It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionOpen letter to GOG(194 posts)(194 posts)
(194 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
This is my favourite topic
Posted May 11, 2017
avatar
Johny.: It would be really nice to have (optional to run) galaxy-client-downloading functionality in the game installers instead of having Galaxy Client installer embedded there. We'll see how that turns out in the future. The advantage here is having it working totally offline.
avatar
Telika: I'd be interested in a 100% honest answer to this :

Why do you need to have the "galaxy-client-downloading functionality" in the game installers rather in the game-downloading interface of the website itself ?

In other words why do you place this check and option at the level of already downloaded EXEs, instead of placing it that the level of obligatory "select download" procedure on your website (another convenient bottleneck which is a just as unavoidable as the install process itself, but would spare you to have to tweak each indiviual game packaging) ?
I'm not the perfect person to ask, but I guess for users that just download the game they have just bought (my guess - most of the users ;) ), and we want them to easily have Galaxy Client installed (optionally) and have their games up-to-date with cloud saves etc.
Post edited May 11, 2017 by Johny.
Posted May 11, 2017
avatar
Johny.: It would be really nice to have (optional to run) galaxy-client-downloading functionality in the game installers instead of having Galaxy Client installer embedded there. We'll see how that turns out in the future. The advantage here is having it working totally offline.
Though why would it be an advantage, to have it working totally offline? I mean, all the most useful Galaxy's features works online (updates, cloud sync, friends), so if I don't want the installer to connect to the server, I probably don't want Galaxy neither.
I'm sure that, at the end of the day, you'll just go for the best, seamless solution. You always do. But it would be so nice if, for once, you could rapidly look into the problem and avoid this shitstorm to grow. I'm not saying that you need to fix all of it right now, I'm sure that most people here just want an official announcement that you will see into our concerns.
All the best.
Posted May 11, 2017
high rated
avatar
Johny.: I guess for users that just download the game they have just bought
But the question was, why not ask the users if they want Galaxy when they download the installer? If you would ask before starting the download, you know the user is on-line and can serve them the latest installer for Galaxy. If you let them download a game installer with a pre-bundled Galaxy (probably outdated already) and ask them during installation, that's just not logical. Making the the whole Galaxy installation available offline is not important, because sooner or later the user has to go online to actually use Galaxy. I just don't get the reasoning behind any of this...
Posted May 11, 2017
avatar
Telika: I'd be interested in a 100% honest answer to this :

Why do you need to have the "galaxy-client-downloading functionality" in the game installers rather in the game-downloading interface of the website itself ?

In other words why do you place this check and option at the level of already downloaded EXEs, instead of placing it that the level of obligatory "select download" procedure on your website (another convenient bottleneck which is a just as unavoidable as the install process itself, but would spare you to have to tweak each indiviual game packaging) ?
avatar
Johny.: I'm not the perfect person to ask, but I guess for users that just download the game they have just bought (my guess - most of the users ;) ), and we want them to easily have Galaxy Client installed (optionally) and have their games up-to-date with cloud saves etc.
They "just download" it from a website, an internet page with a button to click which triggers the download (and checks if there's a client to use). They do not download it from a separate space, or from a different interface.

So my question is : why isn't the easy Galaxy check, proposition, and install process located on this interface. Which the "users who just download the game" necessarily went through.

I'm asking : why this mean instead of that mean. You answered with a purpose which is achieved by both.
Post edited May 11, 2017 by Telika
Posted May 11, 2017
high rated
avatar
Miljac: Being optional and non intrusive is the way to go. Some say you should leave checkbox to install it unchecked by default, and that would be much better. But even better (my personal opinion) would be if you only included download link to galaxy. That way, you will not bloat installer with galaxy client.
avatar
Johny.: I'm just a member of Galaxy Client development team (formerly website team) and I don't think I can answer most of your concerns.

About including Galaxy Client installer - yeah, including all of it in the game installer is probably not the most optimized solution.
I think it's nice for it to be seamless, so it wouldn't require new users to click the link, download and install manually, but simply have a checkbox for that.

It would be really nice to have (optional to run) galaxy-client-downloading functionality in the game installers instead of having Galaxy Client installer embedded there. We'll see how that turns out in the future. The advantage here is having it working totally offline.
avatar
Johny.: About other posts on page 2 - I think I've already targeted those concerns in my first post here (and chatted with mechmouse). Thanks for your feedback. :)
I agree that for users that are backing up installers - it's a waste of space to have full client installer bundled in the game installer.
Hi Johny

Thank you for responding to an issue, you showed us that you do care, and that counts for something in my book. From your first post, it wasn't quite clear what you were trying to say (at least for me), but your second post cleared things up. I only hope our concerns will not only be acknowledged, but addressed as well.

