Well, they all have a very similar core: with all of them, you can just download the wanted installers and then close / log out from the application (be it your browser, the GOG Downloader, or GOG Galaxy) to manually install them. Galaxy just has a few features that can more or less automate this process. So, if you just look at the single-player side of things, it's not any more DRM-ish than the two other methods.

The only restrictive thing concerning Galaxy (except for the lack of some platforms support and stuff like that) is that for some games, you have to use it in order to play their multi-player. I don't know if what you download and install via the installer packages is the same thing as what Galaxy does, so I don't know if you could download Shadow Warrior 2 via the website, install it manually, and launch it via Galaxy to access its multi-player; but if GOG were to include some Galaxy components in installers to allow for multi-player account stuff without requiring Galaxy to be installed as some users seem to request, they wouldn't be any less DRM-ish than Galaxy, either (not saying they would or wouldn't be DRM as it depends on your definition of the term, but it would basically be the same).

Anyway, one thing that always amazes me if that some people apparently think that Galaxy is DRM just because it's another application they have to download. First, they don't seem to realise that the GOG Downloader and their browser also are applications; and second, they would be OK with a "Galaxy-lite" version just because it wouldn't install another application on their system—that would be stealthy. To better illustrate the foolishness of it all: it's like if shepherds weren't allowed to enter their fields alongside their sheep, but would be perfectly fine to enter them if they were hanging from the belly of one of their sheep. :P

But that wouldn't count Sacrifice, Neverwinter Nights, or any other game that requires a serial and/or account to be able to play multiplayer (or some version of multiplayer). Or are those not considered DRM, but Galaxy is?

I just wanted to clarify a couple of things that I've seen either confused or asked so far:

You can download the game through the website or gog downloader and import into galaxy once installed.
You don't have to sign into your account on galaxy to play single player even if you run it through galaxy.
Galaxy is entirely optional & DRM free for single player.



People who don't see the issue with galaxy being needed for mp. Do you/did you feel the same about origin, uplay, steam etc? If not then what do you feel is different in galaxy's case?

Galaxy doesn't install any services?

I'm not a client fan, so haven't tried galaxy since around when it was first released (with Witcher 3 maybe? don't recall exactly). But for some reason I had the impression it installed a service.

You're saying that it does not?

It does install services, but they only run when Galaxy runs and stop when Galaxy closes.

Yes, it does. Two in fact: GalaxyClientService and GalaxyCommunication. They're not left running though - they're only active as long as you're actually downloading something or otherwise communicating with the GOG network in some way.

Steam and Origin also have services installed.

Edit: Ninjerd.

I am sorry, but I am not going to read all of that. I think this one stands out with a superficial glance: Truth be told, I don’t personally care about GOG’s business reasons or anyone else’s. If developers want me to use their software, it has to meet my needs and be acceptable to me. For me this means that my resources are used efficiently and the best practices of the platform are respected (and Galaxy does some weird and questionable things on OS X). I don’t see that in GOG Galaxy and I don’t see it in Steam either. It annoys me that I have to settle for IMO subpar software to enjoy other software. I think they can do a lot better than this.

There is nothing compelling about Galaxy right now anyway and I have so far not purchased any games (I think) that use Galaxy’s multiplayer implementation.

That depends on the specific game in question and other aspects of the release of the game on the platform in question. If the game is DRM-free on the other platform then I don't see much difference at all. More importantly though, I don't see any negative difference between a game being sold on GOG with multiplayer matchmaking using Galaxy compared to the same game (or some other game) being sold on GOG that uses a 3rd party service for multiplayer such as Torchlight 2 using Runic's own multiplayer service, or any of dozens of other games that implement multiplayer matchmaking through external services.

If GOG refused to sell every game unless the developers mandatorily implemented LAN and/or DirectIP as multi-player modes in them and made the developer/publisher provide the server component for matchmaking to distribute with the game so that every person that bought the game could run their own private matchmaking service for the game, and demanded that NONE of the games could implement any form of license key based validation on the client or server side components for any games - which it seems that many people are demanding - then quite frankly GOG would have close to zero multi-player games in the catalogue, and publishers would laugh at them in their faces.

