Just wanted to +1 the OP here, as I am in the exact same situation. I started with day-1-releases, snatching up everything, good game or not. But now I'm having doubts about the future of GOG and I might end up not buying anything at all - never mind the day-ones, but even at deep, deep discounts.

Link to copy/paste of the games that will be plagued.

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/offline_installers_with_an_option_to_install_gog_galaxy/post31

I guess gog didn't have the balls to post the list here themselves, rather on a tracking site...

I don't think being vocal about GOG's decision on the forum, 90% of it in the thread started for that very discussion by a GOG staff member, constitutes "chaos". I didn't notice the backlash somehow disturbing the working of the site or the forum or anything really.

I don't get how you can see the reaction of the community as something wrong. Some people really seem to be allergic to standing up for themselves and not being placid whipping boy for their corporate overlords.

I meant in a broken english that:
I would prefer a normal discussion, instead of a backlash.
Gog should start it beforehand, however.

Well, it's not like the backlash was just hate and vitriol. Angry as people were, I think almost everyone remained civil, and there were plenty of well reasoned arguments against the the new policy, it wasn't just frothing at the mouth anger and hysterical cries.

Hell, people came up with much better solutions to the problem that accomplish what GOG wanted and are easily acceptable to us then what GOG eventually came up with. Really, the only chaos I see here is GOG's decision making.

There should be a DRM-meter for GOG, maybe like the clocks so famous during cold war, that shows how close GOG is to introducing DRM for single player games comprehensively.

I would say they are now already very close. If they were like at noon in 2009 when they started and midnight would mean DRM then they are now somewhere between 11 and 11:30 pm.

Didn't I post something here right now?

People menacing everywhere to abandon Gog seemed a bit "chaotic" for me, but ok.

Anyway, I hope that Gog will check my suggestion, because it's the simplest ever O_o

A short history of my relationship with GOG :

up up down down up down up down up.

... left right left right B A


And @Trilarion: yes, I also get the feeling that the DRM clock on GOG is dangerously close to midnight. All these little stunts feel like test balloons how far they can go in the DRM direction without losing most of their customers. Little step by little step they push further in the direction of becoming just another copy of Steam.

The accumulated filth of all their DRM and clients will foam up about their waists and all the GOG staff and publishers will look up and shout "Use Galaxy!"...

...and I'll look down, and whisper "no."

deleted

Well noon and midnight are at the same place on a clock :-)

So to use your doomsday clock analogy; if we were at noon/midnight in 2009 and we now are at 11 / 11:30 then it means that things are actually improving.

Why do something stupid like implementing Galaxy in a standalone/offline installer. I download these backups to be able to install the games offline. Otherwise I wouldn’t download these backups. What’s so hard to understand about it, GOG?

If I want to install games online, then I don’t need to install games using the offline backups. If I use the backups then it should be clear I don’t want to install them using Galaxy. And if I want Galaxy, I can download it from GOG and import the game folders of the games I installed offline.

The very least should be that opt-out is default. Default opt-in is how people end up with stuff like Ask toolbar and other crapware. Poor business practice, GOG.

Dear GOG, maybe watch your own videos every now and then, just to remember what you advertised as your killer feature that makes you distinct from Steam etc.

Remember “Freedom of Choice”, “Optional Client”?

GOG.com Galaxy: Introducing a DRM-Free Online Gaming Platform!

Two years later, stuff starts creeping in.

If you run at 20 posts per page, then you were probably a victim of the new page bug. Sometimes the first post on a new page doesn't show up until another post is made in the thread.

Sorry, but that's what I meant. I was thinking about a 24 hours clock, a full day. Did you maybe misunderstand me deliberately?
Yes, that must have been it. Should I change 20 posts per page then?