It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionDear GOG, what about Galaxy?(74 posts)(74 posts)
(74 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
This is my favourite topic
Posted July 02, 2021
high rated
avatar
AB2012: There would probably be much less anti-Galaxy sentiment if Galaxy were an actual enhancement to offline backup installers, instead of consistently being at the expense of them.
avatar
WinterSnowfall: Yeah, this is pretty much the main issue, I think.

I only have a bone to pick with Galaxy because it has been responsible for holding back the release of Linux versions for some games (due to the developers not wanting to "just drop achievements" out of their game, because there is not Linux client that can support them). No client, no release, no offline installers...
The problem is the "client" gaming doesn't exist in some separate dimension where it doesn't influence people who simply don't use clients. The "don't like it - don't use it" argument doesn't hold water when gaming industry is being shaped for everyone by clients and all crappy "features" that come with them and the helpless "client mentality" it bred among gamers who can't now even imagine installing a game on their own. When people who love clients say "don't like it don't use it" what they really mean is "shut up and let us steamroll all over your hobby".

DRM, loot-boxes, tv ads in games, pointless achievements over real replay value - all that crap stems from the "client mentality" of being so used to playing everything with an online connection and a pointless program tracking and transmitting your private activity to the whole world that the alternative starts to seem bizarre or downright unacceptable to the masses.
Posted July 02, 2021
avatar
Alexim: The few official messages that have leaked here and there spoke of work slowly progressing, but it's clear that the bigwigs have drastically cut funding for Galaxy, probably following the fiasco of Cyberpunk 2077.

Even in the documents leaked from the Apple/Epic Games trial, delays with Galaxy are mentioned.
But... if they abandoned funding of Galaxy as well, what are they actually funding?
The site has been a wreck for years, features have been cut nearly everywhere... is the money all being syphoned for CP2077 refunds? :P (Only this las bit was a joke, the others are -imo- concerning)
Posted July 02, 2021
avatar
Breja: DRM, loot-boxes, tv ads in games, pointless achievements over real replay value - all that crap stems from the "client mentality" of being so used to playing everything with an online connection and a pointless program tracking and transmitting your private activity to the whole world that the alternative starts to seem bizarre or downright unacceptable to the masses.
Unfortunately, yes, you are right. In itself a client needn't be a bad thing, but considering the state of the industry today it will most likely also include some of the following: telemetry, advertising, in-app purchases, DRM, some form of gambling etc. Which is why I don't use clients, of course. Still, some people only play for the multiplayer experiences - you'd be surprised how many, especially from the younger generations - and in this case they just want something that works. Imagine yourself trying to explain to a kid these days he has to setup some form of VPN and play his games via LAN "emulation" in order to avoid the domination of the industry by greedy corporate overlords. I guarantee he'd laugh in your face :P.

avatar
Breja: The problem is the "client" gaming doesn't exist in some separate dimension where it doesn't influence people who simply don't use clients.
This (what I mentioned above) is also a reality that very much exists on top of our DRM-free "I just want the offline installers" countermovement.
Post edited July 02, 2021 by WinterSnowfall
Posted July 02, 2021
low rated
avatar
WinterSnowfall: Unfortunately, yes, you are right. In itself a client needn't be a bad thing, but considering the state of the industry today it will most likely also include some of the following: telemetry, advertising, in-app purchases, DRM, some form of gambling etc. Which is why I don't use it, of course. Still, some people only play for the multiplayer experiences - you'd be surprised how many, especially from the younger generations - and in this case they just want something that works. Imagine yourself trying to explain to a kid these days he has to setup some form of VPN and play his games via LAN "emulation" in order to avoid the domination of the industry by greedy corporate overlords. I guarantee he'd laugh in your face :P.
Duh, that's just how gaming is these days. Get with the times, grandad! :P

