And then there's the Deluxe Special and the Deluxe Special Edition (fictional titles to impress) and on and on it goes.It's all BS, it's just a simple money grab by the dev's who really don't GAF about making complete games but just little bits and then milk it by adding the extras and then add more extras and on and on it goes......And guess what? The saps keep paying for them:)

I couldn't find an actual example with multiple levles of deluxe. The closest I could find was "Jotunn Edition" and "Jotunn Edition Deluxe Edition"

Divinity: Original Sin 2 seems worthy of a mention in terms of dubious edition naming.

You'd think that Divinity: ORiginal Sin 2: Definitive Edition would be the version to get and contains all the content the developers want you to experience.

Sadly not. This is the base level game.
No sound track is included (Pay extra for a 'Divinte' edition containing that)
No playable DLC is included (Pay eextra for an 'Eternal' edition containing that).

Also in the store two examples of "Enhanced Edition Collectors Edition"

Just ignore the ratings, they don’t mean anything. If you post something on here not inline with the mainstream then you will get voted down.

The secret is, none of these things are actually bad. Indie games are good. Pre-orders... why not? DLC can often be great, why not have access? The client is optional and adds a lot of features people enjoy. You're not being harmed by any of this, so why rain on other peoples parades? Don't sweat the small stuff.

If GOG ever starts requiring the client or whatever, then people can freak out, but they've said over and over again that won't happen.

Then you can surely show me how to start Gwent without the optional Galaxy client.

Online games of that nature are a different thing and you know it. There's a reason no one really cares.

Where does it say that?
And yes, most people don‘t care. This is the reason GOG gets away with this kind of lie, but I seem to be no one, because I care and act accordingly.

The alternative is the same one I've been saying all along: Should have kept GOG as Good Old Games, with games that have ended development and get here being, as far as anyone can determine at the time, as complete and as patched as they're going to get (which doesn't have to be "decades old", often is a few years, old GOG's "at least three years old" rule would really cover most), which Good Old Games would also preserve the flat pricing rule, and a separate place for the newer stuff, with whatever rules and "catches" they need to accept to get the newer stuff for the impatient crowd. BUT deals for the new store would have to include a clause requiring a title to get moved to (old) GOG, adhering to (old) GOG's rules, after end of development.
Plus, of course, keep GOG as just a store aiming to basically break even, not trying to finance CDP's development costs, not handing over resources for Gwent maintenance and support or who knows what else and not push for continous growth if there'd be ways to not be, on their own, in the red otherwise.

Barring that, or if it wouldn't have worked, better die a hero than live long enough to become the villain.
I mean, GOG started out holding the banner high in a fight to change the industry, make it care for the gamers over publishers and profits, eliminate DRM and unfair pricing and marketing practices (regional pricing, DLC, microtransactions when they popped up) and give people reasons to prefer a legal purchase over "pirating" ("goodies", improved compatibility and top support). Since then, they gave up on the pricing and DLC fight completely, have all these incomplete editions and in ways that are even worse than elsewhere, as this thread explains, added CDP's own game with microtransactions, and online-only, DRM-ed only, added a client that is required for various features of plenty of games, and which is implemented in ways that occasionally causes problems with yet more games even in single player for those trying not to use it (that saving bug in some DOSBox games, issues with XP compatibility in games which in themselves would be compatible, possible issues with Linux since it's not available for that at all), even have games with some additional content requiring a 3rd party account, plus the slew of titles for which GOG users are 2nd class citizens, lacking certain features or content and getting patches late or not at all, and those not wanting to use Galaxy having it even worse. And also gave up on the "goodies" long ago, and switch burden of support to the devs and just take what those send them, if even that...
So they went from leading an industry revolution to, uh, "here, we still have DRM-free stuff for single player... if you ignore some missing features for some games... and even content for a few... and put up with delays or even lack of patching... and possibly higher prices... and a messed up editions system... yeah. yey?"

