Hitman - Game of the Year Edition was released on GOG on September 22 but was shortly faced with an avalanche of review bombs from users. This is because even if the main story and bonus missions were playable offline, an internet connection was required for other modes like Escalation missions, Elusive Targets and Contracts as well as to get features like unlocking new equipment, mission scores and starting locations. Players associated this online requirement as a form of DRM and, by extension, anti-GOG.

As a response to the backlash, GOG decided to remove the game from its online storefront two days ago, stating that "we shouldn’t have released it in its current form". However, this does not necessarily mean that the delisting will be a permanent situation as GOG also mentions that it is in talks with developer IO Interactive.

Below is the full statement on the issue from a GOG representative:

Dear Community,

Thank you for your patience and for giving us the time to investigate the release of HITMAN GOTY on GOG. As promised, we’re getting back to you with updates.

We're still in dialogue with IO Interactive about this release. Today we have removed HITMAN GOTY from GOG’s catalog – we shouldn’t have released it in its current form, as you’ve pointed out.

We’d like to apologise for the confusion and anger generated by this situation. We’ve let you down and we’d like to thank you for bringing this topic to us – while it was honest to the bone, it shows how passionate you are towards GOG.

We appreciate your feedback and will continue our efforts to improve our communication with you.

Source

 

[JuanMena]

People used the Internet to *negatively backlash a game that needs Internet?

 

[sarkwalvein]

Well, yes. The same way you would use your voice to tell somebody to shut up in a place where silence should be kept.

 

[masagrator]

People used the Internet to *negatively backlash a game that needs Internet?

...and it shouldn't need. It's just an aritificial limitation.

 

[JuanMena]

...and it shouldn't need. It's just an aritificial limitation.

Well yes, just something ironic.

 

[Deleted member 471305]

Good.

 

[ChiefReginod]

I'm happy with this. Losing one game from isn't a huge price to pay for restoring user faith in the platform.

 

[KleinesSinchen]

Interesting. After all the "We will not tolerate review bombing and remove any reviews that violate our terms" announcements on GOG forum, they suddenly admit that releasing a game with intrusive DRM (always online) on a platform that states "No DRM!" wasn't the smartest idea ever.

Let's hope such a thing doesn't repeat. The ONLY reason why I bought games on GOG (normally no physical media is a big no-no for me) is that they oppose the trend to more and more DRM garbage. If they weaken their policies concerning DRM and start discussing what counts and what doesn't count as digital restrictions... they might just close their site.

 

[masagrator]

Interesting. After all the "We will not tolerate review bombing and remove any reviews that violate our terms" announcements on GOG forum, they suddenly admit that releasing a game with intrusive DRM (always online) on a platform that states "No DRM!" wasn't the smartest idea ever.

That's bullshit. You didn't need to be online to play this game. Just not all features were there if you were offline (which was making game harder and less exciting to play).

 

[KleinesSinchen]

That's bullshit. You didn't need to be online to play this game. Just not all features were there if you were offline (which was making game harder and less exciting to play).

Thanks detailed assessment (in very friendly words) of my opinion. I really like friendliness like this.

That's what I meant with "Not starting a discussion what counts and what doesn't count as digital restriction." If some features aren't available DRM-free, the product isn't DRM-free.

What I read about this game:
Parts of single player gameplay are locked behind online. In other words: Less than 100% of what the game offers for single player mode are available offline. That was the reason for the backlash. Doesn't seem so BS, when GOG admitted the problem and removed the game from their store...

 

[FAST6191]

I can't help but feel this is one of those "whoever wins, we all lose" situations.

GOG and claiming review bombing where there was basically none and with a game in ways contrary something that could be expected to be fairly core to... their site's mission statement and presumably client base. They have taken some serious dings in years past and this is another in the list, for something that was not even "rock and a hard place" type situation.

Equally letter of the law wise (I fully agree not even close to being within the spirit of at least the mission) they did have a leg to stand on as it was never the less playable with bonus features at best gated. As said bonus features (same missions, new starting locations, bonus NPCs to attack for rewards... you can do that with a NES style password never mind a file upload repository) would have been if not trivial then "$1000 to this mod maker to do it" territory (might have even enhanced the game as you get some kind of community features that expand scope of things and ensure the cream of the crop is made available).

 

[masagrator]

Thanks detailed assessment (in very friendly words) of my opinion. I really like friendliness like this.

That's what I meant with "Not starting a discussion what counts and what doesn't count as digital restriction." If some features aren't available DRM-free, the product isn't DRM-free.

What I read about this game:
Parts of single player gameplay are locked behind online. In other words: Less than 100% of what the game offers for single player mode are available offline. That was the reason for the backlash. Doesn't seem so BS, when GOG admitted the problem and removed the game from their store...

It's BS your "always online" statement. Always online means that game cannot be played at all without being connected to their servers. Which is BS.

 

[eyeball226]

This is good news. Whether IOI plan to patch the game (unlikely I admit) or not, the game in its present form really shouldn't have been on there. Removing it for now was the only good outcome.

The best ending would be IOI seeing the light and patching the game to work better offline on all platforms. After all, it's a 5 year old game that is two sequels later at this point. Hitman 2016 is no longer running as a live service game so they might as well EoL it with a final patch.

Well yes, just something ironic.

Wow, you should let Alanis Morrissette know! It's about as ironic as any of the other examples in that song.

 

[raxadian]

The game must have been cracked a lot to get rid of the online requirement . If I wanted to be online to play offline games I would buy stuff in the Epic Store.

 

[The Catboy]

I hope they keep it off and continue to stick to their DRM-Free status

 

[guisadop]

hopefully IO patches the game. I mean, it's a 5 year old game, it deserves an offline patch

 

[Jiehfeng]

All I could picture from this is a live conference where the audience throws a bunch of fruits at GOG and they say "ok ok, we give up, please stop, we take it back..."

 

[FAST6191]

hopefully IO patches the game. I mean, it's a 5 year old game, it deserves an offline patch

I don't necessarily disagree, certainly would applaud hacker efforts to that end if the happened, however it can't have escaped your notice the industry has been in bit of a rerelease/rework/rehash cycle for the last... quite some time.

 

[guisadop]

I don't necessarily disagree, certainly would applaud hacker efforts to that end if the happened, however it can't have escaped your notice the industry has been in bit of a rerelease/rework/rehash cycle for the last... quite some time.

for sure, and that makes me very sad. especially since so many of these rehashes are actually more like demakes than remakes or remasters :\

 

[the_randomizer]

Man, I've never seen a digital storefront back down and fold faster than Superman on laundry day


All this could have been avoided, and yet they were IO Interactive's literal kiss ass, forced to keep the online DRM requirement.