Support NeoGAF

[CharlesSurge]

GOG was going to only have the adware version of the installers, initially. "Starting on Friday" was the initial post. https://www.gog.com/forum/general/offline_installers_with_an_option_to_install_gog_galaxy

 

[Pachael]

CDPR have already made it clear that all future games starting with Gwent will require the client for multiplayer. Nothing wrong with that.

It's quite possible that 2077 won't be on Steam.

I think it's way more likely that they'll do a Ubisoft (game launch on Steam will require Galaxy; I expect Gwent if on Steam to do the same).

Which will be unfortunate, since I feel that by then it'll be just another developer-publisher client that's out there. Can understand why they'd go down this path though.

 

[JaseC]

CDPR have already made it clear that all future games starting with Gwent will require the client for multiplayer. Nothing wrong with that.

It's quite possible that 2077 won't be on Steam.

It's possible insofar that there are no forces at work that render it impossible, but it's decidedly unlikely. Even Gwent will be on Steam.

 

[LordRaptor]

I don't really think it's malicious by design though, more like something they overlooked.

Its a dark pattern.
Its intentional.


also LMAO at that guys losing game of tetris 'beautiful UI'

 

[danthefan]

So it's still optional, right?

How dare they try push their own software!

I think you're just looking for something to get all worked up over.

Yeah. I mean... it says it right there on the webpage, twice, that you're installing Galaxy. It isn't a trick. You have the option of installing just the game. This is a nothingburger.

 

[BBboy20]

So it's still optional, right?

How dare they try push their own software!

I think you're just looking for something to get all worked up over.

 

[Elaugaufein]

Just as a note the Offline Galaxy included installers are still service going down proof, partially because the Galaxy client installer is optional (though defaulted) and partially because Galaxy still functions as a launcher even if you're offline / not signed in.

 

[Affeinvasion]

GoG still providing that classic PC game installer experience from when I had to uncheck a million optional installs for GameSpy, etc.

At worst if you're "tricked" into installing Galaxy, you just uninstall it.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

I don't really think it's malicious by design though, more like something they overlooked. Trying a few games in my library it seems that it's just as likely that the classic game installer links will be highlighted when opening the downloads page, as the GOG Client installer links.

No, what is happening is that GOG hasn't updated the installers of the older games in your library yet. So they're defaulting to the Classic Installer because the Galaxy Installer doesn't currently exist for that game.

Since like I said I didn't know that they now have bundled links I could have downloaded the wrong files maybe once before learning that lesson

I think it's likely that you'll end up downloading the wrong version more than once, since the website doesn't remember your setting and the two screens look nearly identical. I suspect GOG is hoping people will eventually get tired of uninstalling Galaxy.

What would be their gain in being malicious about it? It's not like they're making money for every person who installs the client so at best they're frustrating some users.

I don't know! Why indeed! GOG is actively shooting themselves in the foot by creating a terrible user experience.

You're right though, I don't have any proof that GOG was being actively nefarious... but if this was really all a big accident, GOG needs to hire a new UX designer asap, because I don't think I could design an interface this bad unless I was actively trying.

This is all aside from the fact that users have been raising a stink in GOG's forums for a while now, and GOG has seen fit to basically ignore everyone. It's worth asking why.

 

[peakish]

No, what is happening is that GOG hasn't updated the installers of the older games in your library yet. So they're defaulting to the Classic Installer because the Galaxy Installer doesn't exist yet for that game.

Ah, you're correct. The links page for those games take me to a page with links which launch an already installed client. That makes sense, then.

I think it's likely that you'll end up downloading the wrong version more than once, since the website doesn't remember your setting and the two screens look nearly identical. I suspect GOG is hoping people will eventually get tired of uninstalling Galaxy.

I mean, maybe? Like I say, it's bad design for sure but I think people who care about this will learn quickly.

 

[Elaugaufein]

I mean GOG is probably pushing Galaxy because it gives them better analytics and probably reduces bandwidth considerably now, that they've got differential patching.


But from a user perspective I see no reason to shun Galaxy at this point in time (offline installer that forced galaxy and died without it would obviously be terrible for archiving of that happened). You get a bunch of benefits and even if you're not online / signed in all the offline stuff works. It keeps stuff up to date , provides cloud saves , has rollback functionality , more timely updates and handles them for you. And you can still set up your own launcher icons and never look at it if that floats your boat.