So obviously just because you haven't SEEN any games(that you bought) having extras that MUST mean they aren't added to games here anymore.....you DO get how fallacious that statement is, right?

Blade runner has several extras(manuals mostly, but also 1 wallpaper and a nice artbook), Grimoire has a manual and i'm pretty sure(would have to verify) that some of the Piko additions have extras as well.

Most of it seems to be cosmetic and misc DLC that doesn't seem to account for more than 20% of game content in most cases....that's nowhere near the the majority of a game's content. Also your post made it sound like most of the initial content(50%+) was being cut for DLC.....which is what I was taking the time to correct.

But the base game IS finished once released(minus bug fixes) in most cases.....I don't usually count extra stuff made later unless talking about whether a game is finished for the second time.

(To me a game is "finished" at two points: When the base game is finished and released, and when ALL dlc have been released)

Wrong, as stated above with examples.....also how much bloat do a few dlls do to installers(unlee they add more files I am not aware of)?

================================

Probably because many games still come out with extras and galaxy doesn't bloat installers as much as he seems to be claiming, if I had to guess(though it's possible a few trolls are hitting his posts as well).

That's one modern game out of how many so far?

======================================

Two things: People should never trust sales copy buzzwords/labeling as meaning anything so readily, and also(as I keep saying).....people should be patient/ use common sense when buying & also ask around to make sure no more content will be released for said games. If they buy it early without doing such they have themselves as well to blame besides the sneaky publishers/devs.

The client is not optional, at least in part. Galaxy.dll is required on almost all games now, there has been a major update including old games which never had it. See:
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/gog_galaxy_required_in_certain_games
It IS happening, and denying it doesn’t help anyone. The other things mentioned are bad, for various reasons, not just in their own respect, but for how they influence others, and how they become the normal. And yes, we are being harmed by these things, it’s just not obvious (pre order specific content for one, it might also affect decisions within the game, for expansions etc.).

Please see:
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/gog_galaxy_required_in_certain_games
For example. It is an issue, I don’t need to download or store components for something I will never never, or is required for the game to run. Galaxy.dll is being locked into these old games which never needed it, it’s not drm per se, but if that ever stops working so does the game where before it would not, it’s not needed, it wastes my storage space, and it exposes my system to unescessary risk. If your happy with that then fine, i am not.
I brought blade runner, whooping do. It’s one in a million. I brought lots of others here with nothing. A plague tale, only came with pre order content (it’s not a great game unless you like that). Just a brief look at what I got recently:
Turok 2, nothing
Rogue trooper - wallpapers and soundtrack
Bloodstained - nothing
Dusk - wallpaper, icons
Pathway - nothing
Thea 2 - nothing
Fel seal - nothing
Druid stone - nothing
Bards tale 4 - quite a lot
Bards tale triology - nothing

It’s the same ongoing, mostly the older games have manual. Otherwise nothing. Whilst soundtracks are mostly specifically split out.

It’s not just gwent, there are several other games which are multiplayer focused - Witcher adventure game, that sword fighting game (can’t remember the name), what was goblins inc. some others, not here to keep records.

Paradox are pay per pixel, defend them if you want, they eek out every tiny penny of their products, I would avoid the, completely.

Sorry, I got bored after that. You can defend anything you like, there are clear problems, and things that have been accepted which don’t sit well with a section of the user base.

It was just an example. They have been using this crap for yonks and everyone caught on and said ''great idea, let's do it'' and it will get worse.

How does this dll stop a game from working?
If a game works offline then there are no online ghosts that can get to it.

A client FILE in games(to help integrate those copies with said client) does not mean the client isn't optional.

Yes, the file is integrated into some games, but the client doesn't need to be run or installed for those games to run, and the file(afaik) does nothing without the client.

Slippery slope fallacy....let's wait and see with some of those things you brought up before running around like headless chickens, shall we?

Well then it MUST be true.
(Proof man...show us the proof...then maybe it'd be easier to accept the stuff you're laying out for us)