Also, for those companies that chose to release their games here devoid of multiplayer instead of complying with GOG's 10 foot long list of multi-player demands they have no intention of every complying with, people (including myself) would bitch and complain that the GOG version of the game is neutered and we're not buying it on GOG. As a case in point, I bought both of the Full Spectrum Warrior games on Steam because the GOG version has no multi-player whatsoever in it, and I'm sure I'm not alone. I already own many games on GOG that use 3rd party multi-player services, some of which have since been shut down completely and no longer have that component any more. That's always a risk with any multi-player service of course. Had ANY of those games implemented multi-player using GOG Galaxy services when they were originally written (if it had existed then) or been updated to support it since then - then any single one of those games would STILL have working multiplayer as long as GOG is in business theoretically which is a lot more than can be said for any 3rd party services like Gamespy that have now resulted in us having braindead single-player only games here that have multi-player originally and/or still have it on Steam or elsewhere.

To me this isn't about ideological purity. That does not and will never exist and anyone expecting or demanding it is living in a fantasy world. It is about incremental improvements to problems that exist as a consumer in the world of gaming. To me, buying DRM-free games on GOG which rely on 3rd parties for multi-player is a huge problem. All other things being 100% equal having it instead rely on GOG provided technologies is vastly superior even if their service is or was 100% identical in every way to some 3rd party service simply because it isn't going to die and go out of business tomorrow likely. Having GOG ship single-player only versions of games and reject games that require 3rd party matchmaking with license registration is unacceptable to me, I'll go buy the game on Steam or elsewhere instead. Ideology on that issue might Win GOG a couple hundred friends globally on that while making a million enemies while other companies laugh all the way to the bank. Having GOG refuse to sell games at all unless they comply with some mile long list of ideological demands that only the smallest few gamers even give a crap about will win them maybe a few hundred fans that pat them on their back for 10 minutes while making like 99% of their customers pissed off.

Religion and ideology is great, and I have my own ideology too, but sometimes people need to open their eyes and take a few hundred steps back to see how their ideology can shoot themselves in the feet too and that sometimes certain compromises are not only necessary but that they are in everyone's best interest. There's no doubt in my mind that the direction GOG has been going with all of this is bringing a LOT more video game publishers to embrace DRM-free gaming than ever would have happened if GOG adopted an industry hostile religious ideological viewpoint with a hard stance on every single issue that people rant and rave about. They would be seen as impossible and ignored by the industry where they would have likely ended up following Shinyloot and Desura.

Personally I'd much rather see GOG find that proper balance between ideology and business sensibility in the middle, and if that means a few hundred people that want to rant and rave with religious fervour decide to stop shopping here, that's a cost of doing business that I'm sure GOG can live with, and most of us wont be bothered to hear a few "I'll never shop here again then" posts from people who basically go on to never buy any video games anywhere ever again because quite frankly there are no better stores out there with as good of a solution nor selection of DRM-free games as GOG has and I doubt any other storefront will ever do remotely close to as good either.

I will check for the other still, unless we find something different prior ;)
Thank you.
apologies my mistake for the bad phrasing. was a bit long day/night. but it still means the same, I can not find this user or usergroup (net localgroup). nada nothing, njente, nichts (all languages I more or less would understand a group everyone in ;) ) and it shall show up, or did MS change something again, no doesn't seem to be as I can see all other ones. And when typing it I am/was still confused like hell.
I might have used it a bit more open, meaning automatic <> manual download of a patch. And yes I read this part, but as sometimes users run an install, run an automatic update from within the program, hence I mentioned it. So we can exclude it. ;)
So I will install the reminder of those games to have bit more broader base.
And I was able to confirm that it happens on at least 2 different language versions (french I assume for you? ;))
ok we can exclude anything but the installer.
not joking this F...ing old bug is still there, just more deeply buried in the system and more specific. We came across it when running alpha tests for Galaxy (and confirmed via web search). ;) (asian languages are using a really different way, certain ENGLISH-letter-combinations are getting translated into asian letters. So in reallity you type English, that was how a Japanese explained to me as I asked him how he can type with an English keyboard, sometimes bad enough with those dreaded French ones :P ) (you knoz zhqt I ,eqn ? I hope I remembered right ;) )

next point was NA, removed

So I think we can exclude safely the OS as well.

I am thinking you might have a point, with Port royal 2 I came across a really weird bug:

Their was a local savegame path along with the game directory, inside was just a note saying it was moved to My documents. surprise surprise, guess were they did NOT show up? ;)

After some reaaaaal hard work I found them in user\PUBLIC\PUBLIC_documents\ascaran dadada....WTF?
contacted support still waiting for a meaningful reply tho.
Registry only had a path with C:\Users\whateveruser you usedtoinsallfrom\Documents\Ascaron Entertainment\Port Royale 2 in Gog.com, so again WTF????? ;)

And as I was just there I just checked for the games with everyone, they do NOT appear in gog.com. So I assume the installer was supplied by the devs and GOG did not/could not change it (oversight as well)?
Have to double check though.

