I am sure this topic has been created earlier in many forms and suggestions but I would like to take it a step further if you all dont mind.

Here is my thoughts...
Currently in my GoG library i have a good collection of games i have bought all because they are awesome but also because GoG has treated them with respect and made then all playable in our new Modern Operating systems.

Meanwhile one of my biggest annoyances is finding the start icons to play them.
Now Steam has done it , as has Origin, Uplay, Desura and even Green Man gaming and Capsule. The thing is, I rate GoG higher than most of these and yet they dont give me a game launcher to play all my favorite games, a place where I can see, patch, tweak and play all my GoG games only.


To the GoG team, have you guys even considered this?
It would be awesome.
Hell, I wouldnt even mind it launching with a news page and even a Store Front to buy the GoG games.

So, you want an optional DRM-free client for GOG. Yes, it has been mentioned before.

Take your pick and vote.

You can put all GOG shortcuts into single separate folder.

Oh, come on, it's not like games will stop working just for a little patch, don't be so paranoid.

Oh, wait

No thanks. the OS (or one of 9856498573498573498 3rd party programs) handles shortcuts an program launching no problem.

It DOES irritate me that the newest GOG installers don't create program groups/shortcuts, though, in the start menu in Win7/8. It seems to put them in the stupid Windows Game Center, only.

I don't need a Game Launcher, but more optional features for everyone are always good. +1
This could be quite useful for users with low tech skill here on GOG.

And would piss off all the users with average or higher tech skill who'd feel that this would be the first step of GOG becoming like Steam (even if it were actually an unjustified claim).

But I agree, it would be nice. Heck, I don't mind fiddling with my games at all (I actually love checking out all the inis and cfg files of games and reading guides how to customize them or something - there's also few DOSBoxed GOG releases where I don't make some adjustments to the configs) but I'd still appreciate a nice and solid client. If GOG did it right they could actually use it to additionally support the personal customization of the games by providing easy access to the corresponding files directly from the launcher (or even include a GUI for configuring those files directly within the launcher).

That would probably be too much work - sorry, couldn't resist with all these threads popping up lately ;-P I'm not sure that it's GOG's fault, I've noticed this behaviour also from non-GOG games which makes me think it could be a Windows thing or a combination (Windows requirement + compliance by devs)?

An launcher could be very nice, but I think yet-another-games-client just for GOG would be a step backwards. An agnostic client which happened to have GOG support would be better, IMO. Recent GOG installers put games in the GOG.com program group.

I'm not sure if GOG does anything special with regard to Windows Games Explorer, but Games Explorer tends to add games of its own accord anyway. Even games released before Games Explorer even existed are still affect^H^H^Hlicted by it.

I think the vast majority of users don't want a mandatory client.

However, I think at least half the users in here would like an optional feature-rich client.

It's actually hurting GOG that they don't provide one.

Heck, if they could at least provide (and publish the specs of) a RESTful feature-rich API for their servers, that would already be a significant step.

I personally don't need a game launcher, but would love something to keep my installers up to date, re-install my installed games with the latest version (or just apply the latest patch) and backup my savegames (technically, I already have the later, but something official for everybody would be cool).

I agree but not on the 'hurting'. Having a client may help gog reach new customers (and make some existing ones happier), not having one don't make gog lose customers as far as I know (edit : I mean that it's hard to quantify).

Making a lightweight, cool featured, client requires time and resources. This is something they would have to do (or 'are currently making ?') very carefully. Right now the will for a client is really not clear, people saying 'why not' is not a good incentive.

I often wonder : do all people that want a client use steam, or any client based platform, regularly ? (I suppose the answer is yes)
Then : Are they used to have 2 clients ? do they already use 2 at a time ? Did they keep them running simultaneously or do they quit and launch on every whim ? In the end, what will more likely make them keep using the client than thinking "three clients run like shit together, in fact I prefer the folder full o' shortcuts" ? Business wise : if you spend energy doing something, you'd prefer people to use AND like it (that may need years of tweaking .....and still have lots of issues)

There is a big differences between what people want and what they really need. Then you have to be sure of what you can deliver.

My message to OP is not 'clients are useless, don't discuss of that here', but more 'this is a complex discussion that can't be started anew every week. Many people poured their thoughts into it, you should start reading the older posts and really take it *a step further*'

Side note : a solution was provided for the icon-launching issue, I think it was the main (as in 'immediately fixable') concern.

Edit: why do I always make second readings after posting ?

Really? I don't see a difference with the latest installers. The common installer still creates a desktop icon which can be disabled during installation, a Windows Game Explorer entry and the game folder in the Startmenu/Metro screen. At least in Windows 8.

I usually use the Game Explorer entry to start my games. It is simply an icon in a "standard" windows folder where all installed games are collected. Easy to sort, easy to find, easy to use. Just double click the icon and the game starts.
What else would a client need? Automatic updates? Well, if you insist, but I would disable "automatic" anyway. What I would like to see is a better update notification paired with an improved change-log. Stay transparent and easy-peasy unlike Steam's bloatware for example I would say!

It's a good idea, as long as it's kept optional.

That's what I do, with that folder having a link on the desktop, and the same thing with the manuals in another folder. It doesn't require any sort of third-party app to accomplish, doesn't turn gOg into something like Steam, doesn't leave a launcher program running in the background, and is simple enough that my mom can figure it out.