Aside of x64, v3 installers are not compatible in general with Windows XP. For whatever reasons. if Win7 is not so outdated by real "morally obsolete" meaning, WinXP the same at some point, and that term never applied to age of product. and so, it can be not the XP issue, but installers, in matter of facts calling things as they are and calling lamers are lamers - which u perfectly know, always partially applied to GOG (like killing explorer as a way to start the game).

But in case of Win7. No real drops happen. GOG just going to erase OS version cataloging and search section. Not like they did it in the first place, always stay mess. Both in infobox and sys req sections and randomly changed back and forth for same games.
So. Its always someone "human factor" . And as usual this days - mis-reasoning and swap reason and conclusion. Bad coding (as troll above suggest) cannot be named bad coding nowadays. But it is. Since OS search useless, we can ignore. But that never mean forget to mention that bad job was done.
"Normality" shouldn't be synonym with "normal" (and opposite)

No hiccups should be called normal. It was tested for Windows 7 - it is listed in sys req. No changes made - no sys req changes. Only normal here.

《, I'd spitefully include》
Thats not the mathematical logic way, not binary. Not programming way. Sad fact, while you bad joking here, maybe are not programist at all, that's are the reality.

Sorry, I good joking in future. But I'm just an ogre with a large cudgle, bellowing fee and fi from a big castle in the sky, so it's difficult not to.

No, not really. What would be misleading would be GOG claiming it works on Windows 7 when it actually doesn't.

If GOG isn't offering guaranteed compatibility on defunct OS versions any more, then in the future it won't be testing if it works or not. Hence they cannot advertise that it works or people will have legitimate cause for a refund if a recent update has changed this compatibility.

I still use a old win7 machine frim time to time to play gog games and if new installers broke compatibility would be a hard punch for me.

True but Steam also haven't crayoned in completely fake requirements in place of that, ie, their page for System Shock 2 still says "Windows XP / Vista / 7/ 8", as does PCGamingWiki, as does MobyGames, leaving GOG very much the odd one out. Steam also markets compatibility on OS's that aren't officially supported with the "Steam Deck Verified" tag for games whose developers clearly don't test / offer support for native Linux builds that don't exist. For some reason it's flown straight over GOG's head that traditionally, "Minimum" = You can 'technically' get the game to run, whilst "Recommended" has usually been the one the developer's recommend / support, ie if it isn't working with Minimum they'll say "We recommend you upgrade...", so what GOG want ("Can I run it" vs "Will GOG support it") is already there, just being misused. It makes zero sense at all to crayon W11 in both for everything twice over down to and including DOS games as then there's literally no point in having two separate fields that always say the same thing (and only one of them actually means what it says).

What GOG really need was to to simply leave Minimum System Requirements as is and just change the "Recommended OS" field to "Supported OS" as it's pretty absurd to claim "We only support the very newest OS versions so we falsely claim everything 'needs' W11" whilst simultaneously they sell native Linux games that still have "Ubuntu 14 / 16 / 18" as the only "supported" versions (whilst the current version is 24) - or the equivalent of supporting only XP / Vista / 7 but not 10 / 11 in 2024... If GOG want to be "special" they at least need to be consistent, otherwise you can't blame people for calling them out on being the confusing, inaccurate and self-contradicting mess that it currently is.

Luckily you aren't, since people could use Win7 offline or in VMs just for better compatibility with some games

Or people could use Wine, which has all the advantages of both using a VM or Windows 7, with none of the frustrating downsides since there's a lot less surface area & overhead.

Random question, I'm thinking about installing windows 7 on older laptop of mind. What is the best way to get copy of 7 nowadays?

Can you still find activation keys that work nowadays?

I just download Enterprise edition right from Ms website... and never activate it (since i dont have exactly such edition key, obviously). that was like 5-6 years ago. not the way today i guess.

in that version as sp1+hotfix with very-very few hotfixes of 2014 installed manually, or let me say no additional updates. This version dont have GameExplorer issue, nor https, digital signs issues. Somehow. Going to update first broke many things, and fix them back afterwards.
there is un-wanted* system services need to be off at image as is and more in updates. and issue in TMP trusted module pltform shown as unrecognizable device in device manager. some update will fix that. directx update, directx/windows platform update. date-time-zones update.
most of WU catalogue are erased, so not all latest available and not needed anyway.


Worse that drivers was erased (for any older than Win10)(Win8 have no real support incl broken updates service right after Win10 release despite statements it is still supported back then, even Win8.1 update erased after Win10 released) from catalog. Ms enforce manufacturers erase Win7 drivers from their websites much before erasing them on own WU. So it can be an issue instal drivers normally. Find them before installing Win7 looking by HWID on 3rd party drivers websites (tht suppot HWID search).

I’ll take a look on eBay. I was planning to create a strictly offline machine for gaming, so I intended to download everything I need ahead of time. I'm just not sure if I should use my laptop or my old desktop, which works fine for this purpose

Appreciate the advice and help
Anyway to remove the annoying message that saying activate? That's if I don't buy a key. Thank you as well for the information.

Surely the point of GoodOldGames is to be able play those goodoldgames on newer systems? No-one is worried that they can't play their old copy of Red Baron on their old Dos machine.
There is of course some subjectivism in what constitutes 'newer' versus 'older', An os unsupported by its developer would seem to be a candidate for 'older'. I personally would like to see the game info specify the os needed for the installer separately to the os(es) supported for the game itself.
Galaxy of course will require a supported os but as long GOG keep to its promise of non-galaxy functioning, then installing becomes the issue.
I've always assumed that the offline installers use some common archive format, can anyone confirm if the game files can be extracted from offline installer files without having to run the installer?

diziet

All of this. Thank you, that is exactly, what buggers me as well.

I recommend approaching the system requirements for older games with a degree of skepticism. For instance, Steam lists the game "System Shock" as compatible with older operating systems, but not listening 10/11. it actually works on Windows 10 and 11. Additionally, just because a game states it is compatible with Windows 7 doesn't necessarily mean it will run, especially if you're using modern hardware.

Just my opinion

If you are going to use Windows 7 I recommend to turn off Update Center and anything that may verify system eligibility, because MS tend to deactivate licenses for Win7 computers sometimes. Happen to few of my friends on their computers couple of years ago after trying to update Windows 7. Honestly, don't know why they were trying to do this knowing that there are no more updates for Win7.