I will edit my post to include link to your response, so other people that come this way can easily find your answer. As for other concerns, I will bump this topic to keep it active until they are addressed by someone who has authority to do so.
Post edited May 11, 2017 by Miljac
Posted May 11, 2017
high rated
avatar
Johny.: I'm not the perfect person to ask, but I guess for users that just download the game they have just bought (my guess - most of the users ;) ), and we want them to easily have Galaxy Client installed (optionally) and have their games up-to-date with cloud saves etc.
So, rather than making this choice for everyone by forcing it into installers and wasting lots of bandwidth, disk space and lots of time re-building and re-testing installers as a result, why not do this instead:

*User starts downloading offline/"backup" installer through Galaxy* --> Galaxy: "Would you like to download a backup of the latest Galaxy client installer too? [ Yes / No ]"

And for downloading through the website, present a pop-up message about the Galaxy client that needs to be dismissed before any download links are offered (and only do this once- the first time any game is selected on the library page).

People who don't want Galaxy won't have it forced on them, and those that do have plenty of options for noticing & downloading it and making backups of the Galaxy installer.
Posted May 11, 2017
high rated
The most infuriating thing about the whole situation for me is the way GOG reacts to the whole thing. There are only 2 blues who commented yet, Fables who only writes marketing BS and makes everything worse and Johny who openly and honestly writes, that he thinks this whole thing is not optimal, but admits he is "not the perfect person to ask" (but still thank you very much for chiming in. I see you really care about Galaxy).

There just isn't an official response from somebody at GOG who is responsible for this mess and that is something I expect from companies like Steam or EA, but wouldn't have thought possible from GOG until very recently. Very disappointing!
Posted May 11, 2017
high rated
avatar
DoctorGOGgles: The most infuriating thing about the whole situation for me is the way GOG reacts to the whole thing. There are only 2 blues who commented yet, Fables who only writes marketing BS and makes everything worse and Johny who openly and honestly writes, that he thinks this whole thing is not optimal, but admits he is "not the perfect person to ask" (but still thank you very much for chiming in. I see you really care about Galaxy).

There just isn't an official response from somebody at GOG who is responsible for this mess and that is something I expect from companies like Steam or EA, but wouldn't have thought possible from GOG until very recently. Very disappointing!
It used to be that GOG listened to the userbase, and faced with a backlash this big would've at least suspended their plans & tried to sort out something more acceptable, if not scrapped the plans altogether. This situation is more "this is what we're going to be doing, screw you all if you don't like it"
Posted May 11, 2017
avatar
Miljac: I love this site, I love it to a point that I bought my games almost exclusive through GOG in past 3 years. You continue to bring DRM free titles for us to purchase and that is awesome.
avatar
bhrigu: I am a relatively new guy around here. But the reason I chose GOG over Steam (which is the prevalent store in the market here) is because I found it to be operating on principles different to its competitors.
avatar
Miljac: Galaxy is an optional client I get that, I don't mind it, I am using it, but being optional is not good enough. With your last decision you will make it intrusive [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrusiveness], and intrusive is as bad as mandatory, and all that under some lame excuse that it is friendly to new customers. You have made galaxy a bloatware to anyone who regularly backs up their library and bloatware is not the term you want galaxy to be associated with.

Solution:
Being optional and non intrusive is the way to go. Some say you should leave checkbox to install it unchecked by default, and that would be much better. But even better (my personal opinion) would be if you only included download link to galaxy. That way, you will not bloat installer with galaxy client.
avatar
bhrigu: I also Use Galaxy, I find it useful for Some tasks. But then I would want it to be Optional in the true sense of the term, Optional as you promised. It already has a prominent banner and links on the home page. Anyone who wants it can grab it there. Why would you need to bundle it with OFFLINE installers. And as someone pointed it out in another thread most of those games bundled with Galaxy don't even support cloud saves and such. So what's the point.

Don't try to follow steam. You are a company founded upon different principles. Grow based on those principles.
Remember you have come this long way being what you are.
This. As the old saying goes, ya gotta dance with who brung ya.
Posted May 11, 2017
high rated
avatar
Johny.: I'm just a member of Galaxy Client development team (formerly website team) and I don't think I can answer most of your concerns.

About including Galaxy Client installer - yeah, including all of it in the game installer is probably not the most optimized solution.
I think it's nice for it to be seamless, so it wouldn't require new users to click the link, download and install manually, but simply have a checkbox for that.

