Correct, when stuff goes direction public server - people will line up asking for cheat protection, which when properly done will be one heck of DRM - and hardly anyone will disagree on that. Including me.

But that is not the only way to use multiplayer, because very small scale multiplayer with trusted parties does not require anything like that and pushing everything through one method above will cause the same as what happened to gamespy and will cripple feature set of sold product.

because im not always online and its convenient for me having the launchers all in one place as i do not have them as icons on my home screen

That's not what I meant.

I don't have Galaxy BECAUSE I'm not always on line.

I have all my launchers right here whenever I need them, no internet connection required.

I couldn't even use Galaxy if I wanted to because my connection is so bad and my monthly bandwidth is teen tiny.

ok. so there's no way to use galaxy offline than.

What I have done, created a folder GOG in start menu, moved all shortcuts/folders out of the normal start menu in there.

The same can be done on the desktop, create a folder and place the shortcuts in there.

I think something is getting lost in the translation here. :P

Can someone smarter than me please help her?

THANK YOU Goodaltgamer. :D

As tinyE and myself are a wee bit lost ;)

You can use Galaxy offline, it just doesn't count achievements and similar.

For downloading, yes for sure you need to be online.

I we misunderstood, could you please stated a bit more precise what you mean with the above?

Edit: No problem my alt (pun intended :P)
Edit2: No, as I am your alt and not you being my alt, how do I need to say?

She wants to put Galaxy in offline mode because this:

Maybe you could try turning off autoupdates? https://www.gog.com/forum/general/gog_galaxy_beta_2/post5151

In case my link doesn't work look up post 5151 in that thread.

Thank you Sir ;)

And yes your suggestion shall work.
For the post count not working, seems also to be related to posts being reported as SPAM and being removed.

Thanks worked well

finished reading through the links,sorry took its time ;)

Boost.Asio and Poco, I can see a problem there because of the license. http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt
to be precise:
must be included in all copies of the Software, in whole or in part, and
all derivative works of the Software
As GOG wants other companies to be able to use Galaxy as well, they would need to agree on this terms as well.
SFML? All links I followed was about graphics? ( http://www.sfml-dev.org/tutorials/2.3/#network-module )
Leaves ZeroMQ and SDL_net
Zero having GNU sounds great. It seems to have everything there (still checking)
SDL_net does not have a license? (or did I miss it somewhere?) And it seems not to support IP6? This would exclude it a bit IF you intend to build a longer living product (which I think Galaxy or modern games are aiming for)
ZMQ sounds really great, still reading ;)

EDIT: I decided to post a heads-up, just to let you know, I did not ignore you ;)

That's not a problem at all but common practice. It's just a copyright notice and many a commercial software packages are powered even by multiple open source components and usually show these notices upon request, for example when looking at the credits. That doesn't hurt anyone. It's very common if the open source component is licensed to allow commercial distribution (LGPL, Apache or MIT licenses instead of GPL). Some companies even contribute to open source packages or make their own frameworks open source.

For example if you are a small company and you have a project you probably do not invent everything new but use commercial or open source libraries.

I wouldn't be surprised if GOG Galaxy relies on a general network communication library (commercial or open source) and "just" adds game specific stuff (authentification, matchmaking, leaderboards, savegames in the cloud).

None of these libraries implement matchmaking or the like. They're just thin wrappers around the operating system's underlying socket primitives. Using these, you end up doing the matchmaking from scratch, which isn't what goodaltgamer aksed for.

But really I don't think matchmaking is that hard a problem. I'm a bit cynical, and I think software developers are going with steamworks and galaxy and the like not just because they're lazy and don't want to do their own thing, but *also* because it conveniently doubles as DRM for them when these services are tied to accounts that must have the given game in their library...

Either way, the game must implement its own network protocol and it must have the ability to connect to any IP address (though it doesn't necessarily have the ability to host the server; but I don't think publishers are hosting most games today). Once that functionality is in, it is trivial to expose it to the user. Again the cynic in me thinks that the game developers just don't want to do that because then they'd be dropping their free DRM. And game developers who don't ship their server implementation with the game and instead have the publisher pop up severs on demand probably do that just for the DRM and "control" while claiming it's a service and it's to improve the experience... the major exception being games that really are difficult to host, e.g. MMOs. Even then, I'd prefer it if I were given the option to host my own private MMO server. Again, they want control, they want to lock people to their servers and put in checks to make sure pirated clients can't connect. It's a convenient form of DRM...

It's really this: screw people over, take control and freedom away from them, and call it a service. Cocksucker gamers will happily suck it, and defend it, and twist definitions of words so they can call it DRM-free when it's obviously not.

The most obviously nefarious games are the ones that *do* implement a server but then intentionally lock it to some arbitrary definition of LAN only, and require you to use their DRM to play over the internet (or a LAN that doesn't fit their definition of LAN).

Not having to install yet another horseshit client was one of the best things going for GOG. MP only or not, it sucks, and it's pretty likely it won't be restricted to MP only in the future anyway.

But money talks, of course.

The reason why I asked for, where Trilarion stepped in, was for me to evaluate MY PERSONAL Opinion who really do damn.
But Galaxy (and steam), is a bit like outsorcing. PLus if something isn't working they can just blame the others.

I am already blaming the devs for not having LAN, but it helps with a normal discussion to have facts, as mentioned above ZeroMQ is looking quite good and better if you read more.

YES, having a open source matchmaking would be even better. (Trilarion you don't have anything there as well? ;) )

And for the DRM discussion it would help as well.