Of course, I can also see why people who otherwise oppose DRM would prefer just to have an external server handle things, instead of having to set up port-forwarding. When key features of your game are tied to a server that could be turned off in the future, I can see how people interpret this as DRM. The soul of GoG lies in how games purchased now can be played just as easily into the future, no matter which servers get shut down. That is how you get multiplayer gaming that is truly DRM-free. Sort of like the LAN set-up, but more of a WAN setup. Online gaming can be done without this, but the solution involves fiddling with router settings (which may not be possible in, say, public spaces), and does not allow for 3rd party servers (unless they are set up privately). I get it: the most prevalent type of DRM in gaming is a game phoning home to check that the game, or some of its features, are allowed to be used. Even when you try to explain it, they still don't want to understand why that isn't DRM. It's remarkable when you see."GOG lies about DRM!" and they reference the part where GOG tells you that "for the multiplayer version of the game you must go online" as proof of the DRM. ) As if you could have multiplayer offline.! If you had a LAN setup, you could do it, but most people don't use a LAN these days. Waltc: I've been shocked to see people who think multiplayer requiring the Internet is DRM.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |