Even if you hate GOG Galaxy, then downloading your GOG games via Galaxy is still always vastly better than downloading them directly from the GOG website.

Downloading games directly from the GOG website is tedious, and cumbersome, and it requires massive amounts of clicks, and it also requires for you manually to take into account the file name number mismatches between how the file displays on the GOG website, versus how the file number displays differently on the file name of the file itself; in addition to being aggravating, that problem can also easily lead to user error, where you might make a mistake, and therefore accidentally not download some of your game files.

Dealing with all of that is a massive pain that simply isn't ever worth dealing with.

In contrast, using Galaxy to download your games, instead of downloading them from the GOG website directly, bypasses all of those horrible problems. Primarily, for two reasons:

1) many users vehemently hate Achievements, which require Galaxy to use. They think that since they don't like Achievements, then no one should be allowed to have Achievements on their GOG games. Thus, they heap their hate onto Galaxy, because without the existence Galaxy, then it would not be possible for devs to implement Achievements onto their GOG games.

But other users do like Achievements, so they push back against the anti-Galaxy/anti-Achievement hate as regards to this point (hence "the divide," like you say).

2) Galaxy can be used as a DRM-wall, and sometimes, with some games, it is, with game content locked behind a Galaxy DRM-wall.

Galaxy is not inherently DRM, but it can become DRM when it is misused in this way by GOG itself, as it has been for games like Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk 2077, both of which have some content locked behind the Galaxy DRM-wall, and for which there is no way to make offline backup copies of that DRM-ed content.

That is not really a Galaxy problem though; really, it is a problem of GOG choosing to abandon their supposed DRM-free principles.

But since it's easier to blame Galaxy for problems like this, even though Galaxy is not inherently DRM, many users do blame Galaxy, instead of blaming GOG itself, as would be the reasonable thing to do.

That statement gives a misleading impression.

a) The impression given by that statement makes it sound like the current Alan Wake files that are downloaded via the GOG website are somehow "superior" to the current files that are downloaded via Galaxy.

But that is not true. Both sets of files are identical. The files downloaded from the GOG website are not better in any way whatsoever.

b) The impression given by that statement also makes it sound like the files downloaded from the GOG website are going to remain unaffected by the soon coming butchered version of Alan Wake.

But the fact is, no they won't. The files downloaded from the GOG website are going to become equally & identically butchered to the files downloaded from GOG Galaxy.

On both points, the files downloaded via offline installers have no difference & no improvement & no advantage whatsoever, over the files downloaded via Galaxy.

The user downloading offline installers from the website is therefore no better off in any way at all, versus the another user who has downloaded the offline installers from Galaxy.

For most games, patches/hotfixes/content updates are provided via offline installers (as indicated by their naming, starting with "patch", for example) in the library as well.
I say most games, because it depends on the respective developer or publisher, in some cases on the game and the size of the update.
For instance, for the newest and final patch to Baldur's Gate 3 the patch offline installers assumedly would have amounted to more or less the same size as the updated regular offline installers for the base game.
Hence in this case there are no patch offline installers provided and you download the regular offline installers for the base game updated to the the newest build instead.


Except that the offline installers downloaded BEFORE the update are superior because they'd still include the licensed music and remain to do so, as long as you keep that particular version of the offline installers backed up and don't replace them with the updated offline installers that have the licensed music removed.

You may have noticed the word "DRM-free" somewhere on the GOG pages or ads. What, if anything, does that term mean to you? What does it mean to you that a game claims to be "DRM-free"?

If a game requires you to use a client like Steam or Galaxy to install and play the game, meaning you have to log into some online account with that client before you can install and play your games, those games are not DRM-free because you will not be able to use your games anymore if that online account is erased or the server into which you log are permanently shut down. Or, if you just don't simply have an internet connection at the time.

Also, some people don't "like" or use Galaxy simply because they play their games on e.g. Linux, and there is no Linux version of Galaxy. So they use the offline installers through the WINE compatibility layer in Linux, installing the games that way.


Think of it this way. A scenario in the future: the GOG store has shut its doors years ago, so the GOG service does not work at all anymore. If you try to install the Galaxy client and log to your GOG account, nothing happens. You just get an error the Galaxy client can't reach some GOG server on the internets and that's it, you can't install and play your games anymore.