Edit - I say the above as someone with an external USB hard drive with all the offline installers and extras from my games in case the service does go down. Have a look at gogrepo or similar mass download scrips / programs if that's you're primary concern.

 

[Complistic]

Gog Galaxy is so unobtrusive, I don't care.

 

[peakish]

I mean GOG is probably pushing Galaxy because it gives them very analytics.

But from a user perspective I see no reason to shun Galaxy at this point in time (offline installer that forced galaxy and died without it would obviously. Even terrible for archiving). You get a bunch of benefits and even if you're not online / signed in all the offline stuff works. It keeps stuff up to date , provides cloud saves , has rollback functionality , more timely updates and handles them for you. And you can still set up your own launcher icons and never look at it if that floats your boat.

Gog Galaxy is so unobtrusive, I don't care.

While I personally agree it's kind of disrespectful to those who don't want the client to say that it's good when they're having issues like this.

 

[Zepp Twofist]

The whole point of GoG downloads is to be able to back them up if you want to play through later on. Imagine that GOG itself dies. If you have "classic" installers then that's no issue, but if it has forced Galaxy install then you are SOL.

It's good to have the Galaxy client option for patching, etc... but they shouldn't force it on GOG.

Galaxy specifically includes an option to download standalone installers for backup. That being said, I don't see why gog has chosen to go this route with the regular game downloads since it's apparently important for some of their userbase.

 

[rrs]

GOG built their entire empire on being DRM free, no bullshit added installers. You can take 3 guesses how they'd react to galaxy being shoved into every installer adding bloat and a program a user wouldn't want.

 

[RedSwirl]

Actually, the best way to download the Galaxy-less installers is to, unintuitively:

1) Install Galaxy

2) To go a game in your library

3) Click the "more" button next to "install"

4) Click "Backups & Goodies"

5) Click on the "Game Backup Copy" and Galaxy will start automatically downloading the Galaxy-less client for you to grab in Explorer somewhere.

It downloads the same files that are on the browser website, but does so all in one chunk instead of making you download the pieces one-by-one.

 

[WillyFive]

I installed GoG galaxy but never really use it. I like to play Yooka-Laylee on my TV with my controller, but since GoG doesn't offer a big picture mode, I just launch Yooka-Laylee through Steam and never use Galaxy.

 

[Elaugaufein]

While I personally agree it's not very helpful for people who don't want the client to say that it's good.

Yes , but I don't understand why they don't want the client sufficiently to regard it's inclusion by default as virulent. Even from an archival perspective it's harmless except for adding maybe 3 GB of disk space to your 3 TB of game installers / extras if you have 1000+ games on GOG. And the download managers from GOG I'd recommend using if you're doing that kind of thing default to non-Galaxy installers anyway.

 

[BigEmil]

There are still people who don't press 'More' to find out the full installation stuff?

Are these the same people who keeps just pressing next on softwares which bundles other crap

 

[Joey Ravn]

There are still people who don't press 'More' to find out the full installation stuff?

Are these the same people who keeps just pressing next on softwares which bundles other crap

They are probably the same people who have been downloading from GOG Galaxy-free installers who don't stop to think that GOG is now bundling their client with the download.

But, by all means, ridicule them.

 

[Elaugaufein]

Actually, the best way to download the Galaxy-less installers is to, unintuitively:

1) Install Galaxy

2) To go a game in your library

3) Click the "more" button next to "install"

4) Click "Backups & Goodies"

5) Click on the "Game Backup Copy" and Galaxy will start automatically downloading the Galaxy-less client for you to grab in Explorer somewhere.

It downloads the same files that are on the browser website, but does so all in one chunk instead of making you download the pieces one-by-one.

I'd recommend checking out https://github.com/eddie3/gogrepo if you're planning on doing that for all games , much easier, particularly if you're an offline installer in case the service goes down kind of person. If you have errors there's a support thread on the GOG forums too.

 

[Angelus Errare]

I've got my nice looking UI, so I'm good ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

That looks hideous.

You have 3 panels that have full pane artwork and of those 3, one has an Xbox label ontop of the artwork. The other panels have icons of various resolutions which is an eyesore.

 

[Geddy]

So it's still optional, right?

How dare they try push their own software!

