Auto-patching is good news to me, assuming that it works like the autoupdate on Steam. Having to redownload the whole game every time a new patch is released is not fun[url=].[/url]

Maybe this mentioned before, sorry if that so, I couldn't read previous posts, there is many :)

I love GOG, I love the idea of really owning game. But especially after HumbleBunles, Steam discounts I have hundreds of games on Steam. This made Steam my number one platform. Also I started to use Steam's Big Picture mode and it's very comfortable.

I think GOG needs to (looks like it's going to) be friendly with Steam. Just like when a new browser enters a market it try to import your bookmarks, passwords etc from your existing browser, even new browsers look like each other to steal customers so customers adapt new browser easily. This kind of approach GOG Galaxy should do.

I think because right now really owning a game isn't enough to take customer from Steam. Maybe you can make huge discounts if I have Steam version of a game that is on sale GOG. For example I have Witcher 1 on Steam and it's 9,99 on GOG. You can say hey you really want to own it, you can have it 90-95% discount and I can import your saves, achievements etc. Steam isn't a sale platform anymore, it's more, it's an ecosystem with it's Big Picture, in-house streaming, community, workshop etc.

Also new GOG should have newer games. Most of GOG games are old and old generation of gamers is the potential customer, let's be honest most of the new/young generation of customers don't care about these games. They want new games. Publishers don't like DRM-free, yes, but somehow GOG needs this I think.

In what way? Offer keys? To what end?

Did you just promote that GOG should relinquish their number one rule? And you're an old timer too. That's depressing..

Well that is the reason most people are on gog, the old games along with the new and DRM free.

DRM free is the only reason why I purchase games here, I love it, I don´t use steam at all, I have zero games on steam and that is not going to change in the forseeable future, so if gog forces me into using a client (I know they said it is completely optional, (for now)) then it is pretty much yet another steam/origin/Battlenet client thingie, if that happens I will download all the games I have purchased here (assuming they have not been changed to require the client), logout and disable the account.

So I disagree that gog needs this.

This is my fear as well. Now to be clear, I am talking about older games that had the capability to host your own games when they were new. If this is removed that is DRM in practice if not in name. It might be different with newer games that did not allow this in the first place.

I buy frorm gog because it's easy. Download the installer and you are set. The game is mine and I can install it whenever I want. It has full funtionality. I really don't see manual install as a hassle, not back then, not now. Download a file click on it. Possibly download a patch and click on that as well. How hard can it be?

Basically, what it boils down to right now, is that cross-play so far only work with one confirmed game: the witcher thingy, and if any other games are going to be compatible is down to uptake with developers.

I know what their idea is. But this won't change the given (logical) answers to "what will happen if..."

I know that they said this. But it's not up to GOG to decide this. Publishers have a saying in this as well. And which kind of pricing scheme the publishers want, can be observed at Steam.

Just to remind you, before we have a "You're paranoid, GOG won't ever do this" kind of discussion: I don't think either that we'll see $1 = €1 on GOG! I never said we'll get this. Quite the contrary! I said that I don't think we'll see $1 = € 1 on GOG, because GOG made a huge promise that's pretty reassuring. GOG can't cover the difference if all games get unfair prices (because it'll eat their 30% completely). So the "We'll pay the difference" promise was essentially a "You'll get fair prices" promise. And all this after a pretty huge uproar. That's all I said. Not "We're doomed, GOG betrayed us, we'll have to pay the triple from now on." ;)

I know the survey. And exactly there comes my "If they do, they can look into becoming a Steam key reseller, just like any other useless store" comment into play.

I think the survey result on that specific question is a bit double-edged... There are lots of people out there, who don't care about DRM. They just look around the stores to get cheap Steam keys (remember the first Alan Wake sale and the "Where's my Steam key?"-threads). Those people don't give a shit about DRM free. They don't even know that GOG is into this DRM free-thing. If you ask them "Would you mind 3rd party DRM on multiplayer games?", they'll answer "Great, one more shop who's going to sell cheap Steam keys!" That's what I think how the result ... happened.

Are those people the ones who'll pay your (GOG's) bills? Give them a 90% off and they'll "DDoS" your site. But in the end, you'll be just another Green Man Gaming or Gamersgate. Some shop from the past that had its short momentum. A cheap source for Steam games. Yes, the survey said that "we", the gamers, wouldn't mind DRM... Not that much of a surprise. But I think a significant part of GOG's customers (not Steam's!), the people who buy games, DOES mind DRM.