So how can you play your GOG games then? Well, if you have downloaded your GOG game offline installers with e.g. a web browser BEFORE the service was shut down, you can still freely use those installers to install the games and play them. No clients nor online accounts needed. That is what "DRM-free" means.

Note, to my knowledge it is possible also to e.g copy the folder of the game you downloaded and installed with Galaxy, and play that game on another PC without internet and the Galaxy client, so effectively those games are still DRM-free, as long as you have indeed first downloaded and installed them on your PC with Galaxy, one by one. (The same actually applies to many Steam games.)

However, having an offline installer still gives benefits for DRM-free gamers:

1. Easier to download and archive your GOG games in a form of ready offline installers, than downloading, installing and compressing the installation folders one by one with Galaxy. So the offline installers are easier to use for that purpose.

2. Having an offline installer is at least some kind of guarantee to you that the game is indeed DRM-free. With the Galaxy-downloaded versions you might be unsure, and you'd have to test the games one by one, whether they fully work when played on another PC without the Galaxy client and internet, just to be sure.

3. The offline installers tend to also install all needed dependencies for the particular game to work, so you don't have to wonder why your Galaxy-downloaded game does not work on that other PC (because you are missing some dependency or library on that other PC, which the offline installer or Galaxy would have installed for you).

Take me for example. I have 2674 games on GOG, and I have downloaded them all in the form of offline installers and keep them on a big external USB hard drive. So if tomorrow GOG shuts down the store and their service permanently, I can still install and play all those games. Note: I have used a third-party tool (gogrepoc) to download the offline installers effortlessly, not downloaded them one by one with a browser or Galaxy.

That is the very essence of DRM-free: you are not dependent on any online service or account after you have bought and downloaded your game.

If I was using Galaxy and not offline installers, how could I have done the same? Download and install the games one by one with Galaxy, copying the game folders to another PC, and then test there one by one whether the games still work, including save games. Or if, for argument's sake, those games will require you to use Galaxy and log into your GOG account, then I wouldn't be able to play them on that other PC.

Additionally you can look at it this way. If you care about DRM-Free then you would just download the Offline Installers, and not do the download and install thing with Galaxy. You can still use Galaxy to download the Offline Installers via the Extras option. You then install the game by executing the main or only EXE file of the Offline Installers. You would also as part of that process, backup your Offline Installers to another drive, because until you do, you are not really doing the safe DRM-Free thing. In fact, you should have at least two separate copies of the game on separate physical drives. Doing otherwise, means relying on a web connection, which is a form of DRM all on its own.

GOG of course, want you to rely on them (and their cloud), which is why they push Galaxy, but make downloading the Offline Installers an almost obscure option, and never really promote them.

Unlike many, I don't have an issue with galaxy existing, just with how it was designed and its use promoted.

Galaxy is not the only downloading program for GOG games, so avoiding it doesn't mean you are limited to browser downloads, which can take a lot of clicks for some games, and not really ideal anyway, as far as resume and validation go. Instead, you could use third party programs that use the GOG API/SDK, such as gogrepo.py or gogcli.exe and more recently, Heroic, which the developers of have been reportedly in talks with GOG.

P.S. You don't have to install via Galaxy to play your installed games via Galaxy.

Short version:

You backup your bought products and you dont have anyone telling you, you can no longer access the stuff you bought.

If you let a company dictate the stuff you "buy". They tell you when and if you can use it at all.


You decide.

ps: your account says 2012 and you have no idea what gog is about??
Better late than never I suppose.

Installing the game through Galaxy in one pass (specially humongous modern titles) and accordingly download the installer for backup purposes is also a perfectly standard option that I am sure is very common for a lot of users.

GOG Galaxy is an attempt to make a game management platform that covers a vast swathe of platforms, but in reality is just a money hole being beaten out by free & open source software on multiple fronts.

GOG offers offline installers that they call "backup" which should be the primary format and presented in a better installer & download formats.

For example, a tar.zst & torrent link instead of having to get the letter opener that is InnoExtract and ripping the contents open, dumping them into an arbitrary folder and not dealing with the moribund version of InnoInstall that GOG provides without ever updating.

