I recommend people post to the GoG Armello forum. People should still vote here if they feel it deserves their vote. But the forum is a better place for the discussion. It can be found at: www.gog.com/forum/armello
Catahrai @CHILINUX not to mention: updates arrive later, no custom dice skins, nor public multiplayer on the DRM-free versions. And there are straight up no game updates for the people who use the DRM-free copy of the game included in the Armello Indiebox.
chilinux @KUTCHINKA Sorry this thread has become hard to follow. I will try my best to break down the situation as far as I see it. April 2014, League of Geeks opens a Kickstarter to get funding for a game which would be "on Steam and DRM free." The Kickstarter also indicated the game would have In-App purchases. Initial releases are provided only on Steam with Steam's DRM but backers are given a chance to wait for the DRM-Free release. Around October 2015, LoG satisfies their obligation to provide the DRM-Free game by putting it on GoG as "Armello" with the same description as on Steam. There is no clear pre-sale distinction made between buying on Steam or GoG other than GoG provides the DRM-Free version and the Steam version requires Valve bloated heavy-weight client. At the beginning of this month (September 2016), LoG released the DLC on Steam, PS4 and Xbox One. Also beginning this month, LoG changed the title of the game on GoG to "Armello DRM Free Edition" and provided notice for the first time that Usurpers DLC will not be provided to the "DRM Free Edition." On Steam forums, Trent Kusters of LoG has indicated "as far as we can tell now, Armello's paid DLC is not coming to DRM Free." He further DLC for "DRM Free" (he doesn't even call the GoG release by the name Armello in his forum post) is impossible due to resource limits. His exact words where "given infinite resources and time we could undertake the task of rewriting the underlying architecture at the core of this decision." So, LoG must have known for a while they where writing a massive underlyning architecture incompatible with providing the promised In-App purchases/DLC for "DRM-Free" but waited til the last minute to actually announce this design decision. So while they are able to provide resources for DLC for Steam, Xbox One and PS4, suddenly GoG users are told to accept getting no DLC or to re-purchase the base game on Steam. Regardless of how problematic this stance is, all discussions with LoG have come to an end. Trent Kusters has indicated all future discussions on Steam forums will be locked up and as far as I know he has never posted on GoG to discuss the issues. For the most part, they selected to never provide IAP/DLC for GoG a long time ago but continued to use GoG to get funding to help fund the recent Xbox One release. Now they have a larger audience through other platforms, the GoG users of "DRM Free" are not worth their time/resources. Both the Facebook and Twitter pages for Armello now state it is available on Steam, PS4 and Xbox. While GoG has remained loyal to continuing to sell the game, LoG won't even acknowledge it is available on GoG. Instead, LoG have disowned the GoG release and see no reason to even discuss their promise to have In-App purchases/DLC available any further.
kutchinka i'm trying to understand what is allthe mayhem about? can someone plese eplain to me what is this about?
Fleck GOG has been good to me and not just for the classics I love, I do not find it fair that it is being used this way so I will vote.
Lone_Scout Keeping a downgraded edition at the same price as the standard edition is a theft. At least the base price for this game should be permanently reduced and any refunds charged on the developers.
Tekkaman-James I hate having to support this, but what League of Geeks did was pretty darn shady. Give GOG customers access to all future content or take this nerfed game away. No one likes a bait-and-switch and that's exactly what this is.
chilinux @Cecco If is not fair to Doublefine to compare them with League of Geeks. If you bring up Doublefine's Brutal Legend GoG page using the Wayback Machine (archive.org) and go back to the August 2013 version of the web page, you can see from the beginning a warning regarding multiplayer was provided. Doublefine was upfront about what the DRM-free edition provides. In the case of Brutal Legend, you are correct that the purchaser made an informed consent to accept that limitation. League of Geeks created a Kickstarter claiming the games was coming "on Steam and DRM-Free." Based on this statement, even the Steam edition should be DRM-Free. After getting the money, they decided it was on Steam *OR* DRM-Free. This is a big difference with no option given to Kickstart backers to opt-out of. The GoG page for Armello for April 2015 shows no warning about limitations. One might argue that is because the game hadn't been released yet. It was actually already released on Steam at that point. However, if you go forward to October 2015, there still is no warning and it is just listed as "Armello" with nothing in the title making any distinction. If you go forward to June 2016, there is still no warning in the game description and the game is still "Armello" on GoG. It wasn't until the beginning of this month that the name of the game was changed to "Armello DRM Free Edition" and then the notice regarding DLC was added later after that. It is unfair to claim people who have purchased this game made informed consent. League of Geeks cashed in on the good will generated by having a DRM Free edition and then performed a bait and switch regarding their policies. No one before September 2016 where buying something called "Armello DRM Free Edition" because what was listed on GoG was just "Armello" just the same as Steam. League of Geeks changed it recently and is treating it as retro-active notification. But that is not how informed consent works. No matter how you cut it, LoG has been dishonest about their intentions and they are dragging GoG's name through the dirt with them.
fronzelneekburm @ Cecco: Maybe it's just me, but personally I find it would be much more damaging for gog if they acquire a reputation for being that store where indie devs can choose to dump all their outdated builds at full price. And what's more, gog trying to turn this questionable practice into some sort of marketing stunt.
