I've no idea what hyper-slow cracked versions people are referring to nor am I interested in pirated versions, but the main point we were talking about on the other thread (before this one was started) was that GOG's installers in general are both simultaneously larger and slower vs directly extracting the files for your own *legal* content. This is partly due to the way GOG needs multiple intermediate stages to reconstruct the data that they've chosen to stored as a mess of "Galaxy Streams" rather than actual files, and partly due to seemingly lack of CPU threading for decompression. Coffeecup gave one example (Terraria). Here's one of mine:-

Baldur's Gate EE:-

- GOG Installer - 2.69GB size, 1m 02s install time. CPU usage = 20-25%

- .7z file of game folder (full) - 2.45GB size, 12.9s install time. CPU usage = 80-95%

- .7z file of game folder but with secondary language files removed - 1.61GB size, 5.9s install time. CPU usage = 80-95%

- .RAR file of game folder but with secondary language files removed - 1.63GB size, 9.0s install time. CPU usage = 69%

Each source file was cached into RAM before extracting (to eliminate read-speed bottlenecks) whilst the target drive was a fast SSD. The 7z / RAR files included importing a saved .reg file containing the registry entries usually written by GOG installer files (takes all of 0.5s). In this case the official GOG installers are up to 10.5x slower than just unzipping a zip of the game folder. Whatever flaky "installers" some pirates are churning out is a separate unrelated issue vs the fact GOG's newer methodology of packing installers using some proprietary Galaxy storage method are much slower vs storing them as files that can be directly extracted without needing to be written as "Galaxy stream" temp files, then re-constructed into proper game files, then re-read back from the temp folder then re-written to the destination folder all over again. And whatever CPU threading settings they are using for InnoSetup decompression are about 15 years out of date...

How about they get some actual training on the topic and more support from management? Wouldn't that be an even worse "punishment"? :P I too miss their old installers - not the aspect, but the packaging. I wish they shifted to something like lzma2 and simplified the extraction process (making it more direct), but then again offline installer are not a priority these days...

Bah! Just buy a faster processor, like the 5950X, and a bigger SSD so you can install the games faster even if neither is needed in order to play. Both are cheaper than a graphics card anyway.

That would be a rather complicated and odd way to achieve that.

%nightcraw1er.488
I don't have the link here but somewhere in the GOG developer pages it mentions that the creation of offline installers is triggered automatically when updating the Galaxy version of the game (main branch), and is automatic.

Maybe it is not automatic in all cases, after all there still appear to be at least two different ways for developers to send their game files and updates to GOG.

The compressed file chunks with md5 checksum filenames sounds logical for Galaxy, where I presume the idea is to download only those parts of the installed game, which have changed. It also sounds logical that if those files are already there available for download for the Galaxy users, the most straightforward way for GOG to generate (automatically or manually) the offline installers from them, is to use those same files and zip them together, instead of first decompressing the Galaxy file chunks and then compressing them again. Less chance for failure too there, but yeah it causes an extra step/slowdown for the end-users who are using those installers.

Hard to comment on that without first dissecting the "FG installer" and seeing how exactly it is different from the GOG version. Did he/she/it leave something out of his version (like some dependencies that might be installed with the game, directx and whatnot) etc.

Or does fitgirl claim he/she/it reduced the size of the installer to less than one third of the official GOG installer, by merely decompressing and then recompressing the files? What was this magical compression algorithm he/she/it used? For instance, AB2012's example above was using 7-zip for re-compressing the Baldur's Gate EE files, and the extra compression he achieved was from 2.69GB to 2.45GB, ie. a slight reduction in the installer size.

Also, by the sound of it, fitgirl did quite a lot of manual work to rebuild the installer from the GOG version (ie. those compressed file chunks). I presume GOG is trying to avoid doing such manual work for the offline installers, whenever the Galaxy version gets an update.

Frankly, I recall hearing only complaints about them over years, like previously the rar-compressed files were behind passwords etc.

Yeah I'd love the installers to be perfect too and take as little space as possible (because I archive them too), but I am also a realist on how much (manual) work GOG is going to do to achieve that.

Wouldn't there be another bottleneck somewhere else slowing the process down anyways?

If you had been talking about anyone other than GOG, who have time and again surprised us with shockingly poor judgement, I would have said that there was no way of that happening.

I still can't see why anyone would choose GOG over Steam (or even Epic) if DRM-free offline installers were no longer available.

Speculation? I recall that some gogger and blue explained it.
Don't ask me to find that thread again tho..

Explained what?

It is no secret that the "compressed file chunks with odd names" in newer GOG offline installers are somehow related to how Galaxy downloads and handles the game downloads and installations, but my speculation was that automating the building of offline installers is why they don't generate the offline installers from the original files (instead of those compressed file chunks).

Well as many of us have come to realize, some nerds get so clever they lose sight of the main goal.

A bit like a mobile phone that is great at all sorts of things, except making phone calls & related.

So, from what I am led to believe, there are two groups involved, one does the cracking or bypassing. Then the repacked takes all the game and crack files and for each file applies maximum deflation (free arc is the only name I have heard), to mimimise everything. Thus at reinstall the installer is actually recreating the original file from some formula rather than just copying/decompressing. Hence archive size is a lot smaller. Now yes, in some cases parts are made optional, for cp2077 for instance language packs are optional, which also minimises what is needed to download/store (yes, another thing gog/CDPR are unwilling/unable to do, much like preloading even though that was available on certain other sites!).
Now as I have said previously, I want no trace of the rubbish that is CP2077, and surprisingly one of the things that release did was actually point out the fg site, CDPR were in their “we are so great” phase of pissing everyone off, releasing rubbish, buying reviews, etc. And they posted on that site being all smug about how it wasn’t available there, probably because no one in their right mind would want it. Anyway that post was what led me there (not heard of repacking myself, but there appear to be a few different groups).
But yes, I am under no illusion that gog will change anything as evidenced by the website and the forum, if it ain’t galaxy it ain’t worth it. Need theme lovely microtransactions moneys flowing in, and child gambling is right where the money is at, just ask EA.
Or do it whilst having dinner, or overnight? Storage can’t be done at just those points, but processing can be. As I said, what specific circumstances must the be to say, I have to have this game installed immediately, whilst doing loads of other things.


Edit: I checked a good example. Serious Sam 4 I brought here full price. Gog does not provide an offline patch from 1.07 to 1.08 (nice of them I know), so I now need to download 44gb from scratch. Over on fg, 27.1gb download, exactly the same thing. GOG are failing their customers regularly across the board (unless you sign up to their data capture, microtransaction client).

I'm not sure I understand the difference you're trying to explain..
Anyway, what I recall is that a gogger analized the new installer type and discovered the chunks.
Then a blue said that it was changed to easily create it from the Galaxy files.

(Preface to all reading: not condoning or promoting piracy with this post)

From what i've heard, with such types it's more about the fame/infamy of cracking various games rather than the money. Also tbh i'd rather listen to their opinion on gog's installers/etc over some random person off the street who probably doesn't know a lick about file compression/coding/etc, as they would probably be more likely to know what the heck they're talking about.

-

I usually eat while using the PC, and I dislike leaving my PC unlocked when i'm not around it.

Point being, for some space is the top priority and speed of install is less so....whereas for me, it's the opposite.
(there are exceptions....if the game installer is very small[<5 GB or so] and the time increase is negligible, or it can let's say shave off 100 or so GB, then I might get the smaller version instead)

A 100gb is not out of the ordinary over 2-4 games nowadays. Sure older games do not benefit, in fact anything less than a couple of gig is not worth the effort. But seriously mate, take a break, go outside and have a beer in the garden or something.