See? It says so right here! It's mine, no DRM.

Of course, the definition of DRM-free seems to vary from person to person. My definition is a lot like the one GOG uses. If I download a game, I can burn it on a CD, pop it into any computer capable of running it with the right dependencies installed, and start playing with all the same benefits anybody playing, be it legitimate users or pirates, are enjoying.

Now, I hadn't played Minecraft since before the piston update or so, and I've been playing for the last week. Earlier today, my internet decided to stop working for a while. Minecraft wanted me to log in. It behaved exactly as it did back in Alpha (I bought Minecraft back before it was co... err, I mean, back when $13 or so could be considered too much for the game in it's current state, instead of the [arguably] exorbitant $27 they ask for today) when I tried to play offline.

That is to say, it hung on the login screen for three minutes attempting to connect to something it unknowingly wouldn't be able to connect to for the next few hours. After it got bored of trying to make sure I am who I say I am, it let me go ahead and play anyway, but it decided I should have to use the (horrible) "Steve" skin for my character. It's not a big deal, no, and I can still play offline, but that's not really the point I'm trying to make here.

This dichotomy between the online singleplayer and offline singleplayer experience is an example of a definition of DRM-free that contradicts my idea of what that phrase is supposed to represent. It's ultimately an account-based game that almost reluctantly seems to include an offline mode of sorts. In it's current state, between the questionable price tag and use of the definition of DRM-free, I would very much expect a game such as Minecraft to be rejected from GOG for either the latter or possibly even both reasons.


Feel free to discuss the topic at hand here. I'd like to hear other GOG user's opinions on this matter. Not so much about how incredible/horrible Minecraft is, or how godly/unlikable Notch is. Myself, Minecraft quickly became one of my all-time favorite games, but I could go another five lifetimes without having to hear the word "notch" again, and there is no shortage of places to discuss either of those subjects any more than there is a shortage of server joining requests...

More importantly, the (insane) folks at the Minecraft forums have proven themselves rather hostile toward me over the years, so perhaps somebody here could enlighten me on how I may use my skin in offline mode, that I may have the solution to this problem in the future.

It is my understanding that there is a popular method that involves replacing the default "Steve" skin, but this would make all players with that skin look like your character from your perspective, and your character would look like "Steve" or whatever custom skin they used from their perspective, which is a less than ideal solution should I choose to play offline over LAN.

One option would be to have separate Minecraft installs, one for single player and one for multiplayer. You can point Minecraft to a different shortcut by following these steps. Any changes to the one version will not affect any others. You can also use these steps to have an install with mods and another without, etc.

My thoughts about Minecraft .

- i hate Notch
- i don't like that i have to log in every time i want to play
- i'm tired of " open Minecraft jar. , copy - paste " etc , why don't they create an installer / uninstaller
- some mods incompatible with other mods , texture packs , Forge , Modloader , MCPatcher , Optifine and vica versa ( and some mod creators don't give a shit about it )
- as Skunk posted : " the (insane) folks at the Minecraft forums have proven themselves rather hostile "

Hmm... not exactly what I wanted, but that is still useful to know all the same. Thank you.

Unless things have changed, you're probably going to be rather upset when you attempt to do that considering how upset you are at not being able to use your skin. The way Minecraft is set up if you do not authenticate you are named "Player" and not whatever appears when you do authenticate such as "Skunk". Now, when making a server there is an option to allow authenticated only players or to allow authenticated and non-authenticated players, so it is possible to play like this. However, everyone who attempts to play like this will be named "Player" (as you are playing offline lan and have not authenticated) so if you log onto the server and then a friend tries to log in, it will kick you out as you both share the same name.

It's possible to get around this, but the work around is rather annoying. You have to use what I think is called a hex editor and then, while the program is running, search and change a specific file from "Player" to whatever you want your name to be, but the name has to the same amount of letters as "Player". And this has to be done every time the game is started up. Forget to do it and you'll pop in as "Player" no longer having any of your stuff (as the game registers you as a different player) and perhaps kicking someone out if you have someone playing as "Player".

Tried playing with some friends, but it gets really old fast, especially when they want to just start the game and go. Not bad if you are only playing with one person and have internet connection, you can just authenticate your character so you have your name and have them be "Player".

Not sure what you mean here. Why would you go poking around inside Minecraft.jar? Unless you're trying to install a 3rd party mod, for which you can hardly blame Mojang (I'll happily agree that, from a software design perspective, Minecraft leaves a lot to be desired, but as a game I think it's excellent). Minecraft wasn't designed with modding in mind, but it's in the process of being redesigned to be more mod-friendly.

It's still like that? I had some optimism they'd cut some of that authentication stuff once it was out of beta. Not a lot of optimism, mind you, but still...

I used to play with my roommate over LAN in creative mode back before Survival had multiplayer, and had to mess with some authentication setting to get things to work right, as I recall. The last time I played on LAN with him, it was in Survival some time after the Nether was introduced and before you could go there (normally) in multiplayer. We were forced to play with the Steve skins and whatnot, which is really lame considering this game is supposed to be DRM-free, when it very clearly wants me to remind me that I should be playing with a login and active connection when both of our characters look like Steve. >_>

Well I believe it was while I was still in beta that I last tried. But I don't see how it would be any different, the only way I can think of them making it different would be if one was allowed to create a character (give it a custom name and what not) but there is no such option as of patch 1.2.3.

How do you play the game if the verification server is down ?

Lol, why is that?

I tried MC once, it was some pirated beta a year or two ago. Never ran into any DRM issues >_>

You play offline. Minecraft asks you if you want to play offline if it can't authenticate on the servers. So you're restricted to single player mode, unless you set up a server which doesn't rely on Mojang's servers (it's possible but don't ask me how).

Thanks .

Now i'm pissed off because of some modder . Block ID conflicts , and why do i have to install their mods directly into the minecraft.jar ?
（￣へ￣）

I have never played Minecraft, so enlighten me... you can't just click to play offline and have it work normally in singleplayer?

A lot of games want you to play online with an account but operate fine without it, like most EA games or even an indie such as Crayon Physics.

Well, I believe it's only temporary, since Mojang's team is developing a proprer APi that will enable modders and mod users to - hopefully - encounter less hassle and less incompatibilities. But so far I don't think there's a release date for that API...