Talorc
4382
I love baseball SO MUCH I changed my account location in gog.com from Australia to the United States, just to show my support! :-)
There is no possible problems/issues when changing ones location to an “incorrect” yet advantageous one, right? Like they might void ones downloads or something like that?
Baseball is baseball. And besides, you may like one stadium but decide another is better for you should you ever move or you may accidentally buy a ticket to a game someplace else.
You might find yourself provided with horribly lewd and inappropriate versions of games which have not received the loving and gentle attentions of your local thought protection authority. You may also find yourself robbed of the opportunity to rid yourself of excess cash that would otherwise languish unloved in your bank account.
Worst of all, you might be forced to watch baseball. Baseball. We’re not talking some candy-ass shit like watching paint dry; this is the real thing. It’ll fuck you up. Don’t risk it.
Tony_M
4386
I might decide to live in the US one day. So I think its best that I buy all my games using US location, just to be safe.
Otagan
4387
I’d love to see stats on location shifting for GOG accounts in the month after this change.
Even though I had the original game on disc, I picked up The Witcher EE DC for less than $5 CDN (I spent that on a snack today; The Witcher is worth it). Installed and played a bit; it’s nice to see what the game looks like now after several years and having a modern system since I can push everything to max. The only thing I have trouble with right now is rotating the camera using the right side of my display, since the cursor moves onto my second display. I’ll have to get used to using the centre mouse button to control the camera rotating again.
I’m in no rush to get through the game before W2 arrives. It’s more for nostalgia and comparison purposes, and a bit for reminding me of the characters and plot. Not to mention, I don’t think I had the opportunity to play the EE version of the game, although I had the EE upgrade downloaded.
Budvar
4389
GoG do a lot of good things.
But there “DRM-free” version of The Witcher 2 follows Stardock’s highly dubious definition of the term. Basically, patches will only be available to those who register their games.
While this is certainly less intrusive than the more well known forms of DRM, in my opinion, it is still a form of DRM, and still rather misleading. I don’t care about extra goodies, I ordered from GoG purely because it was advertised as DRM free. To find out that “DRM-free” is now some sort of marketing gimmick, is quite annoying.
Nesrie
4390
Yeah DRM free it is not, in either case.
DRM stands for “Digital Rights Management”, and I’ve usually taken that to mean embedded mechanisms that manage rights. Copy protection, etc.
Not getting patches because you haven’t registered the game isn’t really DRM in that sense, there’s nothing preventing you from doing whatever you want with the copy you currently have.
Additionally, the main problems with intrusive DRM (server authentication, Starforce bricking optical drives, etc.) is that it can cause problems for legitimate users. So, yeah, even if you want to consider it DRM, it’s one of the least likely ways to actually go cause problems for users.
Nesrie
4392
Selling a buggy ass game that doesn’t work on a piece of plastic and locking patches behind on a server that requires you to ask permission to get them IS DRM.
Perhaps, but lets not forget:
Demigod
Elemental
Okay, I concede the point on two of the ten thousand million games out there.
Anyway, it would be great to get going on another DRM debate, wouldn’t it?
(answer: no)
Nesrie
4396
Most companies don’t advertise their games as “DRM Free” and then release them like that either, so it is no surprise to me there are only a few examples. It’s dishonest.
There is a huge thread on this on GOG forums and their head of PR explained their position on this clearly.
I agree with them.
the thread is here.
http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/the_witcher_2_gog_version/page6
They will also provide new master build when the game is fully completed (ie no more patches planned).
Nesrie
4398
Yeah I know. I got an e-mail from them when I sent them a question. I didn’t even ask about the patcher but he addressed it in the e-mail because they know this is a concern… because there is DRM Free and then there is this…
You won’t be required to verify ownership of the game, BUT at this point the only way to update the game (except for the day one patch, which will be available through GOG.com) will be through the game’s launcher, after registering it. Unfortunately we weren’t able to get around this, however registration is not required to play the game. Eventually, when the final patch (though as far as I can tell TW2 is extremely polished) is released, we will update our installer to the latest version and reupload the game, but until then the only way to keep the game up-to-date is by registering it.
Budvar
4399
I never talked about their motivations for doing it. In fact, I never wrote about motivations for DRM at all. The concern here is misleading advertising. The GoG materials have been HEAVILY promoting the notion that this game is DRM free, coming from a house that respects their customers and doesn’t treat them as criminals.
I don’t plan on playing the game for a few months, since I am quite busy and alread have a huge backlog. I generally buy new titles from Steam, so I have no problem with DRM when it is clear what I am getting. You can’t buy DRM free AAA titles, so Steam is a decent compromise for me. I bought this title (pre-order) from GoG yesterday, based on the DRM free premise. I wanted to give my money to company that I believed recognised some of the significant problems and issues with DRM. Otherwise, I would have waited until I actually had time to play this and bought it on Steam.
The ambiguity of language means that GoG can assert that the game is DRM free, but the patches surely have DRM. Any argument for increasing restrictions on patches could be made for increasing the restrcitions on game, so it strikes me as hypocritical for a company that talks very openly about being against DRM to end up utilising it for their patches.
Ultimately it is misleading, and that is what bugs me.
In terms of DRM it is the lowest form of DRM I could think of.
Basically, you need to register to get updates.
So, apart from those updates requiring their launcher, the game does not install any invasive system drivers, infects your DVD-player and breaks compatibility with other stuff, nor does it prohibit you from running Daemon Tools or Alcohol 120%, or anything else. Nor does it prevent you from having a debugger running on your system or attempting to use one on the game while it is running.
That sounds pretty DRM-free to me, at least in terms of what DRM usually means on the PC platform (unfortunately).
*) Comments based on me not having the GOG version so I have no idea if they do any other stuff than what is made apparent from this thread and the one on GOG.
By any reasonable understanding of the term, no it’s not.
