It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Walen: Note that this thread is not about the current downloader which already has open source alternatives, it's about potential future updater client which doesn't exist yet.
Post edited August 26, 2013 by shmerl
avatar
shmerl: As others pointed above, nothing prevents potential illegal resharers from using a separate bittorrent client.
Yes, and as I explained before, that is completely irrelevant point to what I was actually saying.

That argument is similar as saying that GOG could just as well share all GOG games as torrents to everyone (instead of restricting downloads only to those who have paid for the games), as anyone could pirate all GOG games from elsewhere anyway, if they really wanted.
Post edited August 26, 2013 by timppu
avatar
shmerl: As others pointed above, nothing prevents potential illegal resharers from using a separate bittorrent client.
avatar
timppu: Yes, and as I explained before, that is completely irrelevant point to what I was actually saying.

That argument is similar as saying that GOG could just as well share all GOG games as torrents to everyone (instead of restricting downloads only to those who have paid for the games), as anyone could pirate all GOG games from elsewhere anyway, if they really wanted.
Humble Bundle provide an option to download their games through bittorrent for those who bought them, since torrents provide a flexible downloading / resuming / repair out of the box. Anyone can probably pirate those if they want, so this kind of access is pretty loose since regular bittorrent protocol doesn't have an authorization layer. Anyway it's not the same as worrying about users uploading those games to bittorrent networks. So it's exactly like you said - HB know that pirating already happens anyway, so they decided that there is no point in not providing another convenient way to download the games for legitimate users.

My point is, it's lame to worry about making some client open source, because users might build a derivative with resharing capabilities, simply because infringers can reshare anyway if they plan to, no matter what the client does.
Post edited August 26, 2013 by shmerl
I just came across this website and have a feeling that interested GOG employees should take a look if they are interested in pursuing open source ventures or do not yet understand the big picture and wish to learn more.
Sounds great, I would like to see it on Github =)
This becomes more relevant now, with Linux support on GOG coming.
I may come out as harsh, given the topic, but I just wish for such a GOG client, open source or not I don't care. For Good Old Games not patched anymore it's all good here, but not for new and indie ones..

Mostly, because I am not gullible enough anymore to "trust" companies, they mean business and GOG as well.

I may be harsh as I said but this proved clear with a few of their latest experienced deals, like the "limited" keys for select games event coming over and over, and over again for several days and turns coming to me as false advertising and money grubbing. Whatever they may say, the goal is your wallet, I don't and won't be fooled, and just wish you too.
Post edited March 18, 2014 by koima57
avatar
timppu: Yes, and as I explained before, that is completely irrelevant point to what I was actually saying.

That argument is similar as saying that GOG could just as well share all GOG games as torrents to everyone (instead of restricting downloads only to those who have paid for the games), as anyone could pirate all GOG games from elsewhere anyway, if they really wanted.
avatar
shmerl: Humble Bundle provide an option to download their games through bittorrent for those who bought them, since torrents provide a flexible downloading / resuming / repair out of the box. Anyone can probably pirate those if they want, so this kind of access is pretty loose since regular bittorrent protocol doesn't have an authorization layer. Anyway it's not the same as worrying about users uploading those games to bittorrent networks. So it's exactly like you said - HB know that pirating already happens anyway, so they decided that there is no point in not providing another convenient way to download the games for legitimate users.

My point is, it's lame to worry about making some client open source, because users might build a derivative with resharing capabilities, simply because infringers can reshare anyway if they plan to, no matter what the client does.
Blizzard uses bittorrent technology in their downloaders too, and at least earlier in WoW's life it was possibe to extract the torrent file and run it through another client. Don't know if they've added some authentication medod since then. Actually, I don't even know if they use bittorent any longer, or if they've built their own thing since.

