I can confirm. Several updates for the offline installers are now popping up for me as well.

GALAXY - What a horror.
What a memory hungry, bloated piece of software.
I cannot believe that something like that might be running in the background while you play a game. It is bad enough when it is the only thing running. You gotta be kidding me that this is acceptable.

Yes, I took the plunge again today, and tried it with another game, and the experience was anything but a pleasure, quite the opposite. It almost brought my low powered PC, which I just use for the web, to a standstill.

If I have to use that to get games installed, GOG will be history for me.

Unlike yesterday, I did not see a webinstaller file running, and to all appearances all the game files were downloaded from GOG individually, straight into the game folder. The game was Submarine Titans, which was roughly 550 Mb to download, and something like 770 Mb installed (as stated), though it proved to be only 641 Mb roughly. Of course, GOG just might be hiding the web installer file, as I couldn't find it in any of the half a dozen expected places.

My PC is still recovering from Galaxy having been run ... I should probably reboot.

I must concur, this smells a lot like DRM to me. Even the horrible GamersGate have a better version of DRM-free. Thank Dog for the offline installers at GOG, their current saving grace.

So until I learn otherwise, my apologies for seeing Galaxy in a somewhat kinder light. In its current form it will never be acceptable to me, even on a much better powered machine like my gaming PC.

If I have to download and install every game using Galaxy, then zip the game folder to create my DRM-Free single or multiple backup files, then that is just crap. I could potentially spend half a day with some games doing that, they are that big. And for those who think just copying the game folder to a backup drive would be fine, think again ... with in many cases potentially thousands of small files, not only would that take ages to copy, but would heat up your external drive considerably, and if you care about your backup drives and their content, you would never treat a drive that way. And then let's not forget all the wasted space of an uncompressed backup if left in folder form.

And forget updates, you would have to keep each game installed (or re-install) to get them with Galaxy, and they would automatically be incorporated into the existing game folder, which you would have to zip for backup again.

What a nightmare. I've got better things to do with my life.

What do you mean with "web installer"? Did you let Galaxy auto update or did you in fact try to download the offline installers?

Noticed it too. I'll also update the list you've linked some time tomorrow, but I expect the new one will look a lot better.

You may have missed my post from yesterday.

Yesterday I did an experiment, because what I was being told here conflicted with my memory.
Basically, for the first time, I did the Galaxy - Download & Install, for a game.

When I ran the downloaded shell file, a floating progress box came up, and it was called Web Installer, which I presumed was a file. It showed something like 230 or 320 Mb (forget which) was downloading.

Not getting that today, I suspect it may have just been an installer for updating to Galaxy 2.0, as I only had Galaxy 1.0 installed.

P.S. My idea was, that if I could, I would get a copy of whatever Galaxy downloaded before it installed the game ... similar to what you have to do with GamersGate to get the true game installer file. I tried again today, because I had the time to be better prepared to find out wherever the temporary file was located ... alas no luck with that.

Your guess is correct (and yes, I did not read your post from yetserday, sorry). The webinstaller (which I would never ever use) installs Galaxy in case it is not installed and afterwards calls the install routine from the game from within Galaxy. I would suggest to install Galaxy the usual way (directly from the web site) and then either install the games using Galaxy or (which is what I do) download the offline installer through the extras section in Galaxy and install them manually. You will still be able to use Galaxy features in case you want to do by simply starting the game through Galaxy.

No problem, hard to keep up with all the posts.

Yep, I was seeing if it would do something like that, and what control if any I had over the process.

Normally I would, and I did that with Galaxy 1.0 way back when. However I was doing an experiment.

Actually I was deliberately trying to see if I could get a full non offline installer file.

In actual fact, if I had gotten that, it would be another type of offline installer, potentially, that had Galaxy elements included inside it, so not your regular offline installer that like you say is also available through Galaxy or your browser etc.

Btw: I just reread your post and you said that Galaxy hat to update/migrate from 1.0 to 2.0 - that is a time and processing intensive task and afterwards things should get a lot better.

Maybe, but that was yesterday, and not for the game today, and I never installed any games through Galaxy 1.0. And I only currently have two GOG games installed - Shadow Warrior and Normality.

Yesterday after updating, it also started downloading details for all the games I own at GOG. Clearly that was going to take a long time, so I cancelled the process and closed down Galaxy. Today of course it tried again and continued on. No doubt that means it is going to be extra memory hungry while doing that. I also stopped it again today while the game was downloading and installing, though I am not entirely sure it does stop until done, even though I clicked the X.

I now have about 138 games out of 1171 showing in Galaxy.