Imagine a 100Gb game. You Install it in one pass with Galaxy and then (or previously), if you want, you download the offline installer for backup purposes, (yes, you can download them though Galaxy if you want). Later in a future you have your game available to be nstalled anywhere .

Anyway you can do whatever you want and run the game with or without the Launcher after the Galaxy installation. You can ownload your 100GB game and then install your 100GB files redundantly from the offline installer for religious reasons.

Under my point of view in both decisions the DRM aspect is zero. But I know this is something that leads to infinte circles.

I shudder at the thought of doing that, especially with that size of game, what a waste, that is just not needed.
Why download twice, when you only need to do so once.

In my view, it is not really DRM-Free unless you have the Offline Installers, not guaranteed anyway. You can maybe get away with calling it DRM-Free Lite. But how many games are you gonna do that with, because installed they take up far more space, especially with largish games. I guess if you only have a handful of games at GOG, it ain't such an issue, but I wouldn't have the room to install even a small portion of mine ... relatively speaking.

I can see the point of using Galaxy, for some folk. But I don't see the point of doing the single download & install process with Galaxy ... not the DRM-Free point anyway. Doing that, you are just being a kind of Steam user.

I would say it's more that some users are vehemently against clients, even if they are useful or convenient. Some love to boast "I don't need any of that!!!" and others just think it is completely useless. I've been playing games since the early 80's. I can appreciate the convenience that Galaxy allows for installnig and updating games. Also, couple with that that it is completely optional, even for games installed with it, and works offline for your library and games you may have installed, but have not yet purchased, I just don't see the downsides to it. GOG galaxy works great for whatI use it for, and that's managing my GOG games.

No, because Galaxy is still totally optional, even for games installed through it. Galaxy also functions completely offline and with games that you may have acquired through less-than-legal means. It doesn't function as DRM for entire games except in the case of online only games (Gwent) and in the case of individual items or multiplayer modes.

Galaxy is only optional if you are OK with never having access to the multiplayer mode of games you bought. Or in some cases, some content of the single player mode too. Or even the ability to save your progress. And in the worst cases, the ability to run the game at all.

If Galaxy were the only way to install the game I would partially agree with you and would call it "DRM lite/Client only based install" (if you can run the game without the client) after installation

But it is not the case because we have both. A glorified browser speciallized to run, install and manage games and your common browser to download them. You choose what you want.

Only? considering that those cases are not the majority nor the intention behind how Galaxy functions at difference of other clients, I'd say Galaxy is "always" optional, bugs, very special and unnintentional cases or modes aside.

How words are used is not innocent, is it?

You are missing my point.

I never said Galaxy wasn't optional or that you couldn't use it in a DRM-Free manner, it is and you can.

What is important to what I said though, is how you use Galaxy.

If you never download Offline Installers, either with Galaxy or your browser or some other downloader, then at best you are only getting a DRM-Free Lite version of a GOG game, and that is only if you backup the install folder to another physical drive. That last is vitally important, as a drive can die anytime, so you need at least two separate physical drive copies ... one can be your PC, if you have the room. You can certainly see a cloud backup as another additional one, but not one to deliberately count on.

And any games in your online GOG library that you haven't downloaded, aren't any kind of DRM-Free at all. If you are continually reliant on a web connection to get your games, then you are not doing the DRM-Free thing. Sure, you have to use the web connection to GOG to download your game once, but if you aren't doing that soon after purchase, then you really aren't doing the DRM-Free thing. Any scenario where you are reliant on a source outside of yourself, such as a store web connection, means you are not doing DRM-free.


I think this is another case of me not being understood.

The issue is not about Galaxy, but how you use Galaxy.

And I fail to see the sense in downloading your game twice from GOG, once with Galaxy as a download & install all-in-one process, and then another download, either via the Extras option in Galaxy for Offline Installers, or via browser links or some other downloader.

Why wouldn't you just download the Offline Installers for a game, install that, and then use Galaxy with that install?
You essentially achieve the same thing, but with only one download instance, not two. You obviously then backup your Offline Installers to another drive or two etc, to be sure you are DRM-Free.