Indeed.

Their excuse was because of having to maintain special links for it.
A load of rubbish really, as they could have modified it without too much trouble, to support the regular browser links.

Sure, it would have meant several browser link clicks in many cases, instead of the one that did EXE and all related BIN files, but at least we'd still have a lite downloader and we would have been more understanding about any issue regarding special links being continued.

I for one would have accepted their argument, and I am sure plenty of others would have too.

There are two types of customers at GOG when it comes to downloading games. Those who don't like Galaxy and those who do. Both should be supported and get equal treatment.

Currently if you don't want to use Galaxy, you are treated as a second rate customer.

Some are happy with browser links and no integrity testing etc, and good luck to them. But many of us want what the good old GOG Downloader provided - Integrity testing, queued resumable dowloads, simplicity, and light on system resources.

P.S. By the way, it wouldn't have been too hard for a slightly modified GOG Downloader, to also check for any BIN files associated with an EXE file, so we didn't have to lose that ability either, really.

You look at things backwards, upside down and the wrong way round, and your logic use is completely flawed, so yes it was very necessary, as you especially show on a regular basis that you don't read properly. I find that disrespectful.

Here is an example of your logic versus mine.

You are continually complaining about me repeating a particular post, yet don't think logically about why I do that at all.

Logic should tell you, just from your own behavior, unless you are very different to the rest of us, why I find it necessary to repeat myself.

When members here visit a topic, they may visit the first post or they may not. They may read other posts or maybe not. Many I am sure, come to topics with a preconception, based on the topic title. Some come out of curiosity, some come because they are itching to provide their pearls of wisdom. With that latter, they quite often don't read anything written by someone else, or just read the last few entries ... if you are lucky. Most in my experience don't read back very far, if they do at all. They are certainly unlikely to skip back a page if the last page has several posts on it.

So to gain maximum exposure for what I consider as an important post, it needs to be repeated regularly. That should be bleeding obvious. The particular post I regularly repeat, gives important information, to those who are here in this topic for the right reasons. I've had to repeat it more often than I should have needed to, because people like yourself, fill up pages here with unnecessary stuff that buries my post quite quickly.

I'm not here playing a game, like you and many others seem to be doing, having fun at our expense.

I did not ever come to this topic to argue with the likes of yourself, but have been forced to, so the basic message here does not get too diluted or corrupted or lost in the wash.

You and some others on the other hand, come here to attack, to disrupt, to cause chaos, etc.

(To the chagrin of some, I am repeating myself yet again .... all to a good purpose)

You can find details about my program here - https://www.gog.com/forum/general/gogplus_download_checker

LET GOG KNOW HOW YOU FEEL BY VOTING
https://www.gog.com/wishlist/site/keep_the_gog_downloader_and_keep_it_up_to_date

We are up to 1365 votes now .... they just keep coming.

When did they say this?

The search here is useless.
Anyway, I had to find the topic the hard way - We say goodbye to GOG Downloader

Perhaps I have misremembered specifics, as the first post there just generalizes.

I've been through the first 10 pages and not found what I've claimed, written by a MOD. Maybe someone else mentioned it, or I just put two and two together myself or a bit of both.

I am probably basing it on what seemed the likely reason, as the GOG Downloader did indeed require special links, that weren't the same as the browser links. So they would have been creating 3 types of links for every new game or update ... that could have been onerous, and would save some man hours etc to eradicate the need for.

Anyway, the logic stacks up, even if the evidence doesn't. :)

Unfortunately this is not necessarily the case (and no, I haven't switched "sides" I just like to stay true to the facts as much as possible). Like I said, the links themselves probably never were the problem since there is almost NO work involved in adding those to the site ... they also weren't even necessary at all if you use adalia fundamaentals (the links were not the same as the browser links but they could get derived from them which is what the script always did. Sometimes you got working Downloader links with AF even though the original links were broken) which is the reason why those links still worked with adalia fundamentals AFTER they have been removed already. However shortly after they switched off the server or backend or whatever that was needed to route to the files and that was the moment the Downloader died - not when they removed the links. So I am quite sure it was this backend/server that needed support in some kind of way and not the links themseves.

The only thing GOG ever said can be found here
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/we_say_goodbye_to_gog_downloader?staff=yes
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/we_do_not_want_say_goodbye_to_gog_downloader?staff=yes

(If you want to search for blues statements you just need to click on the "!" in the overview - or add the staff=yes parameter the the threadtitle)

If it hasn't been said by GOG we are just talking about assumprions and we should be careful with those if we want to stay believable :)

Well maybe, but even with the data you give, you are still making assumptions, if perhaps better than mine.
I would argue that we don't really know how much work is involved to do those extra links.
We can assume, they run some sort of script, and that is exactly what I would do to lessen the workload.
But did that reduce it completely or enough? We just don't know.

I'm not familiar with adalia fundamentals, even though I saw it mentioned earlier. I was about to look into it back then, but then I read it no longer worked.

Thanks for the info and tips.

P.S. While I'm not a big fan of Python, I do have a version installed, so I am thinking of investigating the possibility of doing a frontend program as a downloader using gogrepo, for those who want it, but don't like command-line tools. It might also reveal to me what I need to know to make my own full downloader using wget.

