3 in fact(plus the browser option and also galaxy)...I listed them in post 130 if you or anyone else needs them(also others might know more to choose from).

Just because the GOG downloader hasn't been updated in years, doesn't mean it not works. IT WORKS! Just leave it alone man. I (and probably many others) use it to quickly download the install files for local back-ups. I am not interested in getting roped into using another launcher with all the bells and whistles. I love GOG because of it's simplicity, not because you want to play catch-up with Steam (good luck with that).

Aside/musing: Tbh i'm amazed it's still a thing.....I seem to recall maybe using it around the year 2000 or so....it's good to see it's still going at any rate.

BTW does anyone know if it's been kept updated since then or is it just an old version/not being worked on anymore?
========================================================

I agree it worked(didn't use it myself, though), but it didn't just work by itself....the staff still needed to(afaik) add links/etc for it to work with GOG(so some work on their part for what was likely a very small percentage of the user base).

Now this is not to say I full support or agree with their decision....I just can see why they might've done it(to possibly save time/money/etc).

(Also I hope this isn't another sign of possible financial troubles had by GOG as a company :\)

It's not only still working fine but it has been updated through all this time: actual version is 4.2.6

Last update: November 26 2019.

Nice....btw is that the "best" version, or are older versions preferable?

(I ask as with some software the devs change things in such a way that sometimes older versions are more desirable)

Thanks again, btw, for the info so far.

Mmm, in this case, I think they've done the right stuff: actual version is ok, imo.

Why are you doing this?
It does not make any sense.

If you wanted to reduce methods to two only, get rid of the Browser method. That method was never as good, safe or reliable as the GOG Downloader.

You have two main types of customers here - those who don't use GOG Galaxy and those who do. Of those that don't, many use the GOG Downloader.

Why are you penalizing us?

If you have to go this route, then why not provide a bare bones (no bloat cutback) version of GOG Galaxy ... one easy on PC memory. Not all of us download on the PC we play on. Many of us don't do Multiplayer or worry about stats etc.

Once again GOG is showing how good they are at communication and how much they are trying to keep connection with the community. Exactly ZERO blue post in a thread that has now 6 pages and therefore shows that the decision they made at least is not without any controversy. Great work GOG .... not exactly the way we told you how top do it in 2017(!) but if you think your way is better just go ahead. But please stop trying to pretend that you actually care about your community's opinion if you don't even take the time to answer some of the most basic questions asked here.


Well, GOG might have them but as usual GOG prefers to give us the silent treatment.

Fwiw I think that whole stunt was a PR move on their part more then them actually caring(though maybe i'm wrong....I would hope I was at any rate).....same as what many other companies do to act like they care, really.

Also remember the "french monk" videos and other ways they used to reach out? I do, and I miss them.

TBH I think that's more due to clamping down after their social media "incidents"...they seem to be afraid to let us know more than blanket PR stuff every now and then, likely out of fear of more social media outrage/backlash. :|

Well, since I actually BELIEVED them you can imagine how I feel if that would actually be the case. We 6 were trying to convince others that GOG really meant what they said and that they really care. We did so because we believed them ... we were called shills and worse things back then and now it seems as if GOG simply used us? Great way to go, just like I said.

Not reacting to a discussion in which case they knew reacting either way would harm them is one thing. Not explaining so called rational decisions a completely different one.

As I said, I could be wrong, but it seems like it was a PR stunt.....of the type many other businesses have used over the years....though again I hope I am wrong on this.

(Also you were in the group? Didn't know that[I heard OF the event/thing but didn't read much into it yet...might read the thread on it later, though])

They likely thought it the best move to "turtle up" and say as little as possible(higher ups), and even if lower level workers wanted to go against that directive they likely have no choice. :\

Glad to see I'm not the only one making the point that GOGDownloader continues to work, so why get rid of it? Sure, it may take (very minimal) resources, but it's a primary delivery option for many of us. Surely customer goodwill and not "'fixing' what isn't broken" is worth more than some of the other stuff they dedicate their resources towards!

Imo(and not to sound rude here, but) I think they gave us a good amount of good will with the new refund policy, though I feel bad for those who used this and have trouble with other methods.

Eh, maybe everyone who uses it or wants to support such can chip in some dough and pay for the support costs & convince GOG to keep it? Might not happen, but it's an idea, at least. :)

Agreed that is a very consumer-friendly move and appreciated, though personally I don't know if it changed as much as people seem to think it did. But keeping Downloader would also be consumer-friendly, since it is more convenient than the browser while also having the huge advantage of "Not Being Galaxy". Are companies limited to one consumer-friendly policy at a time? Shouldn't a niche store try to maximize the amount of consumer-friendliness to retain their audience? I'm seeing where loyal customers are leaving over the decision to axe Downloader.

I like the spirit of that but imo it's a dangerous precedent since the "rational" business move is to take advantage of the customer. It wouldn't be long before customers would have to fund the existence of offline installers, period. And unless the customer sees detailed, transparent information, there is nothing to keep the business from "overestimating" such costs, in their own favor of course.