One should never they *never* in this regard. But I guess that World of Warcraft will probably take very long to come to GOG because it is so well known already and offering it on GOG would not make it any bit more attractive (and it is an MMO).

:-P

But MMO can run on your own server, or a powerful enough PC.
http://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-make-a-WoW-Private-Server-in-15-minutes/

It is just companies like their DRM and spread the lie that MMO and other online games cannot be DRM free.

As much as it pains me, command and conquer generals + zero hour. the official server has been shut down and all games earlier than it also does not depend on drm to operate at all but i suppose EA must have those few games to pad their library with which is a shame really.

batman arkham (franchise)
dragon age (franchise)

because the last game of dragon age and batman arkham (inquisition and knight) use denuvo drm. also dragon age is a franchise of EA, so they want you to use origins.

also final fantasy (franchise) because square enix doesn't know what is drm-free (the best they can do is don't use square enix drm... like steam or app store (for mobile)).

This thread should not exist at all.

My wishlist : all PC games to be realeased on GOG.

Praise Gog my good followers!

System Shock! Oh, wait...

The Arkham franchise is owned by WB, which is here. Denuvo antitamper is not a DRM, and the Securom (or whatever the actual DRM was) should be easily removed. Hell, I'd love for them to remove the DRM but leave Denuvo inplace and sell it on GOG, just so I can laugh a bit more ;)

Dragon Age does seem a bit less likely, not due to denuvo but due to the DLC mess (for the older titles) or EA pushing for Origin with the newer one. I still hope that the older ones will be released here in a gold package that contains everything, but time will tell whether that will happen or not.

DRM can be removed from games so that is no reason to think that said game will NEVER be released on GOG. Many of the games people here are suggesting will NEVER come to GOG could well come here, so don't belong on the list.

denuvo was put to avoid removing the DRM, what purpose leave that if releasing on gog?
Also, personally I consider it a form of DRM, a check for a publisher that does not trust its customers. No customer starts doing reverse engineering, but some customers would like to use wine to play some games or use a mod... denuvo, if you ask me, is worst than DRM.

The same that any digital signature has. To ensure that the file is the one it should be.

Hm, maybe we should ask GOG to stop signing the installers. It is a check that the installer hasn't been tampered with, which means they don't trust us not to tamper with them.

As for wine and mods, not sure how well wine plays with denuvo (would depend on what kind of checks denuvo does, and whether wine plays nice with said tests), while mods would depend on mod implementation. A mod that can be added as a stand alone file (see Shadowrun Returns UGC or The Sims extra content for examples) wouldn't care about denuvo, while mods that required you to change the game's files would. So I do see denuvo as a means to create games with better mod support instead of worse.

But I may be an optimist in that regard.

you don't understand what is denuvo. It's not what you think.
denuvo is not a simple signature, uses an encryption system, is a signature control, continuous monitoring and forced.
one thing is to check the integrity of the installer, another thing is to check, every time, if the software is still intact.
if they had used such a system in the past, it would have been very difficult to adapt some games to modern systems (It is something that should not be underestimated).
Furthermore, there is no way of knowing if they entered a control software (or something similar) maintaining denuvo.
I do not underestimate, and I do not trust, the creators of securom.

Denuvo, does not allow you to know what's really inside the executable (.exe for windows).

Denuvo is a method of ensuring that a file (or collection of files) are not modified. It does use multiple methods of verifying the integrity, as well as multiple times when it does the checks, but it remains an integrity checker. The inability to check the contents of the protected file is a byproduct of said integrity checking (and I'm not sure if the encryption/obfuscation can be disabled by the one implementing Denuvo).

What was it that you posted in another thread about a knife not being evil? Denuvo is a knife. It's an instrument that can be used to do specific work, though it can be misused to do other stuff as well. So no, Denuvo isn't evil. Denuvo is there to make sure files are not tampered with, which doesn't make it incompatible with DRM-Free software.

Btw. what happened to hash checksums (SHA-2 or the like or even simpler)? I thought they are pretty safe as far as safety goes. An integrity checker doesn't need to be more complicated than simply calculating a checksum and comparing. Don't really understand why we need a whole new product at all for it.

While hashes are usually a good method, it's not that easy to have the hash embedded in the file to be checked. Digital signatures were a method to bypass that limitation, but they couldn't prevent the program from being executed if they failed. So no, while we didn't "need" a whole new product for all that, it did cover a few things previous implementations didn't.