Honestly, going for the DRM free option over just not buying a game is a better choice (assuming the choice exists). If everyone opposed to DRM simply stopped buying games, it wouldn't do much to change the publisher's opinions, since the lower sales would mean higher piracy percentages (as in the number of units sold is lower, but the number of pirated copies remains the same, therefor a larger percentage of the game is pirated). Additionally, what if everyone opposed to DRM didn't buy a game simply because of the DRM and that led the publisher/developer to consider that game a failure, even though it was the greatest game ever made? They'd stop making games like that, which only hurts the gaming population in the end.

The absolute best solution to the problem is really also the simplest: don't pirate games, problem solved.

Of course, but people looking at this do have ways have ways of controlling for DD size when looking at sale numbers. Yes overall strong sales will support that DRM doesn't matter, but strong sales of the DRM-free version show that people do care about it and would be an extra support for not needing it/getting rid of it. Now you're right that the DRM is usually easy to get around for pirates and thus even for consumers who did buy the game legally they thus have a way around it too, but many consumers won't take the risk of downloading cracked copies either legally or for perceived/real safety reasons. Buying DRM-free is simply another way of supporting a good cause that helps everyone, not just those who are technically knowledgeable or willing to get cracked versions.

This is why you boycott buying and also let the developer and publisher know why. Some people don't understand that, I guess, and so they respond to anti-DRM complaints with "Shut up and go away" or "Shut up and accept it" (this comment is not aimed at anyone in particular). But just going ahead and buying anyway sends the wrong message as well (i.e that these DRM schemes are a-okay).

Obviously, if there's a DRM free option available that's the way to go. Which is what I'm doing. But I'm also letting CDP know why I'm not buying their retail version and how I feel about the decision to use this type of DRM on the retail game.

Is the Enigmatic T awesome? yes, yes he is. :)

I was thinking in terms of risk of piracy, i.e. the DRM free version will be out there either way and the overall sales is what matters. I see what you mean though, high GOG sales will show a lot of people specifically want DRM free.

I kind of think that line of thinking will backfire though, since the versions that use DRM will sell more than GOG does almost surely. One of the reasons I don't bother fighting DRM is that Steam shows most customers just don't care about it. When people hear limited activations I think they get a little riled, but actual activation or tying the game to an account is a non-issue for the vast majority of customers. Shit, when Bioware announced Dragon Age 2 would use online DRM a ton of people on their forum THANKED them for getting rid of the disc check. Crazy!

Don't get me wrong, I support DRM free. I am a big supporter of GOG not only for DRM free games but also because I like downloading a simple exe file rather than using a client and account. In the end though with new games it's pretty pointless to swim against the grain... some kind of online DRM, likely account-based, is here to stay. Sales of The Witcher 2 on GOG is not going to change that.

Statisticians who know what they are doing will take into account size of the DD or retail when comparing numbers. :) I think by itself the Witcher 2 won't change DRM, but look at music, all DRM-free now from Apple and other digital retailers. There is reason to hope. I think some DRM systems will be around for resell/rental reasons and of course for multiplayer you need to be online anyway, but I think DRM-free will (slowly) increase across the market. As more things offer DRM-free and its shown that it doesn't matter or impact sales and therefore adding DRM does nothing but cost you money, most companies won't want to include a DRM scheme. It does have precedent. Call me an optimist, but there you have my prognostication.

No kidding. I thought to myself "Are these the same people that pissed and moaned like I did about the DRM on ME1?"

Hell, I gave them the benefit of the doubt after they reassured us no SecuROM (misleading at best. Lying at worst) and everything would work out just fine. Had problems with... the DRM on the first day. Should have stuck to my guns, but I am the type that will try something before condemning it.

There's a huge difference between software and music, not only in the product but also in the target markets. Given Steam and Xbox Live's success I do not see games being tied to accounts and DRM going anywhere. You're free to hope, naturally, but I wouldn't keep my hopes up.