Matruchus Same for Cinemaware titles and other developer abandoned games on gog that have patched up/supported versions on Steam.
Salvatos Having backed this game on Kickstarter, I can echo the sentiment that they were never really sold on the concept of DRM-free and just tried to put up with it because they had promised it. As already mentioned, the Kickstarter-exclusive content never made it to GoG because they would have needed every game owner to have the related files installed. I don't know why they didn't just implement an account system, like any competitive card game that needs to check which cards each player has access to, but now the deed is done. Stripped down as it is, the game has little reason to remain on GoG. And selling an inferior version with limited multiplayer potential for the same price as competitors offering the full experience isn't going to do any good to GoG's image.
Peaceful Protestor While I don't agree with the words or how they're used in the description above, I do agree that League Of Geeks should uphold their commitment or, refund everyone who bought the GOG version of their game and apologize for not being able to follow through with their commitment. The event that lead to the current situation was a lack of forethought, by LOG - although this is pure speculation based on available information. According to one of their devs the way they constructed Armello's system does not allow for DRM-free DLC, without costly modification to the game's core. Not foreseeing this as a problem at the time, LOG made a commitment to sell the game on GOG, DRM-free. Thus, resulting in our current dilemma. Too much time has already past for LOG to do anything about it, except apologize and move on. Hopefully, LOG will learn from this mistake and design better systems for their games, in the future. As it is now, I think LOG should remove the game from the GOG store and issue refunds and an apology.
RadonGOG Simply voting for giving them an ultimatum would have made the better topic...
Dogmaus I think this is too much to ask to GOG. It would damage their professional image and I see it as an unpractical request. Also unfair to the players who are willing to buy the game DRM free if they are happy with the off-line contents. On these basis, other games like Brutal Legend should be removed, and it would be a pity. It's up to the player to choose if a game is worth buying in a given edition. Buying the game on GOG shows the developers that there is money in DRM-free and nothing to worry about it. Becoming hostile towards the publishers who choose to be on this platform makes things worse.
If I don't like it for some reasons, I'll pass without making a fuss.
I agree that a lesser version should cost less though.
Catrhis The situation as it is, it's simply unacceptable, they gimped the drm free version simply because it's drm free, and this means taking for fool anyone who buy this so called game here. We have more than enough of being treated as second class customer even if we pay good money just as anyone else, only because we want our product drm free.
Removing this game from the catalogue will send a clear signal that this kind of behaviour is not tolerated.
Leaving the game as buy able will instead tell publisher that they can treat all GOG customer as idiots and fools, and that no consequences happen no matter what.
This as to end, please remove this product from your catalogue GOG, you have more then enough request from others indie publisher that behave like adults instead of whining children bout drm, that losing this disrespecting so called "publisher", can only benefit this site and all the principle it should represent.
Enneagon Was wondering why such outlandish request, but after looking in the details I'm in full support of this. Voted.
SerialSideQuest Also in full support of this. Having any sort of vendor deal with developers / studios / publishers who treat GOG and its customers as second-rate is not only a disservice to the loyal patrons of this marketplace, but also sends a message to developers that this type of behaviour (discriminating against open marketplaces) is acceptable, when in fact it's incredibly user-hostile. Please remove this game (as well as any games where developers and publishers have similar policies), and discontinue any business arrangements with these parties. Thanks!
chilinux This game should remain available to those that bought it but GoG should de-list it from being available for future purchases and League of Geeks should be banned from using (abusing) GoG for their future scams.
It has been suggested that GoG Galaxy should be able to make the DLC available just the same as the Steam client does. This reasoning misses the point that GoG Galaxy isn't a DRM system and the Steam client is.
It was also brought up that the developers provided non-answers as to why the DLC couldn't be ported. This is not completely true.
In January 2016, the Kickstarter comments has a creator post that explains: "Due to the nature of DRM-free no backer content is on those builds (as it would be accessible to everyone)."
So, for the most part, the developer has now decided DLC requires the anti-piracy protections that DRM does not. It is a policy decision and not a technical one. As such, the policy regarding the DLC is inherently incompatible with the mission of GoG to provide DRM-free content.
