*cough* The Witcher *cough*

Highly unlikely doesn't mean 100% not gonna happen. And in this context, I mean currently.

If CDProjektRed and GOG can prove their DRM free policy works better to attract sales rather than giving middle finger to legit buyers by treating them like thieves I'm sure other publisher will follow suit.

This is long term context tho, just like Valve is currently with their SteamOS/Linux. Publisher aren't convinced yet Linux is a good platform for gaming with bad performance on SteamOS. As much as they are not convinced, YET, that DRM free policy is good for their sales number.

But you always need to install a game before using it anyway. It should not be a big deal.

I'm not so optimistic but I would definitely be pleased, if they could manage to do that.

Bad cough you have there, perhaps it will help to know that GOG is owned by CDProject, hence why Witcher is here. So its not a aaa publisher being on board, merely the owners utilising their own platform.

Is that another case of "literally" vs. " figuratively"? There is nothing physical forcing developers to add DRM to any kind of software. Not even the money they get for doing their job is physical these days. Adding/not adding DRM is purely management decision, and one that can be easily changed if it is profitable to do so.

We may never get to 100%, some management people are too stubborn, but there is nothing wrong with supporting GoG in the hope that it will get better than 38% we have right now (based on gross gog/steam catalogue sizes - 1337/3500), and more day-1 releases. Doesn't have to be revolution, I'm fine with evolution.

Then maybe you can look at Stardock for another example. Not sure if they are AAA (what defines AAA anyway?), but we are promised day-1 launch of their newest game - and after long time being Steam only. Or Larian, they makes fine games too, and have been releasing on gog for a long time.

Seems like you mostly got if figured out. There are two ways to add existing installations in Galaxy.

== IMPORT ALREADY INSTALLED GAMES TO GALAXY ==

1. For GOG games installed using installers from the last few months (so called Galaxy-compatible installers)
Click the "+" button on top of the sidebar and select "scan and import folders" - it will find all compatible games within that folder and add them to the Client.

2. For remaining GOG game INSTALLATIONS
Find the game in the Library (click on the image of the game), then click the More button and select "Manage" -> "Import folder" and point the folder selector into the folder where that game is installed.
Please be aware that Client will accept any folder pointed to and will overwrite files inside it (this can for example wipe some mods or damage other apps in case of pointing to a wrong folder) and will update the game to the newest version (current default language English).

So very old installations need to be made Galaxy compatible, and need to be updated. After that though you technically should be able to drop the files on any computer and scan for them via option 1 and have them installed.

Devs have also stated a while back they plan to include install scripts eventually so that games downloaded via Galaxy can be reinstalled with just the game. No idea when this might happen though.

PS: nightcraw1er.488 isn't worth arguing with, some people on the forums are unfortunately stuck in the past way of doing stuff, and love to tell us all about how Galaxy isn't needed/worth it, ect. Those people on the forum are also the loudest, but thankfully not that the majority. The rest of us are enjoying our games & Galaxy to much to care.

Be sure not to have the game modded before. Galaxy broke my Arcanum installation I imported for example, same with BG2 and Planescape

I have to say... well duh? By importing it to Galaxy, you're asking it to check the files and change any that don't match what the server says. Of course it's going to break mods.

You're aware that the Galaxy client/platform is optional right? I assume that applies to the games too.

I suppose devs/publishers only need to make sure that their game is DRM free in order to be released on GOG. DRMs are implemented on later stages of the game development, NOT WITHIN the development.

In fact, you're looking at the discussion forum on a digital distribution that specializing in DRM removal on games for years, without any "full rebuild" required.

They need to do this, to lead the way and to proof that their concept is work to attract the other publishers. At least now they got Metro Redux and Bethesda dipping their toes with some of Id games.

The other platforms, say Origin and Uplay got their owners "utilising their own platform". And most of them are the platform exclusive titles.

How are they doing so far? Compared to GOG's library, definitely not good. The only third party games on those platforms are Street Fighter IV and Orcs Must Die (on Origin).

Uplay specially, become a real nuisance. It's still a requirement even when they got their games published on other platform. Glad I never liked Ubisoft games. I only need to deal with Uplay because of FarCry 3

Origin, is much more acceptable, tho still compared to GOG it's a joke. Using Origin only because of BF3.