The only thing that makes the GOG.com digital store different from, let's say Steam, is certainly not;
-The offline installers (TOP KEK).
and/or
-The "Downloader" (XD seriously).
But ACTUALLY the ability to play the games you have bought, without any DRM. Download it any number of times you want and play it on any computer you want, without any ownership/authentication checks after installation
And of course this can be abused to the point of ridiculousness. You can upload files to Google Drive e.t.c. and link them to your friends or even give them access to your account. It is just logical that MP, in most games here, requires the GOG Galaxy client, but you can play VLAN games without it, with any application like Hamachi.
Any method that allows you to download the files and does not add any DRM , does the job. The Downloader got redundant. Those who are sticks in the mud can still download via browser, while the rest transition to the GOG Galaxy, a project which makes good progress and has more technical possibilities than an outdated and underutilized Downloader has.
After all it’s GOG.com's software and they can terminate it as they see fit. But adding D.R.M. is just a cry-baby’s wet dream. Adding D.R.M. would mean GOG.com is no more, in which case there would be a plan B to pass licenses for the bought products on other platforms, to operate as file handlers.
Either way D.R.M. addition would be the killing point, not the addition of a client and the removal of an old "Junk loader".
A big LULZ to all of you who can't adapt and speak of a doomsaday that is in order.
Most of the old timers in these forums are trolling post prowlers anyway. But guess what, GOG Galaxy will still be the flagship of GOG.com's method of online downloading. Better keep up instead of catch up.
Hahaha.XD

That's exactly my point - we just don't know if it were the links (no matter if I believe this or not). Of course my own theory is just an assumption as well ... never wanted to say anything else. My point was that this:

"Anyway, the logic stacks up, even if the evidence doesn't. :)"

Is not true. It might be ONE logic but not the only one, so it still is not a fact. So a "maybe" or probly" woule be the better way to describe it.

Regarding the amount of time that is needed to do either of those two - of course we don't know but usually adding certain links to an website while it being created does not take long. I also don't know what could be so time consuming or cost intensive running the backend/serrver or whatever as well of course. So in the end we can just say that we don't know because GOG is not telling us.


In case you are using the website here (which I assume you do) I could not recommend this to you high enough. Along with barefoot essentials these two scripts improve the GOG experience at least 150%. They are so great that I cannot imagine using GOG without them. In case you need links, I could post them.

Anybody here said otherwise?

No, really? Thank you for telling us ;)

It has been explained over and over what the difference between browser and downloader is ... why don't you just read the thread first before posting things that have already been replied or argumented to?

Good progress ... this thing is so buggy - just read the actual thread about Galaxy 2.0 and see how much positivity you can find.

"Outdated" - please define this.

"Underutilized" - could be

Again we know, we talked about it and we ended up with the argument that while true it still does not mean that we have to like it. Of course GOG does not need to care about us liking anything at all as well - but we can still complain anyway to show how we feel.

Was there a wish for DRM in this thread? I must have missed this then.

Hmm ... LULZ?... flagship? Really? You really think that Galaxy is GOGs flagship of download methods? Galaxy only was invented AT ALL to get youngsters like yourself who were used to clients and features like achievements to look at GOG as well. So now those are here ... does not mean that the others are gone now.

Just expressing my own personal annoyance at the downloader being gone and using the browser downloads exclusively being a slight pain. I used Galaxy once or twice and found it obnoxious and it reminded me why I did not like the Steam client. If I ever put it on my system by accident (like the physical copy of the Witcher III) I purge it from the system. I loved the GOG downloader and miss it terribly.

"Oho!" said the pot to the kettle;
"You are dirty and ugly and black!
Sure no one would think you were metal,
Except when you're given a crack."

"Not so! not so!" kettle said to the pot;
"'Tis your own dirty image you see;
For I am so clean – without blemish or blot –
That your blackness is mirrored in me."

I wouldn't mind seeing links to those. :) Not sure what all they do, but 150% improvement in the GOG experience I am all for. :)

There are some tools around that help with downloading (not as good as GOG downloader but get the job done). I'm using XDM which plugs into a browser and gives starting/stopping/bandwidth throttling options. Might want to give it a try. Free, open source, and doesn't have the crud that a lot of others I found do (https://sourceforge.net/projects/xdman/)

A thought did recently occur to me, I wonder if GOG would entertain the possiblity of a Galaxy lite client that is 99% downloader? Doesn't seem like that would take much since they have that feature already, just remove the extra. Granted a return of the GOG downloader would be 1000X better (and a lot faster), but at least it (might) do away with largest issues many of us have with the Galaxy client.

Yes, sadly, and also: all galaxy 1/1.2 users are getting forcibly upgraded btw to galaxy 2 unless they tweak a few settings to prevent it.

You can install galaxy, and through a menu download the offline backup installers.....at least that's what it seems like one can do, if I read what others wrote on galaxy downloading(in other threads) correctly.

============================

Well some of that would be very bad.....thankfully they just seem to use it to make money.

Eh, as I said....I don't mind if they make a few bucks off of my habits and misc data....it's not like I am.

Also sometimes I like more personalized ads.....I can't even begin to count the number of ads not relevant to me i've gotten before....at least tailored ones might appeal to me and have stuff I might want to purchase(or purchase elsewhere for cheaper).

No, it wasn't...as it has little(if anything) to do with the topic and can be seen as disrespectful in and of itself(especially to repeat it so many times)....also you said it a few times to various people already.

I still think people can look back a few posts to find a wishlist link.....it doesn't need to be posted every 2-3 posts.

And there you go again...assuming(seemingly) bad intent on my part......it's not like i'm not at my desk twiddling my snidely whiplash moustache figuring out new ways to ruin the thread, you know.

I think GOG knows the message of the thread, and anyone else can check the OP post to learn what it is if they don't know what it is.

Read the bit two bits above this one again....that is not my intent, and likely not the intent of some others who expressed similar.
================================

Besides maybe a bit of personal healing via venting about this, though, there is little reason to state such anymore(well beyond newcomers stating such).

GOG already knows how the ones who already posted feel(even me).....and in spades.