(/sarcasm)
Posted July 02, 2021
high rated
avatar
WinterSnowfall: I only have a bone to pick with Galaxy because it has been responsible for holding back the release of Linux versions for some games (due to the developers not wanting to "just drop achievements" out of their game, because there is not Linux client that can support them). No client, no release, no offline installers...
Indeed. I'm no Linux fanatic but I have started to dual-boot with Mint this past year, and after e-mailing one or two developers directly for games that have a Linux build for Steam but not GOG, it's definitely turning out to be Galaxy that's holding things back due to "GOG keep asking us to put GOG achievements in games. But we can't do that for Linux. So the "expectation" that Modern GOG Games = Galaxy integration means no Linux build for anyone"...

On top of that, many game devs who are happy to spend 20mins taking a clean "Pre-Steamed" version of their game and uploading to GOG (as they do with itch.io) are not happy to have to go back and recode all the Steam-specific achievements into GOG-Specific ones (that's required just for Galaxy users). Some do this, but almost 1,000 games have instead ended up on this list (highlighting what developers themselves think Galaxy integration is 'worth'), but there are also some other devs who have been discouraged from releasing on GOG altogether due to the increased workload Galaxy requires. Although a lot of the blame can be placed on Valve for locking achievements to the store as some coercive client dependency in the first place (that should have been done in-game Stardew Valley / Dragon Age Origins style all along), it doesn't help when GOG doubles down on it. What should have been "Hey devs, you know what the big advantage of DRM-Free is? Ease of support. You only need to create one build and it will work on GOG, Humble, itch.io, etc without needing to reinvent the wheel each time" has ended up "DRM-Free stores with clients and their own store-specific API's & Achievements = ended up just as much work to code integration for as the DRM'd ones"...
Post edited July 02, 2021 by AB2012
Posted July 02, 2021
avatar
SnowSlinger: Dear Lord, the negativity of this "community" is one thing that drives me away from GOG.... If you don't like GALAXY don't use it. I, for one, like it. I see the offline installers as an escape plan if the company goes belly up. I wander if GOG lost courage because there is no pleasing a lot of you. They do so much good - no one notices, they make a mistake - drag them across the coals! (not talking about CP2077 it was a failure right from the start because of the massive hype building). At the very least Galaxy is a convenient way to update/download. The intention of my post was to perhaps get some kind of response from GOG... all I got is a bunch of purists complaining.
It’s negative because of things like this. Why do all my offline installers need to be updated to include dlls which the game does not need but are now hard linked, it’s because GOG wants to push galaxy. Why are games now released as online only, online in majority, or online in part, or require an online connection to access certain content, it’s because they want to push us to galaxy. Why is galaxy so important, because online only multiplayer, microtransactions markets are where the money is at and that is what they want. There is so much negativity here, because GOg have created it, and continue to not only ignore it, but actively antagonise it, as seen by the recent “galaxy day”. If you like galaxy good for you, some us do not and since it was a free country last time I looked (although that may have changed), I will continue to rail against galaxy. There is nothing “purist” about that, and “doing so much good” is just plain wrong nowadays. They wrap a few games up and then sell them on as a business, they are not feeding the poor in somewhereville for crying out loud.
Posted July 02, 2021
avatar
AB2012: On top of that, many game devs who are happy to spend 20mins taking a clean "Pre-Steamed" version of their game and uploading to GOG (as they do with itch.io) are not happy to have to go back and recode all the Steam-specific achievements into GOG-Specific ones (that's required just for Galaxy users). Some do this, but almost 1,000 games have instead ended up on this list (highlighting what developers themselves think Galaxy integration is 'worth'), but there are also some other devs who have been discouraged from releasing on GOG altogether due to the increased workload Galaxy requires.
Sadly that was always going to be the case. Having to rewrite Steam achievements for Galaxy requires the same effort as writing them for Steam (as does having a back-end Galaxy server to handle cloud saves & achievements) but GOG sales are 8-10x lower making it literally the most expensive client to support per sale / hour of development time. So Galaxy cost GOG a lot of to make (much more than setting up an InnoSetup template for offline installers or that older simple downloader), and it cost developers several times more per user to support, and in the end I don't think the "If we can get Galaxy to list all your games from every store as a meta-client, then the No Steam No Buy crowd will stop caring where they buy them from and buy more from GOG" gamble has paid off. I'm fairly sure the No Steam, No Buy crowd don't think like that at all, and if these forums are anything to go by, most Galaxy users today seem to be existing GOG customers that were already shopping here anyway for the offline installers, so it's entirely possible they've lost money on high-spending Galaxy overall vs had they spent the same amount of money elsewhere (or simply saved it).
Posted July 02, 2021
avatar
SnowSlinger: I find that the Galaxy UI is much more likable than that of STEAM (what a mess). I like the color scheme, the layout, the library management options and many more features. I really believe you have great basics, or foundation, to build on and make the launcher the best out there. All in all, I think the work you have done so far is great.

