idbeholdME: Well, access to older game versions in general is more of a nice to have when it comes to digital distribution. You are forced to use only the latest version in 99% of cases. This is actually one of the main reasons I still prefer retail over anything digital, because I can get a 1.0 version of a game (or very close to it) and update it as I see fit. Galaxy has the rollback feature (although only a couple of versions back), which is why I assume they refer you to it in this case. Do we even know if GOG archives all the older installer builds? They might not to reduce space requirements.

Having that feature somehow available for offline installers would be nice although I don't see a practical way to achieve this. But expecting GOG to host and offer downloads of every single previous installer version for a given game doesn't seem feasible. Especially when it's so popular these days to release a game and spam patches every week after release.

joelandsonja: I've been a massive fan of GOG for nearly a decade, so believe me when I say that I really want them to succeed, but I can't help thinking that GOG has been in somewhat of a decline in quality over the last few years. Keep in mind that this is only one man's opinion, but I thought it was worth outlining a few areas where I think GOG needs improvement.

Feel free to add your own suggestions to the list, but I'll get the ball rolling with my top three.

#1. GOG Needs Better Linux Support

I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that I would much rather be using Linux as my primary operating system, but GOG support on Linux is virtually non-existent and I find that extremely frustrating (to say the least). I have to admit that I've recently been having a conflict in my mind when it comes to choosing between a platform that's DRM-Free (GOG), or a platform that has more Linux support (Steam), and I'm not entirely sure which direction I plan to go. It would make my decision a lot easier if GOG said that they're planning to make Linux support a priority, but that doesn't seem to be the case. I could be wrong, but I really think that Linux is going to be the future of gaming, especially with the recent success of the Steam Deck and Proton software/Steam OS.

#2. CD Projekt Should Stop Stealing GOG Developers

I think it's safe to say that most of the developers at GOG have been recruited by CD Projekt to help patch Cyberpunk, but I can't help thinking that this was a huge mistake. I can't prove that Cd Projekt are stealing developers, but it's pretty obvious that they are. I realize that they can do whatever they want, because it's their company, but It's painfully obvious that the developers at GOG have virtually abandoned Galaxy since the release of Cyberpunk, because there have only been a handful updates over the last 10 months and support has slowed down to a crawl. Needless to say this is likely putting future development of Galaxy behind schedule, and GOG is going to continue losing ground to other platforms if they're not able to improve their own software.

#3. The Website Needs Improvement

I want to start by saying that I actually think that the GOG storefront is much better than Steam, Epic or Humble, but I can't help thinking that GOG needs to make better choices when it comes to the overall design. I realize that opinions on this issue may vary, but I wanted to point out three problems that I think should be addressed. #1. The main banner at the top of the page should not be overlapping the image below (see image marked 'Banner'). I'm not sure why GOG chose to make these images overlap, but it just doesn't look right. #2. GOG recently changed the game images near the bottom of the screen to a really strange square shape, and this also doesn't look right (see image marked 'Square'). #3. The website loads like absolutely garbage on tablets. I'm not sure if this is a universal problem, but every time I try to view GOG's storefront from a tablet, it never works properly. Obviously I'm not running my games from a tablet, but sometimes I just want to see what's new, and I can't get the website to work. I also realize that some of these issues may seem minor on the surface, but it does lend itself to the idea that GOG's quality is in decline.

Normally I don't like to be so negative when it comes to criticizing GOG, but I can't help feeling a little disappointed by GOG's direction over the last few years. That being said, let me know what you guys (and gals) think. Do you think GOG has been losing focus (a decline in quality)? Or do you think they're doing a good job overall? Share your thoughts below.

* Obviously all comments are welcome, but please try to keep your suggestions constructive.

mrkgnao: ...

AB2012: Exactly what's making up most of the higher selling costs, and what has changed vs previous years when it was lower?

AB2012: I think the real question isn't "What if CDPR goes bankrupt", but rather it's entirely possible for a parent company to decide that "some changes will have to be undertaken to minimize the loss" to a subsidiary's unprofitable business model as in "we can reduce GOG's selling costs by halving storage requirements. And we can do that by scrapping offline installers..."

joppo: This time I will vehemently disagree with you. Like AB2012 said, unfortunately the most viable buyers would gladly bury Gog in favor of their own store. Either that or they wouldn't spend 5 minutes after signing the purchase before throwing DRM-free out of the window.

It could be great for us customers IF the theoretical new owner was someone who considers DRM-free just as important a value as Gog once did many years ago. But if I'm being realist, this scenario requires way too much optimism.
Our best hope is that the current not-so-happy financial statements bring some well-needed epiphany to Gog/CDP's current leadership that alienating your current customer base in the process of pursuing your competitor's customers (who might not be seduced by the novelty) isn't that good an idea after all.

Time4Tea: I will clarify by saying that, imo, the best thing that could happen to GOG would be for it to be bought by a private individual or group that truly cares about DRM-free and is committed to re-establishing DRM-free as a priority. It would be far preferable to the current ownership who are clearly intent on shoehorning as much DRM onto the store as they can reasonably get away with, to boost short-term profits and satisfy their shareholders.

But, I agree with you that finding such a buyer would be very difficult and so it is probably not likely to happen.

Pangaea666: GOG should go back to its roots.

StingingVelvet: Their roots haven't really changed, they just added more on top. The newer games, the client... all optional.

StingingVelvet: Their roots haven't really changed, they just added more on top. The newer games, the client... all optional.

mrkgnao: Flat pricing? No geoblocking? Complete Editions? Lots of goodies? Dialogue with the community? Support?

You might not care about them, but these were GOG's roots.

mrkgnao: 2) I believe GOG's strong point is its curation, which while always subjective, can still give it a harnessable image of quality. So, while maintaining curation, I would attempt to diversify into neglected categories, such as:
a) DRM games: Yes, DRM games. I don't think the die-hard DRM-free crowd is that big and we already know what they (we) will do when GOG introduces a bit of DRM. Nothing. As long as the percentage of DRM games is small (e.g. 10%) and clearly marked, I think GOG should be fine.

Cavalary: Indeed. And this message sounds (looks?) more like you.
Cavalary: This doesn't. What. The. Fuck???
Not that they're not getting there already via the boiling frog method, as Time4Tea just pointed out.

mrkgnao: Flat pricing? No geoblocking? Complete Editions? Lots of goodies? Dialogue with the community? Support?

StingingVelvet: I think regional pricing is largely a good thing.

StingingVelvet: I don't remember dialog with the community ever being a priority.