No.. the main issue is does GOG does not act according its principles and promises.

If you didn't aknowledge and accept an already expressed decision but keep on asking and purposefully design the whole process so we probably will slip at some time i consider that as more than offensive.

This whole shitshow just shows to me does the whole DRM thing is nothing more than a marketing stunt today with no values behind it.

I personaly strongly believe GOG has abandoned ALL values it once hold.. and it will drop any "promise" they formaly abide at this date (DRM; Galaxy beeing "optional") when they see fit.

How this whole fucking Galaxy-Bundlecrap is implemented and purposefully any constructive and in any way better suggestions from the community are ignored is just disgustingly offensive to me.

If you are willing to ignore all those problems because Galaxy is still optional (they advertised it as FULLY optional at a point which by this action is CLEARLY broken) if you do this and that and watch where you click and search where you get what you want.. then you are why the industry where it is today.
We have customer unfriendly DRM.
We have customer unfriendly return policies.
We have no ownership of digital goods.
We have broken early access.

and so on...
This whole industry is rotten in the core and the customer and its rights are treatet like shit.. and interestingly.. the majority of people like the taste of it.

Noone believes this bullshit does the poor customers can not find the download link for Galaxy and resorting to shady bundleware tactics is the ONLY and BEST way to solve this.
The REAL problem is they want Galaxy installed on more Computers because they need it to grow the platform and make money and for whatever plans the didn't told us.

Right on Breja!

I don't think he realises!

Personally I'm getting tired of direction gog is taking. I'm thinking of being a console peasant. (Non-Microsoft) of course!

Oh yes almost forgot. There will be no Witcher 3 on Linux because Microsoft said so! There you go and I feel bad for gOg and all of us good spirited gamers.

That's an interesting possibility, but if something like this is true, I wonder why GOG couldn't have been more open about their reasoning for doing this. I think people would have been more empathetic if it had to do with something like Support being overwhelmed.

And I'm trying to understand the value of bundling Galaxy with the installers, instead of including a banner image + link one can click on that automatically starts downloading Galaxy if connected to the internet.

Was it ever anything really more than a marketing stunt, though? GOG has always been a business here to make money - they started as Good Old Games because that was a good niche nobody else was doing; then they focused on DRM-free because Steam started getting old games too; now I think they're focusing on "actual competition to Steam".

I don't mean to seem like I support bundling Galaxy, especially with no button to select Galaxy-free installers only.

You know there are other DRM-free services, right? Tiny compared to GOG and Steam, but they exist.

You have to specifically pay attention to the fine text on the download pop-up, then specifically select the clean installer from the menu. That is a mandatory opt-out by any sane definition.
I'm sorry, but the fact that some do unscrupulous things doesn't give anyone else a free pass. That's some shill level handwaving you're doing though.

"Low-high" quotation marks are used in several countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark#Summary_table

'scuse me for not going through this whole mess now, but did blues give an ETA for adding a profile setting that makes sure you get the classic installers as primary?
Because anything but that is irrelevant, and there can be absolutely no justification not to do it.

I rest my case. I guess that thanks to the GOG Galaxy users are in order, for if it weren't for them we'd probably have only the Galaxy-bundled installers now.

I will however add my voice to those requesting an option to set the view permanently to the non-Galaxy-bundled installers, as well as to those wanting an answer as to if this will be implemented. If yes, when can we expect it, and if no, why not?



This one: Not all of GOG's new users are, or will be, tech challenged enough to rely on the client for everything, and may well be interested in the non-Galaxy-bundled installers. And not every current GOG user that wants the clean standalone installers as they've known them for years has, or has to have, followed this thread - example.

The way it's been implemented, with no info about the existence of the non-Galaxy-bundled installers in the default details of games, is more akin to hiding them.

This is on top, and probably a more serious issue, of not offering an option to permanently have the non-Galaxy-bundled installers show in one's library (and not even commenting on it, even though they acknowledge feedback has been provided) which for all intents and purposes equals the same opt-out issue we'd have if only Galaxy-bundled installers were offered.

I'd like to think that you actually don't see it, but I'm not sure that it's actually the case.

Nope:
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/offline_installers_with_an_option_to_install_gog_galaxy?staff=yes
Of course they didn't because that wouldn't be Galaxy-friendly™.

Not only don't we have an ETA, but so far GOG hasn't made any sort of comment on this matter.

just succumb to Galaxy...

LOL. Shut the fuck up NaziCiris.

I call you that because you're every bit the fucking idiot, with the added benefit of calling for the gassing of Jewish people. :)

You are way out of line with your choice of words. If you cannot contribute in a level-headed manner at all, stop.

Madam Chairwoman, I would just like to state for the record that this person in no way represents the rest of the angry mob. Thank you.

There is the door, close it from the outside, thanks.