I think you're just looking for something to get all worked up over.

They'll praise Steam even though they don't technically own the games. Then complain about an optional GOG client when they actually do own a copy of the games. What a world we live in.

 

[immortal-joe]

I get your point, but you don't need to read the fine print. It says "Gog Galaxy Installers" below "Try Gog".

 

[Tacitus_]

Sounds like they're doing the almost the same thing as Valve did with Steam. But instead of "here's Steam, install and log in or you can't play" you can opt out. Probably not for long, but still.
I got annoyed about it when Valve did it, but now? Meh.

 

[paperspace]

⁣

 

[kimifan141]

I have been a long time user of Good Old Games since 2009 but as of this year , i have dropped out, not liked the direction they have taken since.

1) Going all out to grab any and all game release basically copy paste of anything that was on steam already aka drm free.

2) Decision to push gog galaxy over the client free downloads.

I dont worry about drm that much but what i liked about Good Old Games were their initial objective to bring region free , good old lost games to run on modern os.

From What i read on the forums they have slowly killed off all their original promises.

i already have a offline backup of the odd 100 games i owned there so not worried.

 

[MUnited83]

They'll praise Steam even though they don't technically own the games. Then complain about an optional GOG client when they actually do own a copy of the games. What a world we live in.

You don't own the games in either one.

 

[Elaugaufein]

None of this makes sense. What?

But also, you never own your digital games. You own your GOG games as much as your Steam games.

If Valve implodes , most steam games will stop working. If GOG implodes your offline installers won't stop working. That's substantially more "ownership" in the usual meaning of the word as opposed to the weird legalese nitpicking meanings.

 

[ResourcefulStar]

Yes , but I don't understand why they don't want the client sufficiently to regard it's inclusion by default as virulent. Even from an archival perspective it's harmless except for adding maybe 3 GB of disk space to your 3 TB of game installers / extras if you have 1000+ games on GOG. And the download managers from GOG I'd recommend using if you're doing that kind of thing default to non-Galaxy installers anyway.

I loathe clients and features commonly associated with them almost as much as I loathe DRM. Time tracking makes me feel like I'm being spied on. I find them to be terrible at performing their primary task of library management because I can do so much more in Windows Explorer where I have full control over folder names and folder structure. Swear words are the only things that come to mind when I think of achievements. I believe clients to be bloatware at best and spyware at worst. GOG's mission, in my mind, is to show that there's a better way than Steam, not to become another Steam. Does that explain why finding Galaxy installed without my knowledge frustrated me?

There are still people who don't press 'More' to find out the full installation stuff?

Are these the same people who keeps just pressing next on softwares which bundles other crap

Wouldn't be a GAF thread without a dash of victim blaming.

 

[JaseC]

If Valve implodes , most steam games will stop working. If GOG implodes your offline installers won't stop working. That's substantially more "ownership" in the traditional sense.

Not all Steam games are tied to the client, though. If the ability to back up GOG games means you own them in the traditional sense, then you must accept that the same is true of the DRM-free games available on Steam. The distinction is really just one of extent: all* GOG games are DRM-free while relatively few Steam games are.

* Some require a CD key.

 

[MUnited83]

If Valve implodes , most steam games will stop working. If GOG implodes your offline installers won't stop working. That's substantially more "ownership" in the usual meaning of the word as opposed to the weird legalese nitpicking meanings.

Not really though. Steam offline works indefinitely ,there are DRM free games on Steam. Not just that, several Steam content servers are hosted by third parties which won't implode along with Steam.

 

[Elaugaufein]

I loathe clients and features commonly associated with them almost as much as I loathe DRM. Time tracking makes me feel like I'm being spied on. I find them to be terrible at performing their primary task of library management because I can do so much more in Windows Explorer where I have full control over folder names and folder structure. Swear words are the only things that come to mind when I think of achievements. I believe clients to be bloatware at best and spyware at worst. GOG's mission, in my mind, is to show that there's a better way than Steam, not to become another Steam. Does that explain why finding Galaxy installed without my knowledge frustrated me?

Wouldn't be a GAF thread without a dash of victim blaming.

Sure, that explains it. I never really viewed that as GOGs primary purpose myself. I mean GOGs initial purpose was to demonstrate that it was possible to make money by selling Old Games (despite their wide availability through piracy) via increasing the value proposition (no DRM , extras, sane pricing etc). After that it kind of expanded to the Value Proposition thing even on newer games. I'm mainly on GOG because it's DRM free and I'll buy DRM free stuff by preference and I generally find Galaxy a value add (though I'll freely admit the early iterations had severe problems).

Not all Steam games are tied to the client, though. If the ability to back up GOG games means you own them in the traditional sense, then you must accept that the same is true of the DRM-free games available on Steam. The distinction is really just one of extent: all* GOG games are DRM-free while not all Steam games are.

* Some require a CD key.

Sure, that's why I said most Steam games.

Not really though. Steam offline works indefinitely ,there are DRM free games on Steam. Not just that, several Steam content servers are hosted by third parties which won't implode along with Steam.

There are various things that will kick you out of steams offline mode though, like buying a new computer* , which still sets a limit there. And yeah there are some DRM free games on Steam too, which is why I said most.

*There are some others I've noticed but then I realized most of them are actually impossible if Valve implodes because they involve being online in the first place.

 

[HungOverOnATues]

I'd recommend checking out https://github.com/eddie3/gogrepo if you're planning on doing that for all games , much easier, particularly if you're an offline installer in case the service goes down kind of person. If you have errors there's a support thread on the GOG forums too.

Thanks for this. I tried using the archive functionality in galaxy a few months ago and had nothing but problems - slow speeds, downloads failing, no retry on fail, no way to clear completed items from your download list to only display failed downloads, and even had it download a corrupt file that was fine when downloaded from the website (I'm guessing because they uploaded it that way to the galaxy CDN.) Ended up going back to using the GOG Downloader for archiving my collection, but for some reason it doesn't support Linux downloads.

 

[ResourcefulStar]

Sure, that explains it. I never really viewed that as GOGs primary purpose myself. I mean GOGs initial purpose was to demonstrate that it was possible to make money by selling Old Games (despite their wide availability through piracy) via increasing the value proposition (no DRM , extras, sane pricing etc). After that it kind of expanded to the Value Proposition thing even on newer games. I'm mainly on GOG because it's DRM free and I'll buy DRM free stuff by preference and I generally find Galaxy a value add (though I'll freely admit the early iterations had severe problems).

I'm cool with Galaxy existing because I realize that many people see value where I see bloat, but installing it should be "opt in", not "opt out, every single time you download something". Causing your customers distress by making them look for booby traps whenever they buy something from you is not a sound business strategy.

 

[JaseC]

Sure, that's why I said most Steam games.

Ah, right. I thought you were alluding to installed games that'd be playable in Offline Mode as the catalyst for your post was ctw0e questioning Geddy's binary comparison that doesn't take into the account the shade of grey we apparently agree on.

 

[friday]

I think Galaxy is pretty great when compared to other non steam clients. I'm cool with it.

 

[Sakwoff]

Not all Steam games are tied to the client, though. If the ability to back up GOG games means you own them in the traditional sense, then you must accept that the same is true of the DRM-free games available on Steam. The distinction is really just one of extent: all* GOG games are DRM-free while relatively few Steam games are.

* Some require a CD key.

These are not installers though.

So yeah, sure, you can back up your installed game folders of those games, but you wouldn't be able to actually do a clean reinstall anymore.

With GOG, I can basically have an external HDD as a "library" with offline installers of all my games. That would not be possible with my steam library as installing is completely bound to the online client.

That's a pretty important difference in my books.

 

[JaseC]

These are not installers though.

So yeah, sure, you can back up your installed game folders of those games, but you wouldn't be able to actually do a clean reinstall anymore.

With GOG, I can basically have an external HDD as a "library" with offline installers of all my games. That would not be possible with my steam library as installing is completely bound to the online client.

That's a pretty important difference in my books.

You wouldn't need to. Game installations include any required redists (e.g. a particular DirectX runtime). The only difference would be having to install them manually rather automatically via the install script the client runs.

Edit: Regarding registry entries:

Even that's covered albeit inelegantly without the client around to assist. Any registry entries deemed necessary by the developer/publisher will be in an appid_install.vdf file in the root of the installation folder.

