I like the idea of it, but I hate mandatory clients. I wouldn't even use Steam if it wasn't for the low, low game prices.

Unless the GOG client would somehow make your GOG games appear on your Steam game list, what would be different?

I'm the opposite to you, maybe because I don't auto-run the Steam client on Windows startup, and I don't save Steam password either (both because I want to restrict the usage of my Steam account by the other computer users, and I tend to forget passwords unless I keep entering them when logging in to different services/pages :)). E.g. with my HumbleBundle single-player games (those where there was both a DRM-free and Steam version included), I think I've so far always chosen to install and play the DRM-free version instead. Starting the Steam client and entering the Steam password is just extra steps to starting a game, rather than clicking a game icon on the desktop or the task bar.

That said, yes from me too for an optional client. But as can be seen from above, I am more interested to the download functionality (_optional_ ability to start downloads from within the client too without logging to the web pages) and integrity checks of already downloaded games, rather than an option to run games from within the client. Both are good optional features, but priorities. That's why I've felt they should expand the current downloader client with new features, step by step.

For some reason the client doesn't seem to have received any major new features for a long time, stuck to the same feature level for a long time, similar thing that seems to have happened to HumbleBundle Android client. Maybe they both were still so buggy that all the development time has gone to squashing the bugs.

It's ridiculous to even think about such a thing, when this site itself is buggy beyond belief (things like search function, update flags and many other annoying things about the GOG site). Fix what you've got first.

The "GOG client" could be added to the autostart list (and it would show the installed and installable GOG games so they could be run (or installed) with a double-click)? Ie. like Steam, but GOG.

I agree with this, though it would be nice if the downloader would estimate when the download should be finished.

Well, I think you could already now easily make the existing GOG folder in your Start Menu to automatically jump on your face whenever you log into Windows, with all the GOG game folders/icons there. :) Just double-click the GOG game you want to play from there.

But the point that the GOG (downloader) client should list all your GOG games in your account, and start the download (and installation) from there, is important to many new users. The first obstacle for new GOG users seem to quite often be how to download and install a GOG game. Heck, even I was originally fooled into thinking that I should be able to start the GOG game download from within the client, but no, I needed to log into both the client, and the web page.

No, the kind of client I want from GOG is the exact type of the Steam client: one I can autorun (because I'm the only one using my computer), one that display my whole games library and updates them automatically, one that, when I click on one game, provides me with links towards chat rooms and message boards, and so on.

If it's only an updater, I don't really see the point.

I don't see the point, given how much of a huge resource-drag maintaining a client can be for a distributor. Desura has had an optional one since the beginning, and it's still painfully bad and not worth really using over just the browser page. Steam, although it's fine these days, was buggy for a long time after release and it took Valve quite a while just to get it into proper working condition, and it still has hitches occasionally. Also Valve is a multi-billion dollar company who can afford all the programmer overhead for all the integration features like Community, Workshop, etc etc. A small distributor like GOG, could burn a lot of cash developing and then maintaining a client which ultimately very few of their customers will use, because well Steam's client is better and can just as easily add GOG games manually to your library.

Given how GOG's installers work, all the client would be doing is just downloading and auto-running the same installer. Really it would be a massive expense for basically nothing. All the features that could exist in a Client could be down better, and in a more unified way, on this site.

OK but maybe I was thinking more are there many people who like their GOG Downloader but don't want it to morph into a full GOG Client? If support for the GOG Downloader gets broken at any point and Full Client or direct link are then the only options?
Personally I'm a Steam user as well so I don't mind, I just wondered it 'Pro Downloader / Anti-Client' was a stance anyone strongly held...

I wouldn't mind a client: hell, I'd probably use it too, but like others have already pointed out: as long as it's completely optional.

Integrate optional accesses to the forums and to the IRC Channel too?

Oh, I use the downloader. And I would use the "client" too. But I agree with the people who say that it HAS to be optional (just as the downloader is nowadays). I don't want to feel compelled to run a "parasite" program if I don't want to. Especially if said program going wonky would mean that my games would not load/run, or would run interference with my games...
Keep in mind that gog is in great part a shop selling older games, to people that may want to run them on older computers. There are a couple of titles here, like "King of dragon Pass", that react very poorly to external programs running at the same time.

The "client" is the GOG website.
+ Our libraries and wishlists are publicly visible (with the help of Barefoot Essentials)
+ We can see our entire collection of games in one place
+ We're informed when our games are updated in any way
+ Reviews and ratings are accessible
+ Forums are available

The main things GOG is missing are servers, achievements, and a chat service.

The only thing GOG could really use at this point is the ability to send group messages.

To go past the GOG Downloader and step into client territory would be a step in a direction entirely different from what Good Old Games was meant to be.

There is also a wish you can vote for to create a client similiar to Steam. I say here what I sayed there: I don't want it. The reason I prefer gog.com over Steam is the fact that you don't have to install any client with gog games. You can download and burn the games on discs, then you can install them, just like in the old days. That's why I like gog.com more than Steam.
I'd rather to see gog invest their manpower and finance to other things, mostly to bring more games and bonus content.

And "push" update support. A standardized API. Good Alpha/Beta support. A green-light program. The game developers love these features!

While I'm aware of the potential risk a steam-like client ("a platform") impose, but I think if carefully done most of the steam advantages can be achieved without betraying the gog core qualities.