Since Amazon's practically a one-stop shop anyhow, they could have "game codes" a la what they're doing for the Xbox 360 downloadable titles, and there'd be another way to pay for GOG.com titles (OTHER than PayPal, etc).
BJ

When viewing a game's informational page, list whether it has multiplayer or not including various info such as what protocols it uses, and how many players, game modes (coop, deathmatch, team deathmatch, CTF, etc etc.).
It would be awesome if you guys set up something like Steam for games that had multiplayer so we could all have one place to go to to play the games online, but I realize that would be a massive undertaking and is fairly unlikely given how many different developers you guys host games for.

spoiler tags

Profile pages or a PM function +1
and the multiplayer client idea would practically double the value of the purchases on this site
i would even buy an app if it let me play my gogs multiplayer, and i would DEFINITELY buy more games. we don't need added support for games that have no multiplayer, but if there is already a multiplayer function in a game, it couldn't be too hard to set up a way get some home servers going, could it?

Some games here was released on other formats. For instance the Ishar-games, which were also released on the Amiga. It would have been cool if GOG could add the Amiga versions as downloadable bonus content... just an idea (unsure if it's been suggested before). I realize it's not always practical, but sometimes it could be interesting to see how different versions compare, and it shouldn't be too hard to find the adf files and put them up.

That would be 'very' useful, particularly whether it's IPX or TCP/IP.

A little forumfunction that could be usefull, have the forum go to last read post, instead of last page in thread.

+1 Would really like to be able to filter games by their original release date!

I'd love to be able to easily install/run games I download from GOG without administrative rights.

Isn't that more of a Vista problem than GOG games? Can't the feature be disabled (I know at least thrice damned UAC can be)?

This can happen in both XP and Vista if I'm not mistaken, but it happens in XP only when you are logged in as a normal user (not an administrator). Most people never notice this problem because almost everyone run XP with administrator rights. In Vista programs run at a normal user level even when you're logged in as an administrator, so you'll get the UAC prompts no matter what type of user you are.
The problem arises because Windows only allows write access to your local user directory if you're a normal user. If you have your games installed in C:\Program Files\ or anywhere outside your user directory, you'll get a UAC prompt because the program needs to be elevated to administrator status in order to write to its own config files. Modern programs and games solve this by storing config files in the user directory instead, only the program executables are kept in C:\Program Files\. Our good old games are designed for DOS and Windows 9x where the user-administrator distinction did not exist, so they store their files wherever they feel like.
The solution is simple: Install your good old games in your local user directory! Create a new directory, for example like this:
C:\Documents and Settings\<username>\Local Settings\Application Data\gog.com\ (if XP)
C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Local\gog.com\ (if Vista/Windows 7)
Install all your games there and your troubles should be over. As it happens, Google Chrome does the same thing. If you have a lot of modern games installed you're likely to find that they store their config files and savegames in the AppData directory as well.

This was on an XP machine on campus/work. I was going to install to a folder on my desktop (this has worked for other games) but just trying to open the GOG .exe yielded a message similar to "You must have administrative rights to install this game." I didn't even get a chance to install it anywhere.
I'm going to try to installing it at home, maybe on a USB drive or something, and see if that will work.

You're right, I tested the same thing on a local XP installation using a limited user - gog's installers fail to work. I tested a few non-gog games, two of them worked fine (The Maw and World of Goo) and I was allowed to install them in the Application Data directory. A third game (Crayon Physics) failed in the same way as the gog installers.
Looks like the installer runs a check for administration rights and throws an error - the installer probably would have worked if it hadn't been for that. Bad luck I guess.
Installing on a USB drive from a different computer should work fine though, it worked here a least. Good luck!

Wrong, create a new folder in the root (C:\Games\ or whatever), or install to a secondary drive/partition (eg. I have all my games in G:\Games\), and it won't require admin rights to write the files, or replace them afterwards manually (mods, downloaded content, whatever). Admin rights will still be needed to start the installer, probably because the act of installing something temporarily needs admin rights somewhere else (huge chunks of the registry are protected, if not all of it, possibly excepting your user's own little part of it). It's not that Windows protects anything outside the user's own directory, it's that it protects the "Program Files" and "Windows" folders, plus very few others, and not even that clear cut, eg. try creating a folder inside "Program Files" (myself as example again; I have a "Program Files\noinstall" folder for programs that doesn't have an installer, but just comes with the executable in a zip file or something), that new folder won't be protected by Windows (though creating it requires admin access, since PF itself is protected), but folders for installed programs inside Program Files are.
Oh yeah, this is on Vista, Ultimate x64 to be specific. Never used a normal user on XP enough to say much about that system, but I assume it's similar in what it protects.

That would depend on the security policies of the system - I'm sure you are right wrt. the default policies though, as I haven't used Vista in a while. On XP a limited user wouldn't be able to create directories at the root folder, I guess the same is likely to be true if you're on Vista in a school/business environment with more restricted policies.