Yes, you really should not abort things and expect Galaxy to run as it is supposed to do. Just let it update and import completely once, then you will be able to judge for real if installing a game is so memory hungry in Galaxy as you say it is. I am all for offline installers but so far did not have the feeling that Galaxy is eating up much of my memory or processing power after it has started (task manager does not even list Galaxy in the top rows and memory amount is stated as being "really low". If you really WANT to give Galaxy a chance it should be a fair one. Of course that does not change the fact that Galaxy still is missing crucial features and is not working as it should be regarding other features ... but I have not given up hope that this will change sometime in the far future :)
It is high rated because they finally REPLIED and ADMITTED the problem (which btw. was the main reason I even started this thread). It also is a good thing that it is high rated because maybe GOG will see that their customer base appreciated communication and trasparency - at least the majority does.

That was not the purpose of my experiment, and it was sure to take a couple of hours at least to get all the data for the games I own. That alone is telling enough ... it should be a low memory background service, but clearly wasn't ... no doubt speed is of the essence in the developer's view, but certainly not mine ... what's the hurry?

I certainly could not do anything else on my PC while Galaxy was doing its thing.

And if I wasn't allowed to abort the detail collecting, why give me that option, and why not warn me when I clicked the option? Not logical anyway, it only needed to install the one game I instigated and just get the details of that game. All the rest could be done in slow low memory dribs and drabs. If I had installed the game with the intention to immediately play it, why would I want memory being hogged getting details for all my games?

In summary, I don't care what Galaxy feels it needs to do, it should never run so abysmally at any point, if it is being logical and doing all the right things. Just poorly thought out coding.

P.S. And memory usage is relative to how much RAM you have and how much is free from other services. From what I have read about Galaxy, it is a browser or contains an embedded browser (same diff really), and just suffers the same bloat issues, certainly accessing GOG web pages, etc.

But you were still in update process - so what you tested was NOT the normal way Galaxy is working. You tested to update/migrate and install a game at the same time. No wonder everything slows down.

Okay, that's up to GOG having problems to program things in a user friendly way .. I have to admit this. But wait .. they did so in the past ... it was a software called ... wait "GOG Downloader" ;)

Well, you never tested it correctly so no surprise here. But if you wanted Galaxy to fail (by doing things that has NOTHING to do with usual Galaxy) why did you even try it?

Edit: I have attached a pic from my task manager so that you can see the regular Galaxy idle mode.

What update process? It was installed and updated yesterday, and there was nothing to migrate.
The only updating, if you want to call it that, was getting my list of owned games and their details. And like I said, no hurry for that in reality, so it should be low cost.

Indeed.

Like I said, it was not the purpose of my experiment. I was only seeing what files I could get through Galaxy that might be usable as a (Galaxy infected) offline installer, in case we ever lost the regular offline installers.

As I will state again, it should never run so abysmally, even when you first install it etc, and certainly not after. Just very poor programming, and illogical thinking. You only need to get the bare basics for that game you want to install and play. All the rest can happen slowly at idle moments.

It's a case of too much and too soon ... not well thought out. And way too much loaded into RAM ... almost made my PC unusable, and that just doesn't need to happen.

P.S. Going by your screenshot, that is 330 Mb in RAM for specific Galaxy services. What about the non specific but related ones. That's a fair old chunk for just sitting idle. No doubt a drop in the ocean for those with plenty of RAM to spare, and if you are running on your gaming PC, probably not a huge issue, unless every bit of RAM counts with the game you are playing. For me, I am using my web PC, not used for gaming, just used for downloading my files etc, so it doesn't need to be super powerful and have heaps of RAM ... except GOG demand that with Galaxy and website bloat.

Well it is not and it is only done once you updated from Galaxy 1 to Galaxy 2 because it has to migrate the database structure. So my point stands - let it finish see how it goes and then decide ... if you really WANT a fair test that is.

So it wasn't the purpose of your experiement to see how Galaxy would run in case you would have to use. However you complaint about exactly that which makes my counter argument valid again. If it never was your purpose to see how Galaxy is running and if you could not care less why complaint about it?

That's nonsense and you should know that. Migrating a database can take quite a while depending on the size and structure of the database - that is absolutely normal. If you aboort migration process before it is finished and expect the not finished database to work as it should the programmers are not to blame here.

Is there really anybody out there with less than 8GB of RAM (you should not run any Win OS with less than 8 if you want to have some fun)... anyway - that's all Galaxy is using - don't know which services you might also refer to.

But there's no need to discuss this at all if it never was your intention to use Galaxy at all.

if they stop making offline installers, then i have no reason to buy games from this store ever again.