Of course, the applicable titles (World of Warcraft, Starcraft II, and Diablo III) requires an account with the title activated in order to play, so spreading the files is slightly less of an issue.
Post edited March 18, 2014 by Maighstir
avatar
Maighstir: Of course, the applicable titles (World of Warcraft, Starcraft II, and Diablo III) requires an account with the title activated in order to play, so spreading the files is slightly less of an issue.
It's likely while they feel confident to use it but still, it wouldn't explain why GOG wouldn't since they have openly said they understand that piracy will always exist and the way to fight it is to offer a better service.

Hopefully an optional client is the next big reveal that includes (or will) bittorrent technology.
Yes but please let the operational word be OPTIONAL - I have a speedy internet connection, am not impatient and have no download caps - translation...

One of the things that drew me to GoG was that I DIDN'T have to use a bloatware, Steam-like client. I can just click and go. One less point of access for baddies

GoG was just so SIMPLE - no added installation files, easy account setup that required minimal information (who was the one a week or so back that wanted CELL PHONE activation??? - my head almost exploded when I went to create a Yahoo email once, after a long time of not using "free" emails - and it asked for a freakin' phone number - are you kidding??? - guess whether or not I signed up). So ya (and I'm sure this is the case, as the current "client" IE Downloader is totally optional as well) if a client is in the works please make it optional!
Post edited March 18, 2014 by Ixamyakxim
avatar
shmerl: This becomes more relevant now, with Linux support on GOG coming.
avatar
shmerl: snip

A preferable approach is to make the client fully open source, in order to enable the community to review it, and to be sure it's to be trusted. GOG has nothing to lose from opening the client, only gain.

Of course if GOG would decide not to open it, then community would have to come up with open source alternative[..]

snip
Out of curiosity and due to lack of experience with games on Linux - are all commercial games available on Linux open source? If yes, does the community review them before playing them? If not, does the community not buy and play them?
avatar
HypersomniacLive: Out of curiosity and due to lack of experience with games on Linux - are all commercial games available on Linux open source? If yes, does the community review them before playing them? If not, does the community not buy and play them?
Most games aren't open because they have a specific need - they need to monetize on purchases. If the game would be completely open source, one could get it for free legally without need to pay. Other open source commercial projects use different business models to cover costs (like support licensing for example and so on). With games this is not really possible. Ideally, games can make the source open, while artistic parts (models, graphics, music etc.) closed, thus preserving the trust, while keeping the selling of final product to be theirs exclusively. Some games already do that by using open source engines, but they are still a minority. So ideally, yes. Any closed game you install is somewhat of a question trust wise. One can use Linux containers to isolate it from the rest of the system.

In case of installer or update client the situation in different. On one hand it's targeted for modifying the system, so concern is even higher than with the game itself, on the other hand GOG doesn't even monetize anything on it, so there is no reason to keep it closed at all. For the reference, Desura's update client is open source: https://github.com/lodle/Desurium

avatar
Ixamyakxim: Yes but please let the operational word be OPTIONAL - I have a speedy internet connection, am not impatient and have no download caps - translation...
I would imagine it should remain optional, like Desura allows you to download a full latest package, or to use their client to update the installation made through the client. GOG will have to do the same thing to preserve the DRM-free nature of the service. I'd imagine that updates can be provided as some incremental packages as well, to avoid redownloading the whole thing again for your DRM-free backup. You can just download the original release and any incremental update package and back them up.
Post edited March 18, 2014 by shmerl
avatar
nijuu: 2) gives you option to download & install for you but also keeps the installer intact (not exactly sure what happens to the desura one during this process) . This stops customer from wasting bandwidth having to redownload if they want a copy to backup etc.
Because web downloads were tacked on later, the Desura publishing system has two different provisioning mechanisms.

For the in-client downloads, publishers generate a build of the game which needs no installer (just unzip, make sure dependencies like DirectX are present, and run) and then run a Desura-provided tool to generate a series of MCF files. (Basically an in-house incremental archive format)

For the website downloads, they're just serving you a publisher provided installer, dmg, zip, .tar.gz, or whatever.