Time4Tea: There is a clear pattern of continual erosion of GOG's core principles.

Icewolfnector: I didn't know some of the offline installers never got updated

On a somewhat more positive note, I wanted to post a little update to that offline installer list to keep it up to date.
Vampyr a Trine Enchanted Edition seem to have gotten their updated installers. (see attachments)

Icewolfnector: First, I wanted to say thanks to the original poster here, I didn't know some of the offline installers never got updated and the feeling that CD Project is trying to erode their promise of DRM free games is definitely worrying. Sadly game updates even for the galaxy versions of some games compared to steam often enough seem to be a problem on GOG, which stopped me from getting some games here that I actually wanted to buy.

Icewolfnector: First, I wanted to say thanks to the original poster here, I didn't know some of the offline installers never got updated and the feeling that CD Project is trying to erode their promise of DRM free games is definitely worrying. Sadly game updates even for the galaxy versions of some games compared to steam often enough seem to be a problem on GOG, which stopped me from getting some games here that I actually wanted to buy.

On a somewhat more positive note, I wanted to post a little update to that offline installer list to keep it up to date.
Vampyr a Trine Enchanted Edition seem to have gotten their updated installers. (see attachments)

Lodium: Thanks for the info
i thougth the the bugs issue was dropped due to the refunds
i didnt know that was still going on

Zrevnur: I dont know what you mean with 'the bugs issue' but I have seen no evidence of the Polish consumer protection office thing having been dropped. Some links:
https://old.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/kv28mq/cd_projekt_examined_by_polish_consumer_protection/
https://www.dsogaming.com/news/cd-projekt-red-uses-dmca-to-shut-down-twitter-accounts-sharing-stolen-source-code-of-its-games/#more-151546
Far as I remember this Polish office sort of gave CDPR a deadline (maybe may 2021 - dont remember for sure) for improving CP2077.

Lifthrasil: Courts don't start cases. You need someone to sue GOG for false advertising first. Someone with enough money to fight such a law-suit through multiple instances. GOG was careful enough not to promise 100% DRM-free anymore. They just say, that GOG is the home of curated DRM-free games. Promising "a selection of DRM-free games". ... Which they do. A selection of the games on GOG is still DRM-free.

Moreover they promise: "Here, you won't be locked out of titles you paid for, or constantly asked to prove you own them - this is DRM-free gaming." ... which seems to promise completely DRM-free gaming, right? No, it doesn't. It shows what their definition of 'DRM-free' is in legalese:
1. you won't be locked out of titles you paid for. - Which means DRM on Gwent is OK and also extra content (DLCs) and so on can be locked behind DRM. You still don't get locked out of the base game you paid for. So from a legalese standpoint GOG is in the clear.
2. you won't be constantly asked to prove you own the games - which leaves the door open for occasionally asking you to prove you own the game. As long as it isn't constantly. ... I.e. if you read this with a legal goggle, all this sentence does is promise not to use always-online DRM.

Nowhere does GOG promise nowadays not to use online-registration or to keep all parts of all games DRM-free. They have carefully reworded their 'about us' page towards becoming a DRM-agnostic platform. That makes suing them very difficult.

The only thing that might still be seen as false advertising is the promise, that Galaxy is optional. Which is still there on the 'about us' page. However, even there they removed the '100%'. They don't promise anymore that Galaxy will always be 100% optional. So it's a grey area. They still call it optional, but for many multiplayer-games and some single-player content it isn't. So if you have the funds and time to sue them over false advertising, this might be an angle. But expect a long fight.

There are some other things they promise that look like false promises, because they imply a quality of service that just isn't true. But if you look closely at the wording, everything is so vague that it won't be persecutable in front of a court.

Lifthrasil: And so on. Their lawyers did a good job re-wording their promises in a way so that they don't actually mean anything.

Ragmand: This is an idea I support, and have been following myself for a few months. I just want to get everyone's opinion on this: If I already have wallet funds, does spending them count as breaking a boycott? There's a lot of good sales on right now, and when I refunded CP2077 I requested wallet funds because I was duped into believing that it would get me my refund faster (spoiler: it didn't). I have a big enough backlog of already purchased games that it wouldn't majorly affect me either way.

mrkgnao: I don't think that would count as breaking the boycott. That money is already in GOG's coffers and, assuming more than 30 days have passed from the purchase, you can no longer refund it. Might as well use it.

Moreover, if you use the funds, ~70% will go to the developers/publishers, rather than 100% remaining with GOG if you don't. So you really should use them.

mrkgnao: I don't think that would count as breaking the boycott. That money is already in GOG's coffers and, assuming more than 30 days have passed from the purchase, you can no longer refund it. Might as well use it.

Moreover, if you use the funds, ~70% will go to the developers/publishers, rather than 100% remaining with GOG if you don't. So you really should use them.

DarkTl: Ouch. I wasn't aware about many extremely shady things mentioned in this thread. So much for being "good guys" who "care about players", like they are often presented on twitter.

Well, since GOG becomes nothing special little by little, I might as well switch to steam for all my future purchases.