There is the third option that I'm using myself:
3) Don't patch games

Actually, I don't use patches even in those rare cases when I use Galaxy. New games often have a lot of patches but require them only in case of game breaking bugs that make game impossible to finish. Luckily game breaking bugs are not so often so in most cases patches can be ignored until the last when I download the latest version to offline backup folder.

Problem with this is that sometimes the last version is worse or has problems that a previous version do not have. Or it has deleted features or unexpected changes to gameplay, or you have some mods and updating can break your save...so you want to keep that exact version, and it's not the last one (and the last one is not always the bug free version)

I use to just download the whole thing again, but that's because i can (have a decent connection). It's also a pain for us even with better connection than others, because if we want to keep some previous versions, we are forced to keep whole games repeated, and it's a lot of space.

I will add to the initial examples the Battletech game. I will have to check my external HD but if i remember well, the first 4 version patched or so we didn't have a single patch (and this was, imo, more than enough time for GOG to create the offline patches, maybe 7 or 8 days and for a game heavily marketed since the release) so i had to keep all the versions as whole games. Also, constanlty download those big games contribute to suffocate the download servers, and then you can see a gigantic thread about gog slow download speed.

It really seems the new biggest releases are a problem for GOG. Once upon a time, when all were little old games, this was not a problem. But actually we have 30-40GB new games that are more complicated to manually patch (i mean, to create the patch) and probably GOG is not liking this and regret having to do (but they promised Galaxy was optional, so we need those patches and they need to do the work anyway)

So it's a problem for us and for them, imo. And this will continue to be worse as the games get bigger and bigger (and have big 0-day patches because game was in a bad state, have not enough dedicated QA before release, etc, another typical issue from these days, specially with expensive AA or AAA games, ahem)

About keeping all the old patches, sure, you have my vote. But it's also a big problem, again because the number and size of all the patches for the big games. I prefer GOG over Steam not only because DRM-free, but because this classic...eh, "offline" installers and their patches that allow me to choose which version of a game to install and to play. And this part is also important for me, so i continue to download whole games if i don't have those patches, but that is not only time and work, but also a lot space in my external disks, and i just can't keep buying new external disks only for GOG.

So, i agree we all have a problem with the patches, and i agree also that a bit of info/clarification from GOG would be good for all.

The problem for us is not only with patches to big games. It is with the installers too. For example, the above-mentioned Spellforce 3 was updated really fast and it became a problem in itself, because the backup files were updated faster than I could download them. The result was that downloading was aborted, I was forced to start downloading the whole thing and then it would be updated again with the same consequences.
The irony is that we complain when GOG doesn't update game and when it does. It would be great for GOG to keep the offline backup files for, say, a week, but I doubt it is currently possible. It is more likely for patches though.

We found the XP user!

Nope, I don't use XP for more than 10 years... or even about 15 years, it's had to remember now.

Yes, i agree the problem is also with installer, that was part of what i was trying to say (sometimes i write too much and not very clear lol) My recent experience with what you comment is with Divinity Original Sin 2 Definitive Ed. I downloaded 5 of the files when it was updated, but some hours later i came to download the rest and was already a different version, witho no patches, only the whole game installer so i had to restart again :S

I don't complain for the updates, i understand it's a problem with big games that update too fast, but that is only a part of the problem. As the OP said, and i agree, there is no consistence between games updating. Sometimes it's because they patch too fast, but sometimes we lack a single patch during a whole month and see the complete installer updated replacing the old one. Or they suddenly delete a previous version for a total different one, like happened with DOS2 Definitive Edition, replacing the standard game we had that was about 27GB with a new game that is about 45GB, and they do this without warning, even before than the announcement of the new edition.

That's inconsistence in the update policy, if there's one, and it's confusing and, sometimes, very frustrating for us when something like my example happens.

Keeping all the old and obsolete installers and patches on the store page would be confusing as hell to most people. GOG support would be swamped with people asking which files exactly they are supposed to download, which patch goes to where, do they have to install all the separate patches one after another or are they incremental so they have to just run the latest patch over any older version of the game, and so on and so forth.

