DRM, GOG, and The Witcher 2: How One Lawsuit Shaped a Store’s Identity

Digital rights management (DRM) has been one of the most divisive issues in PC gaming for decades. For some publishers, DRM is a necessary shield against piracy. For many players, it is an intrusive layer that adds friction, hurts performance, and threatens long‑term access to games. Few stories capture this tension as clearly as the saga surrounding The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings, CD Projekt, publisher Bandai Namco, and the DRM‑free storefront GOG.

This article unpacks how a dispute over DRM removal led to a lawsuit, why GOG has doubled down on an anti‑DRM philosophy under its new (yet familiar) owner, and what all of this means for the future of digital game ownership.

The Witcher 2 and the DRM Dilemma

When The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings launched in 2011, it arrived at a time when DRM was widely seen as a default part of major PC releases. The game, developed by CD Projekt Red, had traditional publishing partners in different regions, including Namco Bandai (now Bandai Namco) in Europe.¹ As with many AA and AAA titles, DRM was initially used to reduce the risk of pre‑release leaks and early piracy.

Shortly after release, CD Projekt’s stance shifted from temporary protection to full player freedom. A patch removed DRM from the PC version of The Witcher 2 altogether. This move pleased many players but sparked serious friction with at least one publishing partner, leading to a legal confrontation.

Why DRM Was Added in the First Place

From a publisher’s point of view, DRM often serves two goals:

• Leak prevention before launch – Preventing early builds from spreading online ahead of release day.
• Short‑term piracy friction – Making it harder to distribute and play cracked copies in the crucial early sales window.

CD Projekt has previously acknowledged that it considered DRM a tool to guard against pre‑release leaks, not a permanent restriction on legitimate players. Once the game was out and the initial sales spike had passed, the developer no longer saw the same justification for keeping DRM in place.

Players vs. Protection: The Core Conflict

For many players, the DRM question is not abstract. It directly affects how they experience and preserve their games. Common complaints include:

• Performance stutters, longer load times, or crashes attributed to DRM layers.
• Online check‑ins that can block access when servers fail or shut down.
• Uncertainty about being able to reinstall and play years later.

The decision to strip DRM from The Witcher 2 aligned with this player‑first perspective. But it also put CD Projekt at odds with a partner focused on contractual obligations, regional rights, and commercial control.

Bandai Namco’s Lawsuit and the Fallout

The clash between CD Projekt and its European publishing partner over The Witcher 2 culminated in a court dispute. Namco Bandai argued that CD Projekt breached contractual terms related to distribution and platform versions, while CD Projekt pushed back on how those terms were interpreted.¹

Although the high‑profile aspect for players was the removal of DRM, the legal battle also touched on rights to distribute console versions in certain regions.¹ What mattered most to the community, however, was the symbolism: a publisher unhappy that a developer had taken the side of players by cutting DRM entirely.

What the Dispute Revealed About Priorities

The lawsuit underscored a fundamental divide in how different stakeholders view gaming rights:

• Developers and player‑oriented platforms often see long‑term goodwill and trust as more valuable than short‑term control.
• Publishers and rights holders frequently prioritize contractual security, sales windows, and the ability to enforce IP protection, even at the cost of player friction.

Even though CD Projekt eventually continued working with Bandai Namco on later projects, the case became a reference point whenever DRM controversies arose, especially in discussions around GOG’s identity as a DRM‑free storefront.

GOG’s DRM‑Free Mission

GOG (originally “Good Old Games”) emerged as a different kind of PC storefront. Rather than layering DRM on top of purchases, it adopted a straightforward promise: buy the game, download the installer, and keep it, even offline and even if the client disappears.

Over the years, this policy turned GOG into a niche yet important counterweight to platforms built around DRM‑tied libraries and online authentication. GOG’s catalog ranges from classics to modern releases, all sold without DRM constraints. That stance has been central to its brand, even when it limited which publishers were willing to participate.

How GOG’s Approach Differs from Other Stores

GOG’s model appeals strongly to players who worry about long‑term access to their libraries. That concern is not speculative: industry observers and legal scholars have repeatedly pointed out that many digital purchases are technically licenses rather than outright ownership.² If servers shut down or terms change, access can be limited or lost.

New Ownership, Old Philosophy: GOG’s Next Chapter

Recently, GOG changed hands, but in a way that feels more like a homecoming than a takeover. CD Projekt co‑founder Michał Kiciński, who was instrumental in the company’s early years, acquired the digital store from his former company. While the leadership has shifted, the messaging from the new owner has been clear: the anti‑DRM stance is not going anywhere.

In public comments, Kiciński has been sharply critical of heavy‑handed corporate decision‑making and the industry’s reliance on DRM. He has framed overly restrictive control as a form of short‑sightedness—prioritizing immediate control or perceived security at the expense of customer trust and long‑term value.

Why Double Down on DRM‑Free Now?

Doubling down on a DRM‑free model in 2020s PC gaming might seem risky. Piracy has not vanished, and the market is more competitive than ever. Yet several trends make GOG’s approach feel relevant:

• Backlash against always‑online requirements – Players have grown increasingly critical of games that require constant connectivity, even for single‑player modes.
• Concerns about server shutdowns – When publishers switch off servers or remove titles from stores, “purchased” games can become inaccessible.
• Regional and platform lock‑in – DRM often ties games to specific ecosystems, reducing player freedom to move or archive their libraries.

By emphasizing a simple, DRM‑free promise, GOG positions itself as a refuge for people who want to build a library they truly control. Kiciński’s renewed commitment is effectively a signal that GOG’s identity will not be diluted to chase short‑term growth.

Why Many Players See DRM as Anti‑Consumer

Publishers justify DRM by pointing to the real economic impact of piracy. Unauthorized copying can reduce sales, especially in regions where enforcement is weak. However, research and industry experience suggest that strict DRM comes with notable trade‑offs.