It would be really nice to have (optional to run) galaxy-client-downloading functionality in the game installers instead of having Galaxy Client installer embedded there. We'll see how that turns out in the future. The advantage here is having it working totally offline.
avatar
blotunga: I don't really see the point of being able to install Galaxy offline. Those who want it probably rather download it once then have it included in every single installer. Let's assume the average user has 500 games on GOG. If he wants to back them all up, that would be an extra 75GB of wasted space/bandwidth just by the redundant Galaxy installers (assuming the installer is about 150MB).
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
exactly

what is the point of installing offline an "OPTIONAL" client whose key "selling" features are online multiplayer, cloud savegames and autoupdates ?

i'm very confident that someone soon will enlighten me with some awe-striking answers to that, as the retarded idiot i seem to be :)
Posted May 11, 2017
avatar
Johny.: [...]
I agree that for users that are backing up installers - it's a waste of space to have full client installer bundled in the game installer.
avatar
Johny.: I'm not the perfect person to ask, but I guess for users that just download the game they have just bought (my guess - most of the users ;) ), and we want them to easily have Galaxy Client installed (optionally) and have their games up-to-date with cloud saves etc.
First, thanks for your answers, that's really appreciated :)

I do agree with a lot of other posts in this thread.
And amongst all the other things, I want to insist on one particular point : yeah, wasted space (and bandwith) when you back-up installers is a concern (for me and some others). What's the point in DRM-free offline installers if they aren't "convenient" to backup ?
But I won't insist since you are already aware of issues, concerns and eventual solutions.

I'm sure there is a solution which would meet our wishes and the ones of GOG.
Post edited May 11, 2017 by Splatsch
Posted May 11, 2017
avatar
Djaron: i'm very confident that someone soon will enlighten me with some awe-striking answers to that, as the retarded idiot i seem to be :)
Well for the same reason why some peoples add non-Steam games to their Steam client and why some peoples ask to have a similar feature added to Galaxy.

Instead of having icons on the desktop or in their start menu some peoples likes being able to launch their games from a client application where they are all grouped together and easy to find.

Personally I prefer desktop icons but that's just me.
Posted May 11, 2017
avatar
Gersen: Well for the same reason why some peoples add non-Steam games to their Steam client and why some peoples ask to have a similar feature added to Galaxy.

Instead of having icons on the desktop or in their start menu some peoples likes being able to launch their games from a client application where they are all grouped together and easy to find.

Personally I prefer desktop icons but that's just me.
Does Galaxy even launch without signing in Online at least once?
I see someone file a bug/feature request ;)
Post edited May 11, 2017 by Executer
Posted May 11, 2017
avatar
Executer: Does Galaxy even launch without signing in Online at least once?
I see someone file a bug/feature request ;)
Honestly no idea, I only use it when I play online.
Posted May 11, 2017
i also would like to repeat my proposition from the other thread:
about making available to users an offline tool that would allow them to clean up /unbundle galaxy data off regular offline installers

that way, gog wouldnt have to use storage and manpower themselves to maintain such versions of installers, but allow customers who just dont need/.dont want galaxy and also dont want the bloatware syndroma of extra required storage space required for their collection

i mean, ok, gog storage space aint cheap ? but so aint mine, unless gog agree to actively provides me extra cash discount to a new 4TB synology nas or 4TB HDD, because if gog plans to slowly extent galaxy installer bundling to every game, i'm in for over 880 time the required space

make such tool able to work in batch, to maybe scan an existing folder/drive for existing gog installers, and allow us to convert those galaxy-including installers into regular galaxy-devoid ones
avatar
Djaron: i'm very confident that someone soon will enlighten me with some awe-striking answers to that, as the retarded idiot i seem to be :)
avatar
Gersen: Well for the same reason why some peoples add non-Steam games to their Steam client and why some peoples ask to have a similar feature added to Galaxy.

Instead of having icons on the desktop or in their start menu some peoples likes being able to launch their games from a client application where they are all grouped together and easy to find.

Personally I prefer desktop icons but that's just me.
ok, that's THOSE peeps 's choice and likes and desire... i'm ok with them doing that for themselves, but why should i get stripped of the choice to manage my own stuff at my home because of them ?

i mean, i was handling steam+humble+gog collection on my stuff and i didnt ask those peeps any help on that, right ? i never bothered anyone in that regard, so why shouldnt it work both ways ?

i also already made my own cloud save/sync stuff way long before galaxy.

i dont mind "convenient features" for those who would ask for it, but is it a reaso to force it upon everyone without leaving people a choice or a word on that matter ?
Post edited May 11, 2017 by Djaron
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionOpen letter to GOG(194 posts)(194 posts)
(194 posts)