Best I can do is a -3 motheaten copy of Jack Keane.

Jagged Alliance 3

Still 1.0b GOG wake up!!!:

Jagged Alliance 3 (Part 1 of 5) 1.0b 1 MB
Jagged Alliance 3 (Part 2 of 5) 1.0b 4 GB
Jagged Alliance 3 (Part 3 of 5) 1.0b 4 GB
Jagged Alliance 3 (Part 4 of 5) 1.0b 4 GB
Jagged Alliance 3 (Part 5 of 5) 1.0b 2.7 GB

Is GOG fixing this bug ? Where to report it ? How long GOG offline downloads are really useless

There are ways to make sharing possible without running into any legal trouble. In this regard, Microsoft has set an unpleasant precedent with its shared distribution of patches and updates in Windows 10/11. Users have to download these updates either from Microsoft servers, consuming their bandwidth, or from other customers' computers. This approach raises concerns about bandwidth usage and privacy.

To avoid future issues like the ones GOG is currently facing, I propose that GOG develops a plug-in for Galaxy and a similar interface for their website. Additionally, they can create a small client to check for update availability, file health, and connectivity for authenticated, trusted, and authorized customers who willingly participate in the sharing process.

To incentivize customers to participate, GOG could offer rewards, such as a percentage discount on their next purchase or the opportunity to receive games from their wishlist at the end of each month, based on the amount of bandwidth they shared and whether they capped their usage or allowed traffic to flow at full speed.

Moreover, GOG could consider offering custom-designed 2TB USB flash drives containing the update backups for sale. This solution would not be expensive and would help save bandwidth on both ends, benefiting both GOG and its customers.

Implementing these measures can mitigate potential issues and create a win-win situation for GOG and us. More importantly, it would prevent similar incidents, saving them trouble and money in the future. With the right approach and willingness to innovate, anything is possible.

"At first, everyone thought the server outages of 2023 were the worst thing to ever happen at GoG.....that is, until the Great Run on the Servers the following week. With no access to one's games for weeks, people had to actually READ or even GO OUTSIDE....them were some dark times" - Gog Oldtimers

They do not have bandwidth issues, they have a technical server issue; so you are mixing up different things here.

If they can not get it to run properly it is simply a fail... but at least we know by now: Even the server-banks like clouds are never totally safe and it will never hurt putting "some power" into the hands of the users. So i do NOT trust it if someone is telling me "we only need cloud"... in the IT you can never have to much backups of any kind. Actually, with the DRM free approach there is already lot of power moved into the users hand, which is a great thing; but it still can be improved, indeed.

Ah yeah, the infrastructure Steam is using is extremely expensive and in any rational terms, it will not be very profitable. Yet, money is a bit of a disaster because money is loving the might and if you got the might you can do the economically most stupid things and it still will work for you. But no one can safely say that huge server banks with many backup-servers are "cheap"... to maintain. If you still want to save up on cash... you always will become vulnerable.

They had a warning quite close to that on the main page, then a staff member posted an
'update' post in this thread(along with words more or less to the effect of "you can go ahead and
keep buying games if you want...hint hint") and shortly after the warning on the main page disappeared.

--------------

It was probably quite a bit intrusive.....on GOG's bottom line.

Having interacted with their browser apis extensively to download offline installers, I can confirm that the [poor] quality of the user experience downloading and backing up offline installers has taken a backseat to Galaxy development for quite some time.

Usually, the priority for download issues you will encounter will be directly proportional to the amount of visibility an installer issue has.

If you're a Galaxy user trying to download a Windows installer for an AAA game via Galaxy, I'm sure you will see your issue resolved promptly. That's a class A grade customer for GOG right there.

But if you're downloading a Linux dlc or an installer for an indie game via the browser (class C or D grade customer), you'll probably be flat out of luck and have some real quality time trying to bypass their support enforcer (Zowie) to talk to someone after which you will be potentially treated to a long wait. In one case, I had to get in touch with the dev in their game sub-forum to get them to resolve the issue (and they ended up being more helpful resolving that issue than GOG support). That was for a simple "404 link" download issue for the installer.

Really... this just sucks. I mean, GoG is doing huge efforts to fix their screwed launcher issues but could care less about the installers, this indeed is a huge thumb down.

"Fixing the Offline Installers might still take a long time because i consider it questionable if this is high on their priority-list " - this is NEW GAME Jagged Alliance 3 witch FIRST patch - and still no priority ? Wait month for updated version to download after I purchased ?

Let me rephrase: Customers would not run into the issue of not being able to consume their purchase when a technical issue like the one they have to deal with now reoccurs. Call me pessimistic, but this wasn't the first time, and it will not be the last.

So, the proposed solution solves two problems: There will be no disgruntled customers because they are still able to download and play their games, and GOG saves bandwidth on their end and can deal with the issue without risking to loose customers and money. All that in a legal way and on their own terms.

Absolutely. As far as power and options for us go, there are alternative means by which games affected by the current CDN issue can be obtained. (I'm not inviting any discussion about whether this is necessarily legal and the many shades of gray in between!)

I dunno, but the history on how GoG was handling it is not on our side. GoG usually is at the opinion "those installers are the devs work" yet they fail do admit that they are actually screwing up many things related to it which is NOT in the devs hands.

Yet, the dev still got the power to reupload, sure... but they was NOT responsible for those failures.

Usually, a humans mind is acting in a way that... IF HE DO NOT CARE they will always try to hand over the responsibility to someone else... no matter how much of responsibility they may actually have. This is i would say "the most easy way of handling it".

No need... because any form of distribution can be used in some questionable or even damaging ways (to someone else), All what matters is "how you use it" as a user.,, your motivation!

Besides, even a cloud can still be hacked or the data ripped from it (for example Youtube is a cloud, and yeah... those data can be ripped), so as long as there is any form of data exchanged there is the possibility to "jailbreak" in some way, although it can become harder with a increased "jail" for any given data. Although, if there is to much "jail" the data can become nearly unusable and at some point many unnecessary struggle will be part of it... which is not enjoyable at all; with other words "the cost of jailing it can be huge". A direction i never would approve... as for the end-users this is clearly a loss.

GOG: "Apologies for any inconveniences caused." ALL FOR NOW

I think you mean "couldn't care less".

Not entirely how i sense this language because "could not care less" would mean, they do absolutely (the term absolute) not care less... which i feel is not true. However, they do not care quite as much compared to the launcher... not even nearly i assume.

I mean, the majority seems to enjoy a launcher.... at least on some "other place", not necessarily on GoG. However, no matter the exact numbers, i just dunno why the whole world always have to enforce laws or rules toward either a majority or the one with the biggest stick. This is exactly how it will end in the most unfair condition possible and killing diversity. So, i do absolutely, no matter the circumstances, not backup those sort of "might based" or "capitalistic" view... because what really in the end will bring creativity into this world is not "being able to gather as much of power into a single spot as possible" but rather becoming connected and being able to support all the unique traits everyone got.