But please, do not stop here. I, as I am sure many other Galaxy enjoyers, feel like you have abandoned the client. As I have mentioned before there has not been any substantial updates for a very long time. There are so many things yet to add and improve like wallet, profiles, just to name a couple.
I vehemently disagree with all of that.

The Galaxy 2.0 interface and visual layout is abysmally horrible.

By "continuing development" on Galaxy and by replacing the excellent Galaxy 1.2 with the atrociously terrible Galaxy 2.0, GOG absolutely ruined Galaxy and hence made the user experience of using it become an unenjoyable chore.

The very best thing GOG could possibly do would be to outright cancel Galaxy 2.0, and revert all GOG customers back to the excellent 1.2 version...and then don't ever touch the 1.2 version unless something about it stops working, in which case they can fix it.
Post edited July 02, 2021 by Ancient-Red-Dragon
Posted July 02, 2021
avatar
AB2012: Indeed. I'm no Linux fanatic but I have started to dual-boot with Mint this past year, and after e-mailing one or two developers directly for games that have a Linux build for Steam but not GOG, it's definitely turning out to be Galaxy that's holding things back due to "GOG keep asking us to put GOG achievements in games. But we can't do that for Linux. So the "expectation" that Modern GOG Games = Galaxy integration means no Linux build for anyone"...
I hadn't realized this. If true, then this is terrible for anyone who games on Linux. My previous stance had been that I didn't object to the existence of Galaxy, as long as it wasn't adversely affecting me, as a customer and DRM-free supporter.

However, if it is sucking away resources that GOG could/should be spending on fixing the website; delaying the updating of offline installers; preventing Linux native releases; and discouraging developers from releasing their games on GOG in the first place, then it certainly is adversely affecting me. In that case, if GOG can't both support Galaxy and native gaming on Linux, then Galaxy needs to die. And the sooner, the better.
Post edited July 02, 2021 by Time4Tea
Posted July 02, 2021
avatar
Alexim: The few official messages that have leaked here and there spoke of work slowly progressing, but it's clear that the bigwigs have drastically cut funding for Galaxy, probably following the fiasco of Cyberpunk 2077.

Even in the documents leaked from the Apple/Epic Games trial, delays with Galaxy are mentioned.
avatar
Enebias: But... if they abandoned funding of Galaxy as well, what are they actually funding?
The site has been a wreck for years, features have been cut nearly everywhere... is the money all being syphoned for CP2077 refunds? :P (Only this las bit was a joke, the others are -imo- concerning)
We can only speculate, but if you think about it, it's always been like that with GOG: one day they announce an amazing and revolutionary new feature, only to abandon it and cancel it, or leave it in beta until the rest of its days.