There are indications all over their kickstarter page that League of Geeks was never really invested in the concept of DRM-free. They used DRM-free as a kickstarter marketing gimmick back in 2014 to reach both their kickstarter goal and all of their kickstarter stretch goals. The result was stated to be a Steam and DRM-free game released March 2015. However, by April 2015, only the Steam edition of the game was released. A DRM-free "edition" of the game took half a year for them to get around to releasing.
Honoring the marketing of DRM-free was an after-thought for League of Geeks. Now that they have the money pocketed, they have reversed course on what they originally claimed and have limited as much as they can what they actually provide as DRM-free.
So, back in 2014, Kickstater backers where told they could get DRM-free *AND* backer content. By 2016, the new statement was DRM-free is an option to those that accept it means *NO* backer content or DLC. This was not a policy stated up front. It is a bait and switch, plan and simple.
GoG is being treated a patsy. League of Geeks is using the GoG brand to legitimize a kickstarter scam. It isn't just important to de-list Armello just to keep GoG players from further being cheated with a needlessly crippled version of the game. It is important that GoG make it clear that they will not being making the GoG brand available to future Kickstarter so-called "DRM-free" scams.
To be completely clear, I consider @TrentKusters @blackemizzi and @ty_carey of League of Geeks to be a scammer which abuses the term DRM-free to make an extra buck while having no intention to honor the true spirit of getting funded for a DRM-free game.
This is an unhealthy situation to have GoG involved with.
Thunderstone If the drm-free version is going to be the lesser version then they should lower the price of the game to compensate. Rather underhanded how they apparently didn't announce they were going to short-change the drm-free version ahead of time. If they don't want drm-free fair enough, but just be honest about it.
J Lo @ TheShadowDragon: Thanks for the information.
kwerboom Pull this game! Developers who treat GOG different from Steam shouldn't be allowed on GOG. GOG is every bit the equal of Steam and that fact needs to be enforced with developers. I've unwishlisted Armello on both GOG and Steam since seeing this information. This developer doesn't deserve anybody's money.
sergeyua Thanks fot this infotmation! Removed from wishlist and voted!
xKeiro I agree they either should provide GoG with full version of the game, or get removed from the catalog.
TheShadowDragon The fact is that Armello has been sold for a year under the pretense that it was the same game as on Steam and other stores. Even offering refunds, leaving Armello on the store sets a precedent that developers can treat GOG customers poorly and get out of consequences by offering refunds, fully aware that only a few people will take them up on the offer. Add in insulting non-answers from the devs of why the DLC couldn't be ported, even if just for single player, as well as isolating GOG players from general multiplayer, and it is clear that Armello's devs think quite poorly of GOG's customers. This goes for any game that is refusing comparable support for GOG versions as well, but Armello is the first very public incident and an example needs to be made.
JKeift Although this may look like something done merely out of spite against a developer who has engaged in questionable practices, the truth is that having a lesser edition of this or any other game ends up damaging GOG's image. I completely agree with removing this title from the store and letting all developers and publishers know that you either bring the whole package here or you don't bring it at all.
onkarjit Either get the full version of this game to GOG or remove this game from GOG's game catalog.
Hierosclito *share with me the whislist(s), sorry, I wrote wrong the last message. Bye
Hierosclito @The_Red_Borsch: Freedom of choice to vote or not in this, too, right?
Share with me any game whose dev. team is so `ugly´ like LoG and I give my vote without problem. Assasins Creed, Two Worlds, etc..etc.. Without problem, I give the same treat to bad ethics of devs. Bye.
The_Red_Borsch Oh, really? Then will they remove Assassin's Creed, Slender: The Arrival, Two Worlds Epic Edition, Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude, Lula? No. Why? Because we always have the choice: to buy or not to buy, and everyone should have the choice.
And yes: there are much worse games than this one. Eg.: Five Nights at Freddy's and other crappy games on this engine with godawful animatronics. This game is brilliant compared with this game.
J Lo What did League of Geeks do? Wikipedia doesn't have an entry for League of Geeks and a Google search won't pinpoint the issue.
BadDecissions I realize that you probably [i]can't[/i] remove the game, contractually, but at least my vote will express my contempt for the ways these developers have decided to act.
vulchor I am so angry that I kickstarted this game. They failed to deliver on so many promises for the DRM-Free version, I've complained to the creators til I'm blue in the face, and each time they came back saying they had no other choice, but they couldn't understand how I felt that they were treating DRM-free gamers wrongly.
Mygaffer Feels very underhanded from League of Geeks. They never disclosed there would be differing levels of support for Armello on GOG.com versus Steam.
Frankly I wonder if there would be grounds for a class action lawsuit. People should start a Google group who had purchased the game before the "DRM free edition" re-branding, get enough people together and maybe we can find a lawyer willing to take this on a contingency.
Part of the settlement might be forcing the proper support of all versions.
73 comments about this wish