I'm sorry, I don't understand how to do that. I am just a simple caveman. Your modern ways frighten and confuse me.

Git version means current master branch, not the release one. If you aren't familial with using git or general concepts of source repositories and version control, you can read some documentation.

I'm here to play video games, not learn coding. If you don't have anything helpful to add, there is no point in replying. Don't waste my time and I won't waste yours.

If you want to use a tool that's not packaged for your distro, then you can learn how to work with source repositories and then build that source on your machine. It doesn't equal to coding that tool. That is useful. As @ssokolow already said above, you don't even need to check it out from the repo using git, you can make a zip of the master branch straight from the site (the button is right there on the front page). All it takes is to read a bit and to look around there. Nothing impossible to figure out. If you don't want to do that, then please don't waste others' time with requests for help.

I have zero experience with git so I will try your suggestion, thank you.
"Read some documentation" is not a helpful suggestion. It costs you literally nothing to scroll past my post if my ignorance offends you. If a friend asked me what was wrong with his car and I told him it was the mains, and he didn't know what that meant, would he consider it helpful if I told him to "go read some documentation"? Should I get irritated with him, or point him in the right direction?

It is, if you have no familiarity with source repositories at all. Since practically all of them allow downloading the archives of the branches from the web UI. Learning that will save you time next time with asking exactly the same question if it won't be git but let's say mercurial or whatever.

Also, search engines really can be useful: https://lmddgtfy.net/?q=how+to+download+the+git+source+github

Wow. You sure sound smart.

Anyway, the point wasn't to discourage you from building it from source, but to encourage you to learn how to use source repositories.

I'm not going to get involved in some back and forth here but I am going to add my $0.02. Whether you intended it to be that way your earlier response comes across as rude and pissy for no good reason, now it looks like you're just being a dick.

There are far too many snobby and elitist Linux users who are dismissive of newbies and make far too many assumptions and have unreasonable expectations of what users should know. Venturing outside of the distro, being pushed to use the Terminal is overwhelming and fraught with problems. Even if you know what to look for: documentation, manuals and tutorials are mostly very Spartan and also make many assumptions of knowledge without giving any clue about what that missing information is.

If you don't feel like helping a lost newbie then just move along. It's really off putting to see the dismissive replies to requests for help, so leave it to somebody else to post a more informative reply with courteous directions to any required learning.

The tone pmn357 set was "I don't understand your suggestions because your ways frighten me". And that's coming from someone who intends to build the source. The response was according to the comment, sorry. If you ask for help with building the source, you should be ready to do some legwork and not reply something like "I'm here to play games, not to learn coding". Wrong attitude for that kind of request.

For future reference, here's the "trivial if you know what you're doing" approach that shmerl was trying to push you to learn: The main benefit to doing it that way is that, once you've successfully built it once, it's easy to script future updates. Here's what I put in a script named "update.sh": (You use "git clone <URL>" to create your local copy and then "git pull" to retrieve remote updates. the "cd" line, "git stash", and "git stash pop" may not be necessary, but they make it more flexible.)
I'm fine with doing legwork, but I can understand where pmn357 is coming from. Who knows how much work it would take to do said legwork and how much time would be spent wandering around to find the right docs to learn from.

I'd have done legwork in pmn357's position... but you didn't really say anything useful like "as someone who's already learned this, here's the best place to start reading", so the only effect your phrasing would have evoked from me is a mental "thanks for nothing".

I probably had to be more verbose, but the tone set me off.

Version 2.17 seems to have fixed whatever log in problem I was having. I'm also no longer having any sort of problem with the regexes as well.

Not sure if anything else explains that, but thanks for the work getting it fixed.

Oh, so --status does not check the integrity of the files? Somehow

Status codes:
OK - File is OK
ND - File is not downloaded
MD5 - MD5 mismatch, different version

suggested to me it does check the MD5 sums.
Is there any combination of options which (locally) checks the integrity of the downloaded files but does not automatically repair them?

Also probably since I use the "--xml-directory" and "--create-xml automatic" options the download takes hours even when there is only a single new game to download (and I have a fast internet connection). I use

lgogdownloader --xml-directory dir --create-xml automatic --download

to download the files. The output is somewhat confusing:

100% 89.83/89.83MB @ 0.00kB/s ETA: 0s

To me this rather looks like the downloader is not re-downloading the file. But why does it try to do so? And if it's not re-downloading the file what is it doing that it takes so long?
The downloader causes a lot of disk I/O. Does it verify the checksums of already downloaded files when I use the --xml* options?

Edit:

Using the --report option it says:

Downloaded [No error] flight_of_the_amazon_queen/setup_flight_of_the_amazon_queen_german_2.0.0.4.exe

Even more confusing ...

It looks like the --report option overwrites the report file on each run. It would be nice if I could provide a filename with this option. I also would prefer when the downloader would log more information to the report file, something like what is written to the console. So far I pipe the command output to a log file, but the progress display for the downloads makes these log files unnecessary large and very hard to read. Is there any way to suppress the progress information in the command output?