As far as the issue with the checkbox being out of place compared to the rest of the buttons. I found the reason why but I don't see why you have it the way you do? You can remove the width property from .settings-item__option and change it to:

.settings-item__option {
padding-left: 5px;
white-space: nowrap;
}

So everything on the right side can have the same width and be aligned. You should also change the following to:

.settings-item--privacy > .settings-item__label, .settings-item--security > .settings-item__label {
width: 190px;
min-width: 190px;
}

Add the min-width property. The width property could even be removed but for really old browser support it might be worth keeping. I've checked these suggestions on a number of emulated devices (Google Nexus 7, iPad Air 2, iPhone 6s, etc) and this works much better while keeping everything aligned. You should up it some too, 205px looks better.

https://i.imgur.com/PXkK00J.jpg

If this stuff isn't improved I will just make a Stylish design so I don't have to see them and probably release it to the community if they want to use it.

Am I the only one who keeps thinking that reads "Introducing new piracy settings"?

I can live with GOG being more like Steam, but they should really avoid having to be like G2A.

The reports of settings reverting to GOG defaults are not a good sign, make me worry about how smoothly these features will go live; GOG's track record isn't exactly reassuring.


Alas, with the introduction of facebook login, the cost is even lower than making a free account here.



I'm afraid that it's not nannying but GOG's (not well thought out, imo) approach to make their big GOG family bigger - want to know what your friend's into on GOG? Sign up to find out!

But I should add that it's unclear if "everyone=logged in" applies only to one's profile or the rest of the settings as well. The wishlist for example, if set to "everyone", is publicly visible to literally everyone that clicks on the corresponding link.


If GOG does anything with the feedback given here besides listening, your suggested options are a good and reasonable idea, this way everybody gets the level of visibility of their choice.


There's been patronising and condescending posts from both sides, some are more straightforward, some are of the more passive-aggressive variety; I'm disappointed at all of them, no matter what side they come from.


I must have missed it - what mistake are you referring to, and where and how did they quickly address it?



Jolly! A lot more people to voice their dissatisfaction and frustration for not being able to sort the game catalogue by price, or for not being able to hide games they own when scrolling through the game catalogue, or for not being able to sort reviews or edit their own one, or that games are not always being updated in a timely fashion, or <insert any and all other issues that are of low priority to GOG>. What a big happy GOG family we will all be.

And for anyone not getting it, this is not a comment against the upcoming social features, it's about GOG finally putting on the To Do List things essential to offering a good service to old and new users alike.



The reason that there's no news article on the front page is because the official announcement is designed to be all hype, patting on the back and high-fives. This one was made as "fair warning" ahead of the official one, but basically, since GOG's well aware that a subset of the userbase would have concerns and/or objections about the implementation, it was made in the hope of two things:
(i) said concerns and/or objections remain confined in here so that said subset of their userbase don't rain on their parade when this goes live;
(ii) failing (i), there will be only some drizzle instead of rain in the official announcement/parade.


[emphasis added]

That will be a little too late; GOG's emails are notorious for arriving late, and once this is live, one's personal data will have already been exposed. The email should be send out in advance.

I still think that the default should be private, and a pop-up message at first log in when this goes live, with the relevant blurb and a link to the Privacy Tab so that people can make their choice.



Some of us are still waiting for some well needed clarification on a couple of things, as not everything is as simple as "set everything to private and go your way". Surely it can't be all that hard to see that, even for someone who doesn't care.



Don't follow - how will having all those public statistics make GOG a viable store in the eyes of pubs if they confirm that the number of GOG accounts are as low as you guess?

An important concern / viewpoint I think is missing from the thread:

multiplayer games.

The controversy has been mostly framed, including by people who are otherwise correct, as us old farts vs stupid kids on our lawns. This is wrong, because multiplayer games stand to gain the most from privacy and lose the most from its lack.

GOG is obviously interested in multiplayer. They've been courting Steam users with crossplay, they've compromised the DRM-free stance for the sake of at least two games with third-party cloud component DRM, and Galaxy-dependent multiplayer is the new normal.

And I get that. Multiplayer is where the money's at. It sells games, as wannabe pirates are required to have an account. It sells addons. It sells vanity DLC. AAA publishers love multiplayer. To attract AAA publishers, GOG needs to get in on that.

Oh, and there'll be celebrities! And celebrities will need enhanced privacy options to curate their online presence. Celebrities on twatter, for example, see a whole 'nother interface than regular mortals, because Jack Dorsey is a twat. But you don't have to be.

To better get the point I'm going to make, please watch this classic video (turn the volume all the way up):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lt3WUtq9kIs

The little fucker might not have the mental capacity to do something on his own, but he probably has $5 in paypal credit to sic a swat team on your ass.

inb4 "oh but GOG is too small for people to care blah blah"
1. GOG explicitly aims to grow by attracting the people who care.
2. Community size doesn't matter. There are still people playing and cheating in Donkey Kong for fuck's sake.

TL;DR I don't want my brain matter splashed all over my precious poster wall because I threw an autistic preteen's npc off a cliff.

