So obviously a few don’t like the galaxy client.In my opinion a launcher should always be optional and that’s what galaxy is.You can also merch all launchers together with it which is a cool feature.I backed up over 400 games with all the offline installers and it was very easy and simplistic.You only get some cosmetics for cyberpunk if you use the launcher which is bs but i don’t know if they fixed that by know.In general i like the client and if it stays optional forever i don’t see an issue with it

Mainly because it has taken the focus away from the website and the offline installers. We now have the situation where we have less efficient installers which often aren't as up to date as the copy of the game users of the client get. Gog's limited resources and development time are spent on the client, rather than on the website or fixing games. I'm also not a fan of the way that a Galaxy DLL is packaged with the installer - leading to the risk that at some point, this will need to be "cracked" out if it breaks compatibility with newer Windows (let's say GoG go under and a Win10/11 feature update breaks the DLL).

So plenty of legitimate reasons why people dislike Galaxy.

tbh i don't hate gog galaxy at all. it works good for my needs.

Focus as in the efforts of GoG as opposed to focus as in ability to see them. It is because the offline installers are not as up to date as the Galaxy installers. There are a couple of topics devoted to this.

Then again, using your definition of focus, I'd also argue that my argument still holds water - after all, the big green button on the website downloads galaxy, and you have to expand to show the "backup installers"...

It’s actually much more easier to see them now and it also easier to get them

At one point, GOG used malware tactics and stealth-installed Galaxy along with each and every game installer. You were only able to opt out if if you remembered to click the Options button during install. (A button which traditionally offer minor choices, such as install directory or if you want an icon on the desktop, not major decisions like if you want to install a launcher)

They only stopped this practice because the forum users raised a shitstorm.

Things like this don't really win people over. There has also been some instances where games were broken or lacking features when they were played outside galaxy, or their installers were outdated. Also, if you look at the download page for your games, their design heavily try to discurage people from downloading the normal install files. And as nice as archivements and multiplayer are, this part of the games are effectively DRM-protected.

That said, I think a launcher offers some good features, letting you quickly and effortlessly install and uninstall games, and backing up your saves. I just don't like Galaxy constantly seem to nudge GOG away from its DRM-free roots.

Never had the feeling that gog is stepping away from its routes beside of the cyberpunk and hitman oopsie.Nobody is perfect and mistakes are a part of life.They recommitted to their strict drm free rules so let’s take their words and let actions speak

I disagree, but then again, I did join 10 years before you did and remember the site before Galaxy.

Try reading some of the posts on the subject. Some things from memory:
- through galaxy buy epic games, reduced chance f those games appearing on gog and promotes a drm storefront
- removes focus from offline installers
- provides a mechanism for telemetry, microtransactions, and drm. Clients are there for stores to lock in customers and milk them
- encourages lax computer use where the user feels no need to do anything themselves until it goes wrong
- replaces main game content and mechanics with “achievements”
- promotes reliance on internet (cloud saves) which reduces user control
- adds need for more system resources
- makes offline installers also reliant on galaxy dlls
- isn’t open source
- any cross platform
- offers nothing that cannot be done be done far better using other tools/processes other than next point
- makes multiplayer galaxy only
- will eventually lead to the removal of offline installers
- will become CDPrOnline, what it was always intended as
- promotes online only content, online gating

Not galaxy but clients in general, have been
- proprietarising and platform locking mods
- responsible for steams dominance and client lock-in for years
- responsible for most of the worst drm systems yet (GFWDead anyone?)
- fragmentation of the market with each store having its own one, sure galaxy tries to be a one client to rule them all, but it’s still nothing more than a shallow front

So in all, clients are far worse than drm which can be removed, the mentality and reasons why clients are there cannot. Most don’t even realise it, “duh, bruh I just posted to my twatterfeed my 150 clicks achievement”, whilst the companies behind them are walking off with tonnes of nice saleable data. Any reason to use clients other than forced platform specific multiplayer and fake achievements = none!

Edit: I forgot to add, since galaxy released on GOG, they have year on year gone downhill with endless “mistakes”, more and more controversies, locked content, removed functionality, ignored broken features, version parity, in fact everything has gone out of the window apart from galaxy. And it’s not all GOG, it’s CDPr behind it all, the EA wannabes with their always online gambling setup that cyberjunk was planned to be.

That statement is directly contradicted & undermined & disproven by your other statement in your same OP there, which correctly states that Galaxy acts as a DRM-gate for Cyberpunk 2077 content.

That means that Galaxy is actually not optional for people who want to experience 100% of the content of the game which they paid for.

Yes, it’s easier to see them now as GOG made it as hard as possible to find the offline installers. As soon as numbers knowing about offline installers drop far enough, they will disappear.

You mean actions like the Hitman release? lol

GOG told us they were bundling the offline installers with Galaxy because customers were too stupid to download them without the "optional" client. So yeah, let's give them the benefit of the doubt -- and prove that they were right. ;p

You can still install all the offline installers without the galaxy client i already did that and i don’t see any sign that offline installers aren’t the focus.I did download them in the past via the homepage and it’s much better and easier now

You have only been here for a couple of years, ie he galaxy era. Why else would GOG need to put out a press release that they were refocusing on their core business? E wise they lost it over the last few years. It’s not just those two, it’s quite a few more, and it’s always a “mistake”, how many times before it becomes a process trying to push something, e she’s whatever the number we are well past it. Yes, we will see what actions come, so far all we see is some more filter options and no support, so if you see that as improvement…