Practical Drawbacks of DRM

Commonly cited problems include:

• Performance impact – DRM layers can increase CPU overhead and cause stuttering or longer loading times, especially in PC games that already push hardware to the limit.
• Fragility – Changes in operating systems, hardware, or DRM servers can break older titles, leaving legitimate copies unplayable.
• Limited access rights – Permanently tying a game to an account or platform reduces the player’s ability to lend, resell, or archive.

From the consumer perspective, DRM often feels like paying full price for something that behaves more like a rental. This sense of diminished ownership is especially frustrating when pirated versions, stripped of DRM, sometimes offer a smoother experience than legal copies.

Evidence from Other Media Industries

Other digital media sectors have experimented with and often retreated from strict DRM. For example, much of the music industry moved away from DRM‑protected downloads in the late 2000s after evidence suggested that restrictions alienated buyers without definitively stopping unauthorized sharing.³ In video games, there has been no industry‑wide retreat, but there is a growing recognition that heavy DRM is not a cure‑all for piracy and can even damage a title’s reputation.

How DRM Shapes Digital Ownership

At the heart of the DRM debate is a simple question: when you buy a digital game, what do you actually own? Legally, most digital purchases confer a license—a permission to use the software under specific conditions—rather than full ownership of a copy in the traditional sense.²

DRM is one of the tools used to enforce those conditions. For example, it can limit installation counts, require periodic online checks, or restrict access to accounts in different regions. While these mechanisms give rights holders stronger control, they also make digital collections fragile.

GOG’s Alternative Vision

GOG’s DRM‑free approach offers a different model of digital ownership:

• You can back up installers and store them locally.
• You can reinstall without relying on client authentication.
• You are insulated, to some degree, from store closure scenarios.

This does not magically turn licenses into physical property, but it aligns the practical experience much closer to traditional ownership. If you maintain your own backups, your ability to play is far less dependent on the continued existence of a specific platform or licensing server.

Corporate Pressure vs. Player‑First Values

The Witcher 2 lawsuit and GOG’s renewed anti‑DRM stance highlight a recurring tension: corporate structures often treat control as a default objective, while players care primarily about reliability, fairness, and long‑term access.

When executives or legal teams treat DRM as a non‑negotiable requirement, they can make decisions that look rational on a balance sheet but irrational to the people actually buying and playing the games. That gap in perspective fuels many of the industry’s most heated controversies, from misjudged monetization schemes to always‑online single‑player releases.

Why a Player‑Centric Approach Can Still Make Business Sense

There is an assumption that being generous to customers is inherently bad for business. Yet examples from gaming and other digital industries suggest the opposite can be true:

• Platforms that prioritize user trust often enjoy stronger long‑term loyalty.
• Positive word of mouth and goodwill can sustain sales long after launch.
• Transparent, fair policies can differentiate a platform in a crowded market.

GOG’s decision to hold firmly to DRM‑free policies—even in the face of potential legal and commercial pressure—reflects a bet that trust and clarity are more valuable than restrictive control.

What Players Can Do: Practical Tips for a DRM‑Conscious Library

Regardless of how any one publisher or storefront behaves, players retain a surprising amount of influence over the future of DRM in gaming through their purchasing habits and expectations.

Building a More Resilient Game Collection

• Favor DRM‑free options when possible – Buying from stores like GOG or direct from developers who offer DRM‑free builds sends a clear market signal.
• Back up installers and keys – Keep local copies of DRM‑free installers and store keys in a secure password manager.
• Check DRM status before buying – Many community resources track whether a given game uses additional DRM beyond the platform itself.
• Support developers who advocate for fair access – Developers taking public stands against heavy DRM or harmful monetization benefit from vocal community backing.

Questions to Ask Before Purchasing

When evaluating a game or platform, consider the following:

• Can I play this offline, and under what conditions?
• Is my purchase tied to one ecosystem or account forever?
• What happens if this store disappears or my account is suspended?
• Does the game require additional third‑party launchers or DRM layers?

By asking these questions, players push the industry toward more transparent communication about how DRM works and what it means for long‑term access.

FAQ: DRM, GOG, and The Witcher 2

Is DRM always bad?

No. DRM is a tool. It can be implemented lightly or aggressively. Some forms of DRM are relatively unobtrusive and focused on launch‑window protection, while others significantly affect performance or long‑term access. The controversy is less about the concept itself and more about how it is used and how much it restricts paying customers.

Did removing DRM from The Witcher 2 hurt sales?

Publicly available data does not show a clear, direct causal link between removing DRM from The Witcher 2 and sales performance. The game was generally regarded as a commercial success by CD Projekt’s own reporting, and the series continued to grow, culminating in the massive success of The Witcher 3.⁴ The main fallout concerned contractual disagreements, not a proven collapse in revenue.

Can DRM actually stop piracy?

DRM can delay piracy and make unauthorized distribution more difficult in the short term, especially before and immediately after launch. However, most widely anticipated PC games are eventually cracked. This is why critics argue that heavy DRM primarily punishes legitimate buyers while offering only temporary protection for publishers.

Is GOG completely DRM‑free?

GOG’s core policy is that games sold on the platform do not require always‑online checks or third‑party DRM to function. You can download standalone installers and run them without the GOG Galaxy client. Some optional online features may still rely on external services, but the base games themselves are designed to be playable offline without DRM.

What does GOG’s new ownership change?

The ownership change brings GOG back under the control of a CD Projekt co‑founder who has publicly reaffirmed the store’s anti‑DRM philosophy. In practical terms, that means the platform is likely to continue prioritizing DRM‑free releases and player control, even if that limits certain high‑profile partnerships.