You can sign up to get a daily email of our articles, see the Mailing List page!
If you are a customer at GOG, a couple of weeks ago you probably received in your e-mail account a newsletter from them, regarding some changes in their legal agreements. Such changes apply to the Privacy Policy and others are related to the new GOG Wallet feature, but the third point is the most interesting one:
Quote3. Due to certain games that we’ll be launching in the future, we added some explanations about the legal requirements surrounding virtual item purchases.

Note: Bold emphasis is mine.

Of course, if you want to know more about it, you can enter here to check the changes. To quickly find them, you can use ‘Ctrl + F’ and then type the keyword ‘virtual’, and you’ll see the new clauses immediately.

image
In my personal case, I never got into these kind of games; I simply prefer to pay for a full game only once. Also, when I see the prices of some items, I can’t help but think: ‘Instead of buying this asset, I could be spending the money on another game from the store’. Though, if they start adding games like Robot Roller-Derby Disco Dodgeball, where you’re given items as a reward for your skills that you can sell later, then they have my curiosity. Plus, if you’re able to credit the price of your sold items into the Wallet, in that case they directly got my attention…

Which games do you think they will be adding? And also, what are your impressions about the incoming virtual items purchases? Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. We are currently affiliated with GOG, Humble Store and Paradox Interactive. See more information here.
The comments on this article are closed.
Liam Dawe 14 September 2016 at 9:54 am UTC
This is really murky waters, it will essentially allow games full of micro transactions on GOG.

It's probable there are a few already and GOG are just covering their backs legally.

QuoteVirtual items/currency and GOG Wallet funds are not covered by this section 6 and we cannot therefore offer refund, early exchange, money back guarantee or withdrawal rights regarding them.
So essentually their refund options don't apply to microtransactions.

Also
Quote6.17 Virtual Goods are digital items only with no cash-value or real world existence and cannot be ‘bought’, ‘sold’, gifted, transferred or redeemed, whether or not for other Virtual Goods, ‘real world’ money, goods, services or items of monetary value. Trading Virtual Goods is prohibited (unless you are specifically permitted to do so).
So no selling your virtually purchased goods, so it won't be like the Steam marketplace.

This is all to cover their own backs for in-game purchases essentially, nothing more by the sounds of it.
Ehvis 14 September 2016 at 10:12 am UTC
View PC info
  • Supporter
  • Top Supporter
I need to think whether this is funny or sad. So basically there was a huge problem with Armello with DLC as DRM not being possible. And now they are going to allow microtransactions, which is exactly the same sort of DRM. I think someone higher up must have done some calculations and decided that DRM free was not worth missing the boat on microtransactions entirely.
ripper 14 September 2016 at 11:24 am UTC
It depends on how microtransactions are implemented. If the fact that you bought a hat or a new map is saved to your save file, so even after the game servers are closed you can still install the game, copy over the save files and have everything you purchased, that's completely fine by me and it's DRM free. If the hat or a new map depends on whether the game server is still running and verifies your purchase, that's no longer DRM free. However, since these cosmetic purchases are often present in multiplayer games, and the multiplayer will often not work once the servers are down, the DRM free-ness might be a non-issue.

There are certain titles where you play offline and still have ingame purchases (e.g. buying new heroes in Kingdom Rush on Android, it's probably different in the PC version, so take it just as an example) - if those were tied to game server availability and you could not play the heroes without it (even though the whole game is offline), that would be a problem in my eyes and a DRM restriction. I would expect that such cases would be covered by providing a DLC/hero/map/item installer/activator in the GOG Library, so that you can install it any time in the future, without relying on any game servers.

What I want to say is that microtransactions are not inherently evil, it just depends on how people use them. For example, in certain games I used microtransactions to donate extra money to developers, because I liked the game and I got it cheap (or it was free to play). GOG proved recently in the Armello case that they're very pro-consumer. I would not expect any dirty tricks here with microtransactions. Of course, time will tell.
lucifertdark 14 September 2016 at 2:55 pm UTC
I have some games that include microtransactions, I just ignore them & play the games without any of the "superwonderfulcheapextrasthatyoumusthave".
Zelox 14 September 2016 at 3:19 pm UTC
Well I dont know how the DRM-Free thingy will work on in game items u can buy.
But if they can stay DRM-Free Im not bothered with it all.

And if gog goes DRM, well what can gog offer that steam doesnt?
Its just another steam store with less games.
I will probably go back to steam full time then.

And I dont mind microtransactions, if u dont like them u can just ignore them.
But its a nice way to support the devs, waste some money from your wallet, and get good looking stuff.
But ye, Im not a fan off pay2win, but I just ignor those games.
GustyGhost 14 September 2016 at 4:12 pm UTC
Funny you should mention Robot Roller-Derby Disco Dodgeball as I was just wondering in their Steam discussion on a DRM-free release how in game items would be handled.
Shmerl 14 September 2016 at 11:51 pm UTC
Sounds to me like support for some MMORPG like with in-game purchases (Star Citizen?). Never saw a point for paying for such items with real money. I'd rather buy another game indeed. Developers who want to have in-game economy, should use virtual money generated by in-game means (mining, crafting and so on). Requiring real money for that is poor taste. At least in case of Star Citizen you indeed can earn virtual money by in-game means. But they also allow using real money for that.


Last edited by Shmerl at 14 September 2016 at 11:53 pm UTC
Zelox 15 September 2016 at 9:13 am UTC
ShmerlSounds to me like support for some MMORPG like with in-game purchases (Star Citizen?). Never saw a point for paying for such items with real money. I'd rather buy another game indeed.

I dont want to defend star citizen here, just want to point out.
There is some limits to what you can purches with those credits, and there are also a limit on how mutch you can buy within the game. I dont know if this is stuff regarding in game item, like you can only buy certen items or if its limited to, lets say clothing, skins and stuff to your ship.
There could also be a limit to how mutch SC money you are able to buy for real money.

But if SC is pay2win, Im sad and Im off, dont want to play a game where you can just pay your way to the top.
If your read the wiki, SC states it wont be pay2win once it gets released, and I hope they stick to it.
At the moment it is, and I dont mind backers having a head start.


Last edited by Zelox at 15 September 2016 at 9:14 am UTC
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on Patreon, Liberapay or Paypal. We have no adverts, no paywalls, no timed exclusive articles. Just good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
Livestreams & Videos
Community Livestreams
  • Crawl About: „The Warlock of Firetop Mountain“
  • Date:
See more!
Popular this week
View by Category
Contact
Latest Comments
Latest Forum Posts