GameRager: You could also have publishers thinking/saying "Look, CDPR released a nearly/fully DRM free game and it was still a failure as hardly no one bought it.....we guess DRM is still the way to go then." by that logic.

Also, I (again) see it more as the anti-drm people being reasonable and meeting Gog part way but saying "We'll try this for now but we want fully DRM free gaming in future but will also support you this time to show we appreciate the amount of freedom from normal DRM methods you have given us and to support fully DRM free games in the future."

See what i'm getting at here?

Coelocanth: I do. All I'm pointing out is speculating about how publishers are going to view the results of this is pointless. They could look at it as "Hey, almost DRM free actually works" or they could look at it as "Hey, even when they bitch and whine about DRM, they'll still buy the game anyway".

hedwards: I think most people will end up doing that, but by the same token we don't have to be happy about the misleading information. From what I've read recently, I get the feeling that Mr. Gog wasn't told that the patching system would require authentication or that the information didn't make it to PR.

I think a lot of the complaints probably wouldn't have been made if we hadn't been sold in part on it being the only DRM free option.

But, ultimately, I do find it reassuring that GOG apparently didn't intentionally mislead us and is at least trying to rectify the situation. Which may or may not be believable to various people, but I personally choose to trust them on this.

GameRager: I also trust them and agree that they are trying their best(or Enigmatic is.) to get us answers. I hope though that the purchase sales of this game have an effect, even a small one, on the anti-drm movement....and possibly the anti-shitty games movement as well. ;)

GameRager: Yes, but that's only if you remain pessimistic about things. Remember, publishers look at numbers first and foremost. If they see people buy a AAA nearly DRM free game then big things might happen for the anti-DRM crowd.

hedwards: I think a lot of the arguments have been more about trust and having been burnt by other companies in the past. Along with the fact that TW2 isn't a typical GOG game in that it's a brand knew game and doesn't really fit with the typical standards in place.

Plus, apparently they were unable to get approval to release it in Australia without censoring. That sucks, and I hope that they can fix the problem by having a patch available. In this case it's pretty clear that they didn't intentionally do it, I wager it's going to be a tremendous pain for them to have multiple releases with their current site.

Coelocanth: They have. Simple disc check on Dragon Age:Origins. Look what's on DA2. There's your answer, pessimistic or not.

GameRager: As for trust I think Gog should be considered an exception to the rule......unlike other sites/publishers they have usually been very good to us and therefore deserve a bit more slack and trust than others.

SylvesterInk: I'm not trying to be unreasonable here. This is a matter of my own principles. This is something I stand by rigidly, with any game. I am definitely a little disappointed that TW2:GOG was supposed to be "completely DRM free," but I understand that the way the industry is currently is what may influence this decision in the end. And if that decision does end up unfavorable to my principles, then I will have to take a pass on the game. I think this is a similar stance other naysayers may have about the topic as well.

And I also agree that TW2 looks to be a lot more promising than 90% of the RPGs that have come out in recent years. That's what's all the more annoying, because this is a game I WANT to support. I want to vote with my wallet on deeper games that focus on a great experience for PC gamers; Games that aren't afraid to have complexity and depth.

I do hope that it just turns out that the auto updater is similar to the GOG Downloader though. Yes, you do need to log on, but then you can download the patches same as you would download any game from GOG. That I'd probably be fine with. (Though I don't see that as being very likely. Why should one need to log on simply to patch a game?) Anyway, I'll just wait and see.

GameRager: One test case does not a standard make.

SylvesterInk: I'm not trying to be unreasonable here. This is a matter of my own principles. This is something I stand by rigidly, with any game. I am definitely a little disappointed that TW2:GOG was supposed to be "completely DRM free," but I understand that the way the industry is currently is what may influence this decision in the end. And if that decision does end up unfavorable to my principles, then I will have to take a pass on the game. I think this is a similar stance other naysayers may have about the topic as well.

Coelocanth: And yet you're hoping that this one test case will set a standard for publishers? Sorry, but that seems a bit naive to me. I'll remain pessimistic.

GameRager: Yes, but again I never meant to indicate that it would set a standard for publishers, but it might get the ball rolling in the right direction. Also, Gog/CDPR's whole anti-drm stance and all the press surrounding this might be just the boost we need on this front.

Coelocanth: Perhaps. Again, I remain skeptical. Very.

On a side note though, I'm intending to get the game from GOG, as this DRM is not really restrictive enough to deter me from buying. But I definitely understand and sympathize with someone like SylvesterInk, and I'm very disappointed with this 'no DRM' DRM.

GameRager: If this works out(big if, but still....) and the next possible CDPR title is fully DRM free what will be your stance on looking back at this and how it played out?

I hope I phrased this right.