You would be wrong. You might be closer to being right if you said active accounts, but we know over 700K played the Witcher 3 on GOG on release so we know there are at-least that many accounts. This is directly from GOG as they bragged about it. Even on twitter they have 260K follows which can be a good estimated of interest in GOG.


So I would say a few million total accounts would be a good guess. 100 - 300K active accounts would also be a good guess.
Which is fine. Wanting more options is also fine (I would like to see more myself). But most people in this thread only seem to care about the default settings, even though they can put their settings to whatever they want.

Setting the options where you want is great for those of us who have seen this and are aware that those options are there. But when someone hasn't logged in since February and they log in after the profiles go live, having a bunch of thqt stuff set to be available to anyone presents a violation of basic privacy without any forewarning. The default options should be set to protect the unaware user, not to exploit the unaware user.

1. It's limited to logged into GOG users as already stated by elcook, and if you haven't posted on the forums recently it will be very unlikely that anyone will even see your profile outside of added friends for the vast majority of people as they would need some kind of direct link to your profile like the ones found when you hover over an avatar.
2. Those not using Galaxy will likely have very little, if anything shown on their profile based on what GOG has discribed.
3. The things GOG has discribed (game activity, time, achievements, etc) are already shown to GOG friends on Galaxy, and have been that way since the begining.
4. Media outlets are already reporting that profiles are coming and that GOG added more privacy options. Popular gaming hubs already reported on it too.
5. GOG will have an official announcement, probably post on social media, and probably send an email. Even if they wait until the day of release to do so, giving what I said in #1 you will likely have ample time before anyone actually comes across your profile that isn't already your GOG friend.

It's always hard to make a choice like this when you introduce a feature like profiles years later when people already have established accounts, so I do get where you are coming from. But imo the fact that a few people may have arguably trivial data shown that they would otherwise not care to show, doesn't justify setting the feature to private by default impacting everyone. Especially when steps are taken in an effort to notify people. Like I posted before, most people don't change settings, this is a fact based on actual gathered data, and setting settings to high like that can kill a feature from becoming used which would go against the goal of what GOG is trying to do here.

I'm not taking into account GDPR and if they have to do it for EU users that is a separate matter... I'm only speaking from a general point of view.

I think Cyberpunk 2077 has to be GOG exclusive if CD projekt really want to see GOG growing...

I suspected profiles would be on the horizon, it's the next logical step to go toe to toe with Steam. I wouldn't be surprised if GOG is also working on a method to deliver mods to you easily for Galaxy users. They already have something very similar to SteamPipe iirc (the portal or something?) for devs to do updates. Plenty of their past moves over the last couple of years also indicate being more aggressive with Steam. (Connect, Galaxy, trying to do movies, tons more sales/earlier bigger sales to Steam, achievements, cloud saves, now profiles.)

I'm sure all of this has provided them with growth, though at the end of the day no matter what they do, unless they plan on supporting multiplayer games they will eventually hit a cut-off for new users who predominantly play online games, which are pretty much Steam territory.

As for privacy, my only complaint is that the default should be opt-in for displaying your info.

ya that person doesn't understand me which makes that person a ignorant fool the reason i have bad spelling and grammar is because i have bad spelling and grammar, i was in the special education system for that reason so what people learned in 6th grade i would have been getting taught 4th or 5th grade stuff. I have to use google for all my spelling when it comes to bigger words, it's something i can't fix. I had to take pre courses that that cost $$$ that gives you no credits in collage < ok enough for now on my life
-------

i do see Facebook stepping the line although they could just add a no profile option to make things easier as well the people with no profiles can't look at profiles just to make it simple i'm nor sure why gog did that...

i fell like some people's logic there ideas should not be counted... because they take the idea way to far till it makes 0 sense even for gog

but can we at lest have a more official statement then just using theories & guess yes i know EU privacy law and such although still kinda strange to me it affects games, i understand names, birthdates, emails and such though.. the most important stuff.
also because i was original steam user one thing i learned before using gog was block all profiles that er kept private on steam because of scam trades and other stuff.
this is where i'm coming from and why these are my opinions/idea

There was an Nvidia promo with a FREE code of The witcher 3: Wild Hunt for to redeem on GOG...
I am a GOG user since late 2012, but that is how I got The Witcher 3 for FREE with a GTX 960...
(At the end of 2016, I purchased The Game of the Year Edition for to support GOG)

I guess most of those 700K users are people that created a GOG account because of the free The Witcher 3 Nvidia promo..

Just want to point out that it takes Google ~7 minutes to see and index posts in this topic, so a hypothetical of a couple of months isn't even required. A couple of minutes is all it takes for data to leak out.

On the other hand, Facebook is a toxic shithole that promotes and profits from consumer ignorance, so maybe there's good reason to be pissed about GOG partnering up with another sleazy, backstabbing outfit.

Err, gog, care to explain this? I removed all my friends connections 3 days ago. Yet I still see the activity of those former friends on that page, so that connection wasn't actually as removed from your system as you make it seem...

Also, you can still see how many games people own, even when all profile settings have been set to max privacy. Presumably for Galaxy users you can also see their hours played and achievements. So monitor the profile hourly, and it still leaks exactly when a galaxy user is playing games, by that indicator increasing...