Then why hasn't GOG reversed it yet? How can it take months or even years to reverse it?

615 games in my library.

Only 42 in my wishlist, and some of them I'm questioning whether I really want them or not to get rid of them. Like do I really care about Disco Elysium for example even though I have like plenty of RPG games like it.

But still I haven't bought everything willy nilly on GOG in a while.

What specific products do they no longer sell that you want to buy? Afaik, the vast majority of what they sell most everyone can agree is DRM-free. Do you mean what they no longer sell the guarantee (the "product") that all single-player content is DRM-free? Or are you referring moreso to the problem with outdated installers?

To be fair, everyone on the forum loves whining, a case similar to Spider-Man. :P

When I buy a video game, what I'm looking for (beyond the obvious gameplay) is to:
1) be able to know that I will be able to fully enjoy the game in single-player completely offline (note: unlike others, I don't mind if GOG sells games that do not conform to that, including fully DRM games, as long as they clearly mark them as such, which currently they don't).
2) be fairly confident that the game will be kept up to date to the best of GOG's ability (note: I do not berate GOG if the developer neglects the game here vis-a-vis Steam (a.k.a. second-class citizens), but I do mind it very much when the game is updated on galaxy and weeks or months later is still not so in the offline installer)

Both of these were once more or less guaranteed by GOG. Now neither are guaranteed for any game I buy, so I buy none.

There's more, but these are my two main beefs nowadays.

Okay, thanks. To me, "services" might be a more appropriate term here than "products" (since personally I think of games themselves when hearing "products") but I guess what you're talking about is part of the product too and either can be called "sub-par" or "low-quality". Maybe nitpicky.

Fair enough, "services".

But in the digital era, it's hard to separate the two. I'd love to buy my video game "products" on Steam, if only they didn't come with the optional client "service".

Sure. (reading the second sentence, should "optional" be "non-optional" or "forced", since the Steam client is not optional? just wanna make sure I understand correctly)

Really? I did believe Steam Client was mandatory.

No mistake.

- You don't need the client to buy games (except free-to-play games).
- You don't need the client to download and install games (there is a command-line utility that allows you to do it, something like a primitive gogrepo).
- You don't need the client to play DRM-free games, of which there are thousands on Steam (and who cares about non-DRM-free games, right?)

See my reply to tfishell.

For GOG to get better.

For 11 years (and 1700+ games), I have not bought a single game outside GOG. It's not easy to make the jump.

I see the OP's point but I respectfully disagree.

GoG was founded before cloud computing and online was much of a thing. DRM (in that context) meant copy protection on a disc you played offline. DRM-FREE makes complete sense in that context.

Now... with a lot of things online or cloud based... clumping "DRM FREE" to include anything that needs internet access to play (e.g. GWENT) is somewhat ridiculous. Arguably, you could play NMS w/o internet I suppose... And, as more devs go the cloud/services direction there will more and more of these types of things where devs add more "fun things" (air quotes) via online services. Online services, by their very nature, must be secured, which, depending on your point of view, may constitute DRM.

IMHO, and I've thought about this for a some time now before the OP's post, GoG needs to redefine what it means to it's customers and, more importantly, that it needs to fit in the new world that is more online, cloud based, games as a service, and microtransactions. I play plenty of online type of games but those aren't on GoG (other than GWENT) because "online" is "DRM"; they also have various types of "microtransacations" which GoG was originally against. But, in the Free to play world I'd rather throw that at GoG knowing that they will still push DRM free games even if they support other services/transaction methods. Other sites don't care at all about DRM.

GoG can't dwell in the past. There's no future there and it'll die out eventually if it does. Some redefinition is needed.

Having said all that... I don't know why they don't continue to support the offline downloader. That seems to be a big deal with the community and it can't be that hard of a codebase to maintain.

Oh, well, It was more a rethoric and sarcastic question without real interest.

GOG used to fit into it by being the most unique and precious thing in this environment - an alternative. What good is it to anyone as yet another store that tries to do do everything the others do?

GOG can reinvent itself however it wants, they can call microtransaction the future, they can call alway online DRM-free, they can call mandatory client optional, but the idea we should just roll with it because "this is the way things are now" and "progress" and buzzwords and shit - now that's ridiculous.

In other words - You can shove your games as service up your cloud.

Exactly.
GOG was selling itself to potential customers as being different, against trends.
The moment they officially * abandon their sworn principles is the moment their designated "nishe" customers are going to vanish.
It's also the moment GOG is thrown into big water full of sharks called competition.
Because for a major amount of customers here there is no point in buying here apart from their unique nishe selling points.

* They are indeed doing it now. Just covertly. So not officially atm. They are atm testing how much their customers can bear before they draw the line. As evident majority still is in denial about how things stand. Minority, us, is trying to make some actual steps.