Kristian: Vainamoinen, how would an optional client and/or optional auto updater hurt any one in anyway?
Vainamoinen: The auto updater can not be optional, as that's a feature that's undeniably
meant to replace executable patch files. It will become mandatory as developers will immediately delay and then stop delivering actual patches or even patched original game files ("it works on Steam"). In my opinion, implementing an 'auto update' possibility factually means
making it mandatory.
"Automatic" here means a loss of control over the downloaded game files. It might be comfortable for some, but is clearly geared towards repeated and constant connection to the publisher's servers, always checking, scanning, updating, without bothering the player with actual info about it. Download once and archive all the patch files - a thing of the past. It's the opposite of what gog should stand for, i.e. the independence of game files from the publishing platform, all the while preserving the emergency feeling of the traditional 'patch'.
We all know that a "day one patch" generally meant that the developer fucked up and released his game too early. A day one update delivers the same files, but strangely isn't perceived as a fuckup any more. The number of patches a developer had to add was a direct measure of his incapability. The number of auto updates strangely isn't. I have my theories as to why that is so, and I'm certainly not getting in line for that mindset tomorrow. Sorry, but I just don't want to make updates too easy for developers because they're meant to test and finish their game before they release it.
I guess I sound old fashioned here - and that's probably exactly what I am. Judging from 25 years of gaming experience, I'll say that less and less developers are willing to deliver a finished game; I'll say that today Valve is even purposefully blurring that finish line with Early Access. Yesterday's open betas are sold full price today already, and tomorrow they'll sell yesterday's vaporware. Games will rise in popularity and fall into oblivion without ever leaving beta status. I assume you're seeing the beginnings as well.
GOG is in a pickle here because comfortable ways to change game files are an industry standard today and developers are demanding it. They are demanding it because ever more they are unwilling or unable to deliver a finished game.
I'll gather a few thoughts about the "client" later. In my opinion, there already is a kind of an optional GOG client. ;)
I can think of a large number of ways to make an auto updater possible, without making it mandatory.
The easiest possible way would be to simply run a check to see if there are updates available, keeping the exact update system we have now, but then run an automated script that downloads, extracts, installs then deletes the installer.
You could even implement a system that allows for multiple installations, keeping the updaters, whatever you want. Just write a script for it like so (very obviously pseudocode, but the point is the same):
if (update available)
{
download update
extract and install
ask if user wants to keep updater
If yes, keep updater and end script
if no, delete updater and end script
}
done.
I agree with your thought that Day One Patches are a problem, but GOG can't control that. "Early Release" betas are also an issue, but again, that is not under the control of GOG. What GOG CAN do is control how the patches are released here, and they have already proven that it can be done both GOG's way, and Steam's way with the way Rise of the Triad works.
EDIT: Oh, and right now, all updaters and installers are kept on GOG's servers, so this makes it even easier on them to implement this.