They announce GOGmixes, they're successful, but after a while they're abandoned, they start having bugs, and eventually they're terminated.
They announce the Community Wishlist, a GOG pillar for figuring out which games are the most popular, but they never leave beta status, even the links never work properly.
They announce GOG profiles, promise to add new features over time, but in fact never added anything anymore, and now they're even deprecated with the new Galaxy 2.0.
They announce Galaxy 2.0, the ultimate ambitious launcher that will merge all launchers into one, but it hasn't received any substantial updates for a year now, and has never left beta status.
And we don't talk about the forum, it's forbidden to talk about the forum.
Posted July 02, 2021
avatar
Breja: Because I'd rather they spend their resources on being the best possible DRM-free store and the offline installers, rather than a client I don't need and which only serves the cancerous shit devouring the gaming industry, such as achievements, "social" functions and other nonsense.
avatar
WinterSnowfall: You don't need it, I don't need it and a lot of other people don't need it... but, as the nuns say, "think of the children!" :P.
I have to say that I have no particular "need" of achievements or social functions, but I do enjoy achievements when done well and generally find social functions unobtrusive as long as I'm not compelled to use them. Generally, if a game has "mandatory" social functions, then the overall structure of the game as a whole will be one that I have zero interest in (stuff like Anthem, Destiny, et al.)

What I do find cancerous are the people on the one hand who seem to be comlpetely unable to function as gamers without these functions, and the people on the other hand who seem to throw toxic hissy fits EVERY SINGLE TIME such features are included.
Posted July 02, 2021
avatar
Breja: I know I whish they would abandon the client.
Agreed. I think they would be able to do wonders around DRM FREE Offline copies marketing VS their competition.
Posted July 02, 2021
+1 very good info

avatar
AB2012: Indeed. I'm no Linux fanatic but I have started to dual-boot with Mint this past year, and after e-mailing one or two developers directly for games that have a Linux build for Steam but not GOG, it's definitely turning out to be Galaxy that's holding things back due to "GOG keep asking us to put GOG achievements in games. But we can't do that for Linux. So the "expectation" that Modern GOG Games = Galaxy integration means no Linux build for anyone"...

On top of that, many game devs who are happy to spend 20mins taking a clean "Pre-Steamed" version of their game and uploading to GOG (as they do with itch.io) are not happy to have to go back and recode all the Steam-specific achievements into GOG-Specific ones (that's required just for Galaxy users). Some do this, but almost 1,000 games have instead ended up on this list (highlighting what developers themselves think Galaxy integration is 'worth'), but there are also some other devs who have been discouraged from releasing on GOG altogether due to the increased workload Galaxy requires. Although a lot of the blame can be placed on Valve for locking achievements to the store as some coercive client dependency in the first place (that should have been done in-game Stardew Valley / Dragon Age Origins style all along), it doesn't help when GOG doubles down on it. What should have been "Hey devs, you know what the big advantage of DRM-Free is? Ease of support. You only need to create one build and it will work on GOG, Humble, itch.io, etc without needing to reinvent the wheel each time" has ended up "DRM-Free stores with clients and their own store-specific API's & Achievements = ended up just as much work to code integration for as the DRM'd ones"...
Posted July 02, 2021
Don't listen to these fools GOG, here's what you do:

* Stop working on Galaxy
* Start working on Schmalacky
Posted July 02, 2021
avatar
SnowSlinger:
There is already another thread in which people asked about Galaxy and why there are so few updates. Only one reply that announced one big update. Will see if I will find the post and link it here.

Those who think Galaxy will be the end of the world will never say anything else and they just don't want to understand that it was never meant to be a replacement but rather an addition - just like you said. Imo Galaxy is still far from being perfect and imo GOG should never have Gaalxy as a requirement for anything - at least requiring SP stuff ... but I am still pretty sure that they don't plan to abandon DRM-free or Offline installers. Well, that'S all I will say to this since a very bright GOGer figured out (to my surprise) that I am a GOG apologist anyway, so why should I have said anything bad here? ;)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionDear GOG, what about Galaxy?(74 posts)(74 posts)
(74 posts)