OldFatGuy: I don't need, and therefore don't want, and therefore am not interested in a client to make the game run.
skeletonbow: I don't think anyone really wants any gaming client to be a mandatory necessity to make a game run, even people that like what gaming clients have to offer. GOG Galaxy client is not required to make a game run however, whether the game was installed manually or installed inside Galaxy. Galaxy can launch games, or they can be launched from the start menu without Galaxy client running. In fact, one can install a game with Galaxy, then uninstall Galaxy and play the game. That's the "optional" nature of the client itself.
OldFatGuy: If I bought a car from Koon's Chevrolet, and it required me to push a button every morning to start it up, then I'd be okay with that. If however, Koon's added a button that required me to push it to "check in" with Koon's every time I started the car, I'm not interested. Obviously that's an interesting view too since I mean why object to pushing another button when we already have to push one to get the car started.
skeletonbow: Sure, I don't think anyone wants that either. That's also not what Galaxy does however. Galaxy can connect online to your account to download games but it's no different than doing the same thing manually by hand in the web browser, it's just a different application doing it. All of the features that connect online are optional, and one can log out and just use the client can act as a launcher and never log in if they choose.
You sound like you are just strongly opposed to being forced to use software you don't want to use, and oppose having to be connected online to do gaming stuff that you think should not involve anything to do with being online. You're exactly right too, and Galaxy doesn't force anyone to use it nor to be online unless you want to use a feature that by its very nature requires being online technically such as downloading a game from your account or chatting with someone.
I think that the majority of people who do want to use Galaxy here likely feel the exact same way as you about not wanting to be forced to use anything they're not interested in and not being forced to be online etc. That's all stuff that is a core part of GOG's philosophy IMHO and Galaxy is ultimately going to be the embodiment of that philosophy/ideology - making something better and actually consumer-friendly compared to the competition's products.
I like gaming client functionality, but I just want one that puts me in control and doesn't force or manipulate me or require me to even use it if I don't want to. That's why I'm fond of the idea of not only Galaxy but what Galaxy will evolve into over time.
And I get that others like it. I never said "I wish GOG didn't make Galaxy." I said "I'm not interested in it. Optional or otherwise."
There are all sorts of optional stuff that I'm not interested in. Screen savers are another example. I mean they're just software, right? Why on earth object to running software? Everything we run or play is software, so it's crazy to object to running one more piece, right? Does the fact that others like screen savers, and the fact they perform some sort of "valued" function for some make it "interesting" that I don't want any part of them too?
There are some great things to like about gaming clients. Number one, and foremost, IMO, is the automatic updating. I mean, seriously, that's a great feature. I completely understand why folks like that. I like that, although TBH I'd prefer games be sold in a state that didn't require constant updating it's first year out, but that's just me. But since "the market" has already spoken on that subject and consumers have made it clear they're willing to put up with unfinished products being sold, then I completely understand why automatic update is a great feature.
And there are others that many will find great that I don't. I have no interest in achievements or multi-player, but I get that many others do, and for them a client is great. I get that, and don't find it "interesting" at all. I understand it.
But for me, I don't want anything running on my computer that isn't necessary. In fact, before Windows 7, my log in experience every time I logged in was to go into the Task Manager and end all but the most essential processes, which I learned over time. I suppose some might find that "interesting" too, but it was my experience that there was a direct correlation between the amount of crap running "in the background" and the amount of CTD's and BSOD crashes I experienced. (I can't do it on Windows 7 because I was just overwhelmed with the number of processes and services running and figured it would take a full time commitment to ever figure out which ones I could end all the time)
So I'm just NOT interested in any gaming retailer's client, optional or otherwise. And when they make it a requirement, then I'll have to evaluate whether or not I'm interested in remaining a customer of such a retailer. For me personally, Steam was a NO for nearly a decade, until I had to sigh and once again accept the fact that gaming consumers are more often than not willing to accept anything just to play their games. Once I decided that horse was out of the barn, I relented and purchased a few of the Steam exclusive games that I had boycotted up until then. But I'm still not a fan of Steam, do not purchase there much at all, and may not ever buy there again, I don't know. Despite the fact that their client does do some pretty neat stuff (auto updates, cloud saves, multi-player service, etc.). If GOG ever makes their client a requirement, I'll almost definitely stop purchasing here.
But the nearly page of comments basically suggesting that it was absurd to object to clients because everything is client was just... obtuse. Again, it would be like suggesting it's absurd to object to ANYTHING running on there. Which leaves us with every retailer/advertiser/business in the world running any and everything they want on my machine. if someone can't distinguish between objecting some types of software (client) versus any type of software (client) then IMO they're intentionally trying to be a troll or aren't very bright, and that's what several comments in this thread looked like.
I hope each and every one of those making them have every available cookies/browser add-in, retail client, and all sorts of other apps running on their machines because you know, if they don't, then they're being hypocrites for ridiculing others for objecting specific clients.