Apple was also successful before introducing DRM-free music. That didn't stop them from switching to DRM-free and it started small there - selling plus tracks, in fact you had to pay extra for "plus" music. There are really no DRM-free alternatives to Steam and XBox-live. They have no DRM-fee competition (GOG is small and a niche market player at the moment).

Target markets is a problem since the gaming market enriches for the piracy-sector as well. That said, the rise of casual gaming should change this. As computer gaming becomes more mainstream, the target audience will broaden. I'm not saying that the rise of casual gaming doesn't come with it's own drawbacks of course, but it should reduce piracy rates in the computer game sector since most people barely know how to operate their computer let alone pirate. Just as digital downloads of movies and e-books also become more mainstream, they should go DRM-free as music did. As more digital media goes mainstream and DRM-free that will put pressure on gaming to go so as well. I'm not saying this will happen overnight, but that to me is the trend. Remember before the music industry went DRM-free, they put some horrific DRM on their media too.

Yes there are differences in all of these digital products, but not enough and not in areas that will change the basic economics of the situation. Developing and adding new DRM systems that haven't been cracked yet costs money - a lot of money in fact. If they aren't effective in doing what they are designed to do and don't help sales enough to compensate, then companies will drop DRM systems in order to increase their profit and not piss off consumers who will start having choice between DRM-free and DRM games. So basic economics and profit motive should, ironically, be the end of DRM.

Apple was using the ITMS as a way of damaging competing portable music players. Anybody that wanted to hear their purchases from the ITMS at that quality had to either stick to their computer or buy an iPod. Worse was that as things grew there were more and more exclusives that could only be had through discs or the ITMS.

I don't get the hate, GOG is charging the same price worldwide for a brand new game with no DRM. I honestly don't give a crap why DRM exists on other versions, even it's slightly due to hypocrisy (and I'm not saying it is). I don't want to save 5-10 bucks so damned bad I'm going anywhere else for this one.

Damn, there's so many reasons to forgo some beer and buy TW2 from GOG I'm having trouble summing it up, ultimately everyone is going to have to see it for themselves, make the GOG version crucify the sales of the other versions and send a giant middle finger to EA and Ubisoft, that's what i say!

I'm confused ... are you writing this in support or against my argument? Everything you wrote is true, but reinforces my argument that the music industry went from selling products with an almost territorial DRM to one that now sells its wares completely DRM-free. But you wrote it as though it were counter to my argument, so I'm confused. I guess I'll reiterate and expand:

iTunes was a DRM service with an iTunes specific DRM. That's absolutely true and in fact you can blame the music industry for Apple's growth. They demanded DRM, Apple smiled, did it, and took well advantage of it to grow huge. As it grew, Apple started offering DRM-free tracks as plus tracks from select publishers that it managed to convince to do it, and now all music is DRM-free. Other digital download services are as well and digital download services sell more music than retail which I believe is also all completely DRM-free (I think).

So the point still stands that from a starting point of there being DRM, some of the DRM quite strong, digitally downloaded music is all DRM-free now. I can do whatever I want with music downloaded from iTunes or any other digital download service. That's the salient point. The rise of DRM-free products happened with music, it will happen with other media because it makes economic sense. As soon as Steam gets real competition from a DRM-free service or begins to loosen up its own restriction, the end will be nigh for DRM. GOG and TW2 are the tip of the iceberg, the very beginning of the trend to me. It's not even necessary, though I hope it happens to show consumer preference, that the DRM-free versions sell better, but rather it will become irrefutable proof that the companies are wasting huge amounts of their and their stockholder's money on a system that doesn't work. They'll be better off making more profit by not using DRM and not loosing customers to DRM-free options.

Eh, it was more of a footnote that Apple ditched DRM when at some point after it had established itself as a monopoly, and before the DoJ was starting to nose around about why they were using their position to hurt the competition.

Some people want a box, especially when they made it so deluxe.

I'm probably going to sound like a complete arsehole now. If you really want the collectors edition then buy it. GOG only cares about the sales on GOG.