But imagine if you buy Assassin's Creed on Origin. LOL.

Both are failing hard. Why? They don't offer anything new. Both are DRMs, an annoyance to the customers AND they're lacked features or benefit to the users. In short, both are the much lamer version of Steam.

I say GOG is stupid if it's heading to Uplay/Origin direction, or head-to-head with Steam with Galaxy. Steam will swallow GOG mercilessly. Steam already have a decade head start.

So far, the very attractive point, the major selling point of GOG and what makes GOG distinctive to Steam is the DRM-free policy. And I guess they won't throw that selling point away anytime soon.

At least it could ask "May I destroy your existing installation?" before doing anything. Also I don't understand why importing means that you also have to update? What if you do not want to automatically update the game?

So I think it's not self-evident that mods have to be broken.
I think so too but they still have not many AAAs here and if having DRM free is good enough to get on par with Steam... I'm very sceptic about it. Well, let's see and enjoy the party while it lasts.

Yes, I am fully aware that it is option - and this is the key point - at the moment.

DRM and client integration are developed at the same time as the game. This is why a lot of the comments that developers return state that they will release the game at a later date when they are able to maintain two builds. This is because the build they work with is not drm free.

Errm, yes I might have picked that up being here for quite sometime. GOG doesn't specialise at all in DRM removal. They may do it once in a while with nocd patches, or replace certain files with inert ones, however the majority of the newer games are provided DRM free by the developers.

It does ask. There is scary looking warning message BEFORE it let's you choose folder to import. The forced update should not be necessary, Galaxy already supports having installed game with "the version you are using is no longer available" mentioned in game details, and blue point next to it to signal available update. It would be better to import them in this state, but... beta. It's one of the known flaws, mentioned in sticky post in galaxy beta thread. They are working on it.

As for breaking mods... depends on the game and mod. If the game has decent mod support (mod folder and it picks them from there), there is little reason for them to be destroyed. On the other hand, if mod has to modify game assets (Baldur's Gate 1+2 world merge for example), there is very little reason for them to NOT be destroyed. I still wouldn't let Galaxy import/update my Morrowind folder even if that game has very good mod support. Not unless I made a copy first. But with readily available changelog and option to disable automatic updates (per-game and in newer versions also global default for new installations), that's not an issue.

Yah, it was in closed beta when I tried it. There should have been a warning when doing it. OR a button to not verify game cache :)
Yeahyeah I know i was retarded, I was just hoping to add it as a mostly shortcut to launch it from Galaxy

I don't expect anything big will happen soon myself. Like I said this is a long-term context, won't be an easy road for GOG too. But it's not impossible. But one thing for sure, so far I don't see any better contender to Steam than GOG. And it's good that Steam have strong competition. Competition between companies will benefit the customers great deal.

Nope, the DRM was implemented later. Examples? Well, read your own third paragraph, no cd patches. Removing the DRM is relatively easy and people has been doing it for decades, and most of those people are probably doing it just for hobbies.

More examples? Lots of GFWL games were transfered to Steamworks back then, and no full rebuild was needed. The good example for this is Arkham Asylum. They definitely didn't do a full rebuild.

Fallout 3 is another good example. The GFWL removal patch works flawlessly, no rebuild needed. And I suppose it's not even done by professionals.

If you're talking about say, the multiplayer frameworks/back-end, so yes it is. They have to implement it ground up for the game.

But multiplayer back-ends are not DRM. Steamworks matchmaking for example, it's part of the features offered with the DRM. But it's not the DRM itself. OTher features? Steam achievements. You might figure out already that achievements are not DRM. There are games that uses steam achievements that can run without the steam client itself. GOG started the business by doing so. Currently their business are revolving around removal of DRM and DRM free releases, be it patched by GOG or by the developers. But either way, you get the idea.

Anyway you're waaay off topic now. My point is, DRM-free policy is GOG main selling point. And having a client won't change that. It would be a stupid suicide for GOG to turn the client into DRM then goes head to head with steam, because it's currently very barebone, not even comparable to origin/uplay clients.

There's nothing to be afraid of from the Galaxy client. Your concern about the Galaxy client is nothing but fear of changes and it's baseless. Still if you don't like it you can opt not to install it.

I've got my answers on OP, so if you want to further discuss anything else with somebody else, feel free to use the thread.

Cheers.