EDIT clarifications

As you should. On the game side of things, feel free to limit your video game purchases to other stores out there that provide a better experience for you I guess, if there are any in business and they sell any games more complicated than stuff that runs on a 10 year old iPhone in quality.

On the Galaxy side of things, if the software doesn't meet your needs or expectations by all means don't use it, it's optional. Make sure before purchasing a title that if you care about multi-player that the available multi-player options and how they are implemented specifically meet your personal needs that's all. You'll probably be limited to video games from 1995-2005 I imagine though, with only a few titles since then that support options like LAN/DirectIP.

I honestly don't think anyone is going to find a more compelling superior multi-player option on any other distribution platform out there however. Maybe with certain individual games that break the mold, but not on any large scale, and I don't think it is going to ever change for the better either.

The ideological views some people have on this with regards to multi-player are more or less diametrically opposed to the views of the video game developers making the games. I think the developers are much more likely to win people away from their ideology for individual game titles that are exciting enough than even the largest group of ideologists are going to make any changes on how the industry develops multi-player components in their games.

So people might individually have strong views and not buy games as a result, but not in enough of a wave of numbers to have any effect on the industry changing the way they develop multi-player. Maybe for individual developers and individual games, but not the industry as a whole. If you look at a game like Divinity Original Sin for example, it gives kind of the best of both worlds if you ask me. It gives LAN/DirectIP and GOG Galaxy Multiplayer IIRC. Sadly, few companies do that or are willing to do that and I can't see how any ideological movement taking any stance with or without their wallets will have any real material effect on that in 2016 and beyond. It's far too late for that now.

I didn't say that. We can include them if you like or debate them first or label them differently and include them then.

I concentrated on Galaxy because that (requiring you to log in) is very similar to almost identical to how the Steam client works (so the DRM status should be rather uncontroversial as far as it gets) and is a probably easy to detect and always the same, so it would be realistically possible to have a filter implemented by GOG about it. Everything else would require manual work. If we have this we can easily move on to the others. Let's do it step by step.

I concentrated on the stuff that is realistically possible to do with reasonable effort, although experience says that realistically it won't be implemented by GOG, but maybe by someone else..

Multiplayer function of GOG Galaxy is very like those 3rd party software or services:
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kali_(software)]Kali[/url] (IPX emulator)
GameSpy (defunct)
GameRanger
Voobly

I do not think they are DRM, so GOG Galaxy is not DRM for me.
Most of (if not all) GOG multiplayer games are not exclusive here, they support at least one more set of API/service for multiplayer gaming.

GOG Galaxy is just one of the services that game developers could rely on, so they do not have to reinvent the wheel from scratch.

You first asked for any game with DRM or that requires a log in to be marked as such, and I told you that all of those already were, though there were a few false positives as well. You now ask for Galaxy games to be marked as such, ignoring games which use a different kind of authentication, and I'm saying that said labeling would skip quite a few of those you asked for in the first post.
And what happens to games like Dying Light, which supports both LAN and Online via Galaxy? Are those marked (and skipped) or not marked (and potentially bought)? Yes, DL is a game you can't buy from Germany, so possibly a moot point, but it is the one that I know for sure that supports both methods.

Sure thing. What should be labeled? Games that require serials? Games that may require serials? Games that offer LAN (whether those require a unique serial or not)? Games that use Galaxy (whether they also support LAN or not)? And should the list be "Requires feature X for Y" or "Supports feature X for Y, but doesn't require it"?

Go with the ~925 games in the multiplayer tab, and see which of those should be in your blacklist. You may find that not everyone that doesn't like Galaxy agrees with said blacklist.

I'm going to say the same thing: the two services it installs stop running when Galaxy closes (and they're not always on even when Galaxy is running).

It seems you've got quite an appealing question, there! ;P

That is precisely the problem. There is nothing else. Galaxy is DRM and GOG knows that, hence their marketing focus on ‘optional’. Galaxy is not about DRM-free gaming, it is about having an easy gaming experience like Steam and others. However, I still think that they could do better. Open source would be a start or a rich API. I vaguely remember them saying something about this, but we have none of that. Galaxy is as closed-source and restricted as Steam. I am not willing to use either, just because the software can also be downloaded DRM-free from the website.