I'm not forcing Galaxy on anyone. It isn't included in the installer I am suggesting.

It's just a checkbox, I honestly don't see the problem.

Even so, I would suggest GOG install something (Registry entry maybe) that could be checked by the installer each time, and which stored your choice first time around, so that with subsequent game installs it is automatically deselecting the checkbox for you. None of its rocket science to achieve.

However, don't hold your breath that GOG would be so beneficent to do that.

After reading AB2012's post, I'm confused too as to what you think adding a Galaxy "stub" do at the user end that will fix an outdated installer caused by an update not triggering an auto-rebuild of the offline installer at GOG's end. Or have you been arguing all along that a "solution" to an outdated offline installer is to get the offline installer to include the ability to download Galaxy, install Galaxy, then use Galaxy to download the game (via Galaxy) but then "pretend" to yourself that you just installed it "via an offline installer" simply because that's what you clicked on first? That's no solution at all, and incredibly dishonest as to why people want OFFLINE installers in the first place. They work offline / for long-term game preservation reasons that install 100% locally and will continue to work with no GOG servers to download from...

Not each time. Once. The GOG installers remember choices through registry entries.
He's saying that Galaxy would use the same installer as the offline installs do, meaning there is one version to upkeep, not two. So when updates come to GOG for a game, they are there for everyone.

I'm sorry, but you need to re-read my first post.

The content installed for the game, whether as an Offline Installer User or Galaxy Online Installer user is identical. The Galaxy App is the only thing downloaded by the Installer file, and Galaxy installs the game using the local content of that installer. It doesn't download a different copy of game files.

As has already been stated a few times, what gets installed to a user's PC is something like 99% the same, whether you install currently with an Offline Installer or get Galaxy to do it for you. In fact, it could be more like 99.9% if every Offline Installer currently includes the Galaxy based DLL files.

There is absolutely no issue in regard to InnoSetup.

The DEV updates one set of game files and/or GOG update the Galaxy based DLL files.
One installer is created. The stub code is all part of that ... easy peasy.

They already do this as well.

Absolutely. But we have opposite views of what the right thing is on this matter. Anything that in any way, shape or form, however slightly, favors the client or those who use it is definitely not it in mine.

It virtually already is identical ever since GOG migrated the offline installers from a zip-like structure (the old nameofgame_2.0.0.1.exe filename patterns) to a new "Galaxy stream" like structure during 2018 (the new nameofgame_1.0.0.0_(xxxxx) filename patterns) to match. You can see how they are really stored today by using InnoExtract with the command switch --no-gog-galaxy (literally hundreds of \tmp\xx folders with obfuscated filenames). ie, the offline installer content already is identical now as to how Galaxy downloads it. The update issue is entirely at GOG's end, ie, some devs may be using the "old" way of them uploading the game to GOG, or some of GOG's automatic scripting may not be working correctly / triggered on an update.

Unless I'm missing something, the way you've worded it above is that your solution for out of date offline installers is to use offline installers as fancy Galaxy downloader stub + shortcut link to install and start Galaxy, then use Galaxy to install the game via (still out of date) local content (that the offline installer could install anyway), and then tell people who don't want to use Galaxy, to pretend they're not using Galaxy? That doesn't solve either the outdated issue, nor the fact "backup" installers are supposed to be standalone by design and not rely on Galaxy at all.

Which is a darn rotten thing to pull in itself.
And if I understood it correctly (haven't tried with anything large enough), by requiring all of those to go to the temporary directory first, makes it impossible for me to install large games, the system partition just being for, well, the system and the handful of programs installed in Program Files.

I don’t want unrequested third-party software in my game installers.
New "search bars" for Internet Explorer are wrong. Google Chrome installers are wrong. Spyware, nagware, adware are wrong. Galaxy installers are wrong.

And there will be no update benefit anyway. So I would only end up with Galaxy installed due to some dark pattern, and would have gained nothing in the process.

Since I do not want Galaxy, I am not going to download a game installer trying to install it. If this were to become the only kind of installer proposed by GOG, I would stop buying games here altogether.

It was not a "Galaxy version of the installer", ie. something that would have been meant for existing Galaxy users.

It was meant for new users and other users without an existing Galaxy client, with the option to install Galaxy while you install the game.

Galaxy users need no installers. The installers are only for non-Galaxy users. There would be no benefit for users with such installers. Galaxy users wouldn't use those installers as they don't need any installers, the Galaxy client downloads and installs the games they want.

Unlike you suggested elsewhere, it wouldn't guarantee version parity with Galaxy-versions of games because these offline installers would still have to be created somehow (automatically or manually) and put the download links to the GOG homepages. No, that is not how it would work because Galaxy users by default don't use any installers. They just click on an "INSTALL" button on their client, which then downloads and installs the game for them. They don't download any "installer" with their web browser from www.gog.com/account.

Also, what would be the benefit for non-Galaxy users that there is an option to download and install a Galaxy client within their offline game installers? There is only one type of installer to update already now, the one you can download from your account with the web browser.

Galaxy users don't download any separate installers.

So no, your suggestion would not guarantee version parity between the non-installer version of the game in the Galaxy-client, and the installer version you can download from the GOG homepages. It would probably be e.g. some kind of self-extracting EXE of the Galaxy-installer version of the game, which possibly includes some startup script that makes the changes the game requires (registry entries, installing some needed dependencies etc.).

I guess I would be fine with such, as long as they could be run (and "installed" ie. uncompressed and ready to play) without the client, but I'd hope there would be an option to download them also without the Galaxy client, as some third-party tools (like gogrepo) offer better download options.

It still doesn't explain OP's point that these "zips" would include a query about installing the Galaxy client (in case it isn't installed already).

What purpose would that have for anyone, how would it help anyone?

For non Galaxy users, such "zip file" would have to include both that startup script that puts registry entries etc. in place and maybe installs some needed dependencies for the game (not the Galaxy client though!), but also some kind of uninstaller script that also removes those registry entries etc. after you want to get rid of the game.

Why would it have to come with a query to install the Galaxy client at all? After all, the Galaxy users would not use that installer anyway because they download and install their games using the Galaxy client (and it would be silly there was some kind of optional Galaxy installer stub or query for them, "Do you want to install the Galaxy client now that you downloaded and installed this game with your Galaxy client?" LOL), while the non-Galaxy users don't want such a query.

The only one which might see some benefit with it is a first time user who wants to use Galaxy but somehow ends up downloading the game installer files from the web pages... but for them the current Galaxy client installers (which afterwards automatically downloads the game they want) work even better as they don't have to download Cyberpunk 2077 in 28 pieces, totalling 100GB. They just let the Galaxy client handle it.

No it doesn't.

Adding a query about downloading and installing the Galaxy client in each and every GOG game offline installer that you can download with your web browser from https://www.gog.com/account does not in any way guarantee version parity with the non-installer Galaxy versions of games that you download and install with the Galaxy client (not the web pages).

Why would it?

Is that where your apparent confusion comes? That you think there is version disparity between the Galaxy and non-Galaxy (installer) versions of games because there are two separate download links on the www.gog.com download pages?

That has nothing to do with the version parity. Even if there was only one link, it could still lead to an older version of the game because the Galaxy users don't use those web page download links at all. They download and install their games from within the Galaxy-client, if they have installed it already.

As bloated as Windows really is, you can fragment it by moving things like profile, temp folders, and even Program Files to other partitions/harddrives. Just like in Linux.