That's how I see the outcome of the survey. A mix of Goglodytes and Steamers. One half beeing here for DRM free, the other half for moar cheap gamez. But I could be completely wrong though.

And I didn't mention Russia and CIS states either. Or Brazil. But that's because I didn't really want to talk about regional pricing. Just have another look at my initial post:

It wasn't about regional pricing at all. It was just a "GOG won't allow developers to use Galaxy as DRM, because they remember how we reacted when they introduced regional pricing."

And now, please let us stop this discussion. We both are in complete agreement: GOG will do everything they can to prevent the $1 = €1 crap. We have different reasons to believe this (you, because of their initial idea, I, because of the costly promise they made), but we agree on this. So you don't have to convince me ;)

I explained it. If I have a game that I also have on Steam, GOG should import my saves, achievements etc. Even I don't have such common games GOG may import my friends, activity feeds etc. We are talking about a gamer platform that has at least 4-5 million online people anytime worldwide. All I say, to increase it's customers GOG can make discounts that attract attention. Like I said if I have a game on Steam GOG can say, with special discount you can really have it here on GOG with DRM-free. I think that kind of marketing may increase potential customers.

I want GOG to be more competitive to Steam, so that's why I'm suggesting these ideas. Competition is good for customers, right?

About second comment, DRM-free is the key feature of GOG. I love it and don't want GOG to give up on this. What I meant it should somehow make big publishers sell their newer games on GOG. Maybe not in day one but after 2-3 years later. I think old games = older generation of gamers and they are less than young / new generation of gamers so new generation are bigger potential customer.

In short what i want to say, if there is a way to increase GOG's library and customers, GOG should try it with Galaxy platform. I'm looking at business perspective. How GOG can increase customers so it can be more competitive, so it can be more powerful in front of publishers so it can add their games to GOG more easily so we can play more games on GOG with DRM-free. That's all.

I think we can all see the benefits of GOG Galaxy for the customer.

What I don't see so far are the benefits to a developer for using GOG Galaxy for their matchmaking.

Gamespy/GFWL/ Heck even Steamworks still allowed you to sell your games across different retailers, and let those players play with eachother no matter where they bought it.

The one who seems to benefit most from this version, is the one who always fell outside of the boat in that arrangement until now, GOG. GOG was the only store where games with those requirements couldn't also be sold. In that sense this seems to be a solution to a problem that was very much of their own making.

I guess the question now becomes, will developers feel it's worth participating in GOG Galaxy over the other alternatives.

A Pro is that their game can now be sold on GOG as well.

A Downside is that they would be forced to have a DRM-free single player game.

Comparing to Steamworks another possible downside is having to maintain several different versions of the game. The Steam one and the DRM-free one, whereas with Steamworks, not only can they do with 1 version, but Steam would manage the downloads of the games, the patching etc, and all the developers have to do is send a bunch of Steam keys to the other retailers to sell. The question here is whether GOG will offer something similar (or whether GOG Galaxy ready games are inherently similar to the Steam ones) (Not to mention the Workshop etc)

and, if I understand this correct, if a developer do make a Galaxy version and a Steamworks version - those game will not necessary "talk" to each other and therefore allow cross-play. Cross-play only happens if both version of the games are Galaxy compatible (which kind of make the whole "cross-play" hype a bit... incorrect?)

yes, that's what I mean. the games must be Galaxy 'enabled' to use cross-play. There is no requirements with Steam that they can not use other matchmaking services. This means, though, is that the developers must make a choice between which framework they want to use in the future, but also that existing games need to be adapted by the developers to become Galaxy compatible.

Destro said 'for now', so that isn't really much of a confirmation either way.

Yup, I'd really like to be able to play LAN games without being online.
Otherwise, what's the point, really?

There are already such things as GameRanger to fix multiplayer of old games:
- like Age Of Empires (broken because old)
- Flatout 2 (broken because GameSpy went down)

So, what's left really?
LAN gaming without the need to be online!

Just spent some time skimming the follow-up survey thread. Most of the people who posted there do seem to give a shit about DRM Free, and most of those were GOG regulars. Yet they still answered Yes to PA, with an almost 4:1 ratio for it. Pre follow-up survey, the answer was 70/30 no/yes.

So I wouldn't be so sure about what the GOG's community reaction would be to a game that requires GOG Galaxy to multiplay, and I doubt there will be a game that requires GOG Galaxy to play the single player mode of.