For the THIRD time: They already HAD(!) a working client. I don't know how much clearer I can explain this. There never was any need for anotther one OTHER than the integrations which they neglected completely! I never said they should not bother about any client, but there never was a need to scrap a working one just to do a buggy one. And since this client is working for you: please try to hide or tag a game for a specific platform. You can't . You can filter per platform but whenever you hide or tag something using this filter it will still hide or tag the game for every platform and that is a bug. One they know for years now and they tend to ignore. You could also try to install a game with DLC using the OL installers for the base game only. Galaxy will download every single DLC and there is no way to prevent this ... they know, they ignore, it is a bug. Or you could try to install only a base game using Galaxy - same thing happens. So yeah: kudos for paying crappy developers who don't understand how you should develop a working software instead of keeping the old client (which worked perfectly fine) and using the money on really important things like ... customer support.

]

Don't talk to me like I'm an idiot. I said they focused on improving their client and new client ideas, because they saw that as their route to broader market appeal. I don't know how much clearer I can explain that either. The fact they had a client version already is neither here nor there.

As for the rest, I told you I don't use integrations. I can hide GOG games just fine. The integrations didn't get them the numbers they wanted, so they likely stopped putting money into it. I already said that as well.

I did not. I just keep on repeating the points of my argument.

You said
"In any event at the end of the day people want clients. Saying GOG shouldn't bother trying to improve there is basically saying GOG shouldn't bother period."

I said that they HAD a client. And they were not improving on it they were creating a new one only to add the feature of integration on which they themselves never focused on when they developed it. If they HAD focused on the integrations MAYBE today we would have a usuable client with the working integration.They did not so we don't have that. If I plan to do something I have to do it right and if I am developing something I have to do it right.

Sorry, I overread this - but If you don't use integrations there's no need for Galaxy 2 as well (other than GOG forcing it on you) since Galxy 1 did the exact same thing without being that buggy.

1) Galaxy 1 existed and those who wanted a client were happy.
2) GOG decided to create a new client to attract people with the idea of integrations (that's all that's different).
3) GOG NEVER concentrated on the integrations except for the one people did not want - Epic.
4) New people who liked the idea of integrations are leaving because they don't work.
5) Not enough manpower/money to tend to customer related services like customer support. Inventing a completely stupid new system that is not even cheaper but pushes customers with problems away.

Is that something I should congratulate them to? Being on the end of the line that is waiting for support now and not getting any more than auto replies it is hard to do so.

If I see mistakes I point them out. The Galaxy 2 development was a mistake - especially the way it was ... and still Is developed. This is not bad luck it is sloppy working and planning.

I dunno man, we're talking past each other here. I'm saying they focused on improving the client for a reason, and you keep telling me they already had one. I know that, it's why I used the word improving. I never said they did a good job improving it, in fact I think it's fair to say they failed.

So... we're just not making sense to each other I guess? No harm no foul if we're just not clicking.

They did not improve the client they created a new one - that's a different thing. Also, if they actually would have focused on the "improving part" we would have working integrations now but they never did. They focused on creating the same client they already had with a different UI only and neglected the "improved" part by neglecting or rather not developing integrations at all. The only thing that has "improved" is the work they did for nothing. That is what I am critizising here. They failed (and yes, we can agree on that) because they did not do their work correctly and that might now also be one reason why I have to wait ages until I get a reply to my support tickets.

I just purchased a game here again and was greeted after checkout with "we have your back with our 24/7 stellar support". If they are just sitting there 24/7 that's nothing to brag about and that's not stellar that's lazy. Whyy are my tickets completely ignored? Why is the fact that this new support ticket system is faulty at heart completely ignored? Why do I as a customer since 2009 right now feel completely ignored by GOG? Whenever I think GOG could not get any worse they prove the opposite.

Oh you're being extremely pedantic. Okie dokie.

Well, the keypoint of my argumeht definitely wasn't that .. .they keypoint was that they planned on improving without puttig work into improving.

Thanks for letting everyone know.

I noticed this too : no more chat box a few days ago (i just hope for good aswell) and right now tickets are auto-closed like you mentioned. -> seems to reflect what Clownski_ explained.

if you sign-in you can see to whom the ticket is assigned once created but now it's no more possible to update ticket through "my activities" (i didn't find any way after closing the ticket creation process when done - except using my mail client to update a ticket). I also suppose they are in the process to update the support center according to the new system (i have high hope yes) -> that would explain why no more link is provided in the automated answer

Granted that doesn't help: my last human contact with the support was July 14 2023. Since then nothing....oh i got worse when the french support was still alive...

I don't know when it happened, but they removed the option to check out old tickets on the site. It was still pretty useful to me to know exactly when I reported certain problems, for one thing. I also often submitted replies directly on the site, so I don't have a conversation thread archived as e-mails. Many of those tickets had various links I'd pointed to that were too numerous to bookmark; now I have no way to look them up.

Sumbitted instead of submitted in the pic.