The rollback is the old version, that’s the point. If you move forward with an update, then any future updates would now need to be applied to two separate versions of the game, times the offline installers and the Galaxy version. That’s a lot of redundancy to manage.

As for the Workshop point - meh. It would just be a tie-in to Galaxy. The actual game files wouldn't be any different. The only real difference would be if the offline installer version was somehow not modable, while the Galaxy version was. But I don’t see that happening, so in my view, it’s mostly irrelevant.

never mind

That’s perfectly fine, and I have no problem with that. But in the end, that’s your and the communities responsibility, not GOG’s. GOG is, after all, a store. Their main concern is selling games and making money. They are not a museum or an archive.

If there is one thing this community loves, more than anything, is arguing about definitions.

I don't think it's "arguing about definitions" when, as AB2012 explained much better than I ever could, this could easily be the exact opposite of what it purports to be. The difference between altering something and preserving it is not just semantics.

That was a joke.

Ah, sorry. Went over my head, you know how it sometimes is in written communication.

I know, text is quite difficult to convey intent, however that is a double edged sword as if I try too hard to convey that true intent people may feel that I'm treating them like they are stupid which wasn't the case so it's difficult to find that perfect balance.

That's their fault for introducing Galaxy in the first place and refusing to admit it was a mistake that should cease being supported, in favor of becoming a more purely DRM-free store. Also, am I the only one who notices that the "oh no, that's too much work" excuse only seems to get used when it comes to treating offline installer users with care? They can pour virtually endless resources into Galaxy, into finding new ways to ingratiate themselves with Trusted Partners; hell, didn't they manually add Galaxy into every offline installer years ago before reversing the decision? That's why I think it's not a matter of labor resources but, rather, of priorities. Right now, I see the priorities being pretty out of wack.

Well, you were literally just discussing the Rollback feature which is a Galaxy exclusive so to speak, with no offline installer equivalent. So, I don't think it's farfetched to wonder if a hypothetical upcoming feature would be Galaxy-only. Regardless, we have already seen with Steam Workshop where some mods are exclusive to it creating a walled garden. I think that approach should be less encouraged, not more encouraged.

Trust me, you're not. If digital game stores were car showrooms, this place seems to be in a permanent state of "Check out our new cloud-based in-car entertainment system! Did you see the leather trim? Notice the client-enabled 3D Parking Radar?" for the same half of the user-base over & over, whilst for the other half of all drivers, one wheel is left constantly wonky, there's a long delay in turning the key and the engine starting because the car hangs waiting for authorization from the salesroom's client to start, and the car randomly slows down to 30mph with no resolution or even interest in investigating the problem for years on end. Unending demands for the former expensive luxuries get accepted as "modern" whilst the latter's calls to have basic usability problems fixed get gaslighted with "being unreasonable, it's only a small showroom after all..."

I think we're talking past each other. *shrug*

I can't talk about this without thinking about Daggerfall Unity when GOG decided to launch its own build here and how problematic the situation became. Thankfully, they've removed it. Just let the community do the job.

Daggerfall Unity is a mod though, not a whole game directly being altered, which to me is even worse.
This actually summarize the whole problem just as the excellent post by AB2012 below yours explained:

To preserve is to let people get the original game files and THEN, only THEN, tweak it using community tools or letting them make their own tweaks.
I'm really annoyed by the fact that they just REMOVED the products we originally bought in a DRM-Free store in their original Offline Installers form. The SOLE REASON I came here in the first place after leaving Steam 5 ears ago.

I completely agree with you guys on this. Specially on the fact that we don't know for certain if GOG will even be around 10 years from now. If the objective is truly to preserve, let us preserve the original offline installers, without removing them from us suddenly as your fixes might actually BREAK THEM even more in down the line.

So, moderators that are reading this thread (and may or may not ignore it):

We're thankful that you guys managed to bring us Resident Evil 1-2-3 and Dino Crisis 1-2. But please: Don't let this go up your heads to think that you can now remove people's games and change them as you like thinking you're preserving them. This is not how it works. Please, listen to your community.

Yes. I remember this too. It got so big that even Yong Yea made a video about it. Which is unfortunate. Forums should still be a place for community opinions to be heard too. Social Media have their place, but they're not the only place.

Better yet: Don't change anything on our beloved offline installers! *thumbs up!* :P
Jokes apart, It seems to me that it wouldn't be that hard for them to not change the offline installers and add a single file in a new section in the download area:

"GOG Preservation Program Patch vX.XX"
With a changelog below or at the side:
"This patch is part of our Preservation Program.
"What it does?

This patch fixes this, this and that, by doing this, this and that.
We conveniently created this patch so that if you still want to try to play the game the way it was intended, you don't need to install it."

For Galaxy Users, it could have the same kind of explanation. People that don't ever read anything would just download the Preservation Program version and if there had any problems, a download without the patch applied to the game files could be offered at the side of the normal install, lets say.

I hate that they're doing the "Cloud" and "Launcher" thing already, but if it goes like this, at least don't remove Offline Installers users the ability to choose. Otherwise, again, the sole reason we're here is not here anymore and we're better buying our games elsewhere and applying "patches" ourselves.

I agree, you should try to focus on what I was actually saying, instead of trying to spin it into your own different narrartive.

I will ask politely again that if you both have any disagreement that may taint this thread with any kind of personal attacks, solve it on private or contact moderation, please, please. Thank you!

The objective of this thread is to call GOG's team attention to the issue so that they can see that this is a controversy theme where their clients don't agree with how they're dealing with the situation.