Add to that the complains from "slow internet users" whether they want the patches to be incremental (=bigger) or delta patches (=more complicated as you'd have to install several patches). And then the cases when the game gets so massive changes that newer patches will not be backwards compatible anymore with all older versions.

To keep it simple, I suggest GOG should do this:

1. No patches to offline installers. Period. When updates arrive, the whole installer is always updated.

2. For people who want daily updates or want to keep it simple, yes, you need to use the Galaxy client in order to use its auto-update feature.

This would also allow GOG to automate the whole process more, ie. the updated offline installers are automatically generated whenever the Galaxy version gets an update.

I think by "new" releases they mean "I'll buy from GOG but not until patches have settled down". Divinity Original Sin games are good examples. Great games, especially the first one, and Larian are to be commended in keeping GOG versions up to date. But when each game ends up requiring 20x patches followed by a re-released Enhanced Edition followed by a few more patches over the space of 2 years, there's no race to be a pre-orderer or rush to archive early offline / backup installers.

And even for finished games, GOG needs to stop flagging non-updates as updates, ie, another 50 games changelog = "updated internal installer structure, no changes to game files." Again... Just save the "update" flag for when the game itself has been updated.

Hard to say what they meant. I took "handle it better" meaning that he will not buy new games from GOG until GOG handles updates somehow differently, but still buy new games from other places (like Steam) which don't handle them any better. Double-standards.

The idea that GOG should keep ALL the previous versions of all the installer and patch files would just eat silly amounts of space for very little benefit, something that very few customers would actively use. So Divinity Original Sin 2 is 45 GB in size, and has received or will receive 50 updates during its whole lifespan, including the HD version.

So GOG was supposed to keep 50x 45GB + all the old obsolete patches ever released for the game, just for that one game. And the same to all the other games too.

And then confused customers would constantly be contacting the support asking which files exactly they should be downloading, or complaining when they ended up with a broken installation because they forced an incompatible version over an older version, etc. etc. blaa blaa blaa.

Just. Not. Worth. It. There is a reason no other digital store does it that way either, that those people are demanding.

I'd much rather see GOG fully automate the patching process of offline installers, ie. as soon as the Galaxy version receives an update, the offline installer on the account page would get updated too, without GOG staff having to use days and days to sort it out and test it. It would become unnecessarily complicated if they tried to make it generate also separate patches too (would they be only delta patches, incremental patches, or both, or what?).

The OP already gave a solution to avoid the confusion: keep the patches separated in a new section of the drop down menu. He suggested under the "more", i suggest something like "old patches" to be even more clear. No confusion at all, then.

Also, your solution is forcing people to use Galaxy. Not because they want daily updates or want to keep it simple, but because all the people that have slow internet connections. You are just forcing them to use Galaxy if eliminating the offline patches and keeping just the whole installers. Imho, that is a step a lot of people don't want and some are even warning in advance, saying that GOG is trying to do, with more or less subtlety, exactly what you propose.

Edit: oh, and you are also saying to people like me that like to keep previous versions of the games to buy a lot more external drives to be able to do so. I personally would hate to have to keep terabytes of installers because there are no more offline patches. And don't tell me it would be my problem because i want to keep those past versions, please, i already exposed my arguments for doing so.

Or just the first installer + all patches + a 'most recent' installer with everything included? That should cover everything I think? That's 1x original size + 1x fully updated size + the difference between them (+ extra for overlapping content between patches)

Not if you follow 2 simple steps:
1) Put patches in their own tab called "archive" or something so they only show up if people are actively serachig for them.
2) label them properly, i.e. patch 1.5 -> 1.6, so there is no doubt what exactly each patch does.

Sure, it would require additional hosting space on GoG's side, but it would be a win for the customer.

There have been several cases where the newest patches are not compatible with the old ones anymore.

Also your solution does not solve the "issue" that someone mentioned, ie. the newest installer version is updated while they are still downloading the older one (because they have so slow internet and monthly download limits that they can download a big game in parts over several days/weeks/months/years).

No other digital store tries to keep past versions available for everyone either.

I'll throw my hat into the proposal. The offline installer options need a separate 'patches' section and better info on what version of the main installer we are getting.

Sure it requires more stewardship to keep this all organised, but that is how a business grows, by focusing on the customers needs :)