Psychological science entered a crisis when a lack of reproducibility, outright fraud, and the discovery of the prevalence of questionable research practices converged. Since then, funders, scientists, and the public have proposed or even demanded open science as a remedy to increase the accessibility, transparency, and reproducibility/replicability of psychological research. While these practices are generally perceived as positive and laudable, they often require increased effort on the part of the researchers, at least if pursued in a meaningful way (cf. FAIR principles). At ZPID, our mission is to promote open science practices by providing free-of-charge tools that reduce the burden on researchers while ensuring quality standards. One part of my talk will cover some of these tools (e.g., P-TOS, PreReg, PsychArchives), their adoption, and also their weaknesses. Another part will look beyond ZPID to developments in the scientific publication system, such as Registered Reports and PCI Registered Reports. While I will occasionally present empirical data, this talk will mainly reflect my subjective perspective as a former researcher who has moved into a research infrastructure position at an Open Science Institute.