 

[LordRaptor]

I mean... if your biggest argument against steam is "BUT WHAT IF IT GOES DOWN????" then you're basically chicken littling

 

[Wowfunhappy]

You wouldn't need to. Game installations include any required redists (e.g. a particular DirectX runtime). The only difference would be having to install them manually rather automatically via the install script the client runs.

Registry entries? It isn't a given that just moving the files over will work, unless you have a clean VM set up to test with.

But this is almost irrelevant. Maybe 2% of games on Steam are DRM Free. Okay, I pulled that number out of my ass, but the ratio is REALLY low going by my experience. If you buy a game on Steam, it's a pretty safe bet that it will have DRM.

And yet, for all my dislike of Steam, I have never seen a situation where it could plausibly be installed without the user's knowledge. Because Valve knows that's a terrible experience. GOG really should not be getting schooled by Valve in this area.

 

[AcceptableGhost]

I mean... if your biggest argument against steam is "BUT WHAT IF IT GOES DOWN????" then you're basically chicken littling

Honestly I wish Steam had a box in the features section for "DRM Free" so that developers could actually advertise the fact their game on Steam can be run without Steam. Lots of smaller scale developers don't bother crippling their game in any way and it is kind of annoying they can't promote it as a feature.

 

[Elaugaufein]

Registry entries? It isn't a given that just moving the files over will work, unless you have a clean VM set up to test with.

But this is almost irrelevant. Maybe 2% of games on Steam are DRM Free. Okay, yeah, I pulled that number out of my ass, but the ratio is REALLY low going by my experience. If you buy a game on Steam, it's a pretty safe bet that it will have DRM.

And yet, for all my dislike of Steam, I have never seen a situation where it could plausibly be installed without the user's knowledge. Because Valve knows that's a terrible experience. GOG really should not be getting schooled by Valve in this area.

I don't think this is analogous, if Steam provided some kind of not-Steam-based installation for their games it would have to install Steam most of the time because as noted the majority of Steam games have DRM enabled. As such it makes way more sense to make you install Steam first and install within Steam.

 

[RedSwirl]

I'm weird about this.

My primary choice for playing PC games is still Steam partly because of inertia, and partly because I still want all that stat tracking and social connection through Steam. I do this even though I know other clients have more or less caught up in many areas. At the same time when possible I'll try to buy a game on Humble Bundle both because I just prefer paying through Amazon and I like getting the DRM-free version along with the Steam key. Then if I enjoyed a game enough to want to play through it repeatedly, I'll install the non-Steam independent offline version and sometimes buy it again on GOG if it's on sale and I don't think it's gonna be on GOG Connect.

Oh and I launch everything with the Xbox app now. I like how it keeps you connected to XBL friends and how it automatically adds shortcuts to *most* games as soon as you install them.

 

[madjoki]

Registry entries? It isn't a given that just moving the files over will work, unless you have a clean VM set up to test with.

But this is almost irrelevant. Maybe 2% of games on Steam are DRM Free. Okay, yeah, I pulled that number out of my ass, but the ratio is REALLY low going by my experience. If you buy a game on Steam, it's a pretty safe bet that it will have DRM.

And yet, for all my dislike of Steam, I have never seen a situation where it could plausibly be installed without the user's knowledge. Because Valve knows that's a terrible experience. GOG really should not be getting schooled by Valve in this area.

I'd say way more than that are DRM-free. Of course most of AAA releases do have.

Steam installers are just text files, so those can be manually applied too (and if steam went down, I'm sure someone would make solution for that).

 

[Cyanity]

It's just a game client, OP. Not really a big deal.

 

[Cuningas de Häme]

They aren't tricking anyone, they clearly said that this is going to happen. And that games that use GOG Galaxy features will be getting both versions of the installer.

You still get all the perks you had, DRM-free, no forced updates, all that. You can choose in what way you want to install the game.

So much crying over nothing.

 

[Aureon]

I've never quite gotten why GOG is pushing GOG Galaxy so hard, when Steam does pretty much everything it does and more.

Like, if I want a game on a client I just get it on Steam. GOG is for games I want to put on a flash drive.

Uh... really?

Because steam takes a 30% cut. GOG is after that cut.

 

[kiyomi]

I've got my nice looking UI, so I'm good ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

lol

 

[llien]

I'm fond of GoG, owning your games FOREVER, without online dependency on godknowswhatserver is fantastic.

Agree with OP, this crap doesn't belong there.