The original user was claiming GOG can't help the fact that some games have multiplayer locked behind online and clients. My point has nothing to do with "me" or "self-control," it is a general basic observation. Namely, GOG can indeed "help" the issue of the locked modes if they want to, by not selling the games here.

So are non-comments. The point of the analogy was to show that when something free of contamination then becomes contaminated, it is not really the right question to debate where it falls on the spectrum of "somewhat contaminated, mostly contaminated, fully contaminated, etc." The fact that is is contaminated is enough.

Galaxy is kind of a 1 step forward, 2 steps back kind of thing in my book.

You can't decide what gets sent to the cloud or manage it in a meaningful way; plus the limit is stiflingly small.

Galaxy 2.0 is apparently pretty, but otherwise something of a UX downfall; many threads have been made on the troubles of navigating it. (I do personally prefer "brutal function" over "pretty".)

Galaxy doesn't exist for a subset of users. I'd accept a generic appimage or tar.gz at this point if they can't achieve platform specific packaging. But given that MojoSetup is still using the 2k10 version still, I would worry for the longevity of such an approach. So I've been running Lutris with occasional pokes given to Gamehub and similar ilk.

Personal library management is stuck in the earlier half of the 2000s, and feels more akin to a tacked on legacy feature than a full fledged organization system. It shouldn't be this painful to add tags and other simple things.

I don't care about other gamestores, so that and many other aspects of it are worthless to me. Just give me the possibility of MultiFarm, and I'll be happy.

The problem is that the need of a launcher don't qualify as a DRM method, the launcher is just a proxy, GOG Galaxy doesn't have a measure that verify your ownership and lock the content behind it. Galaxy is a DRM Free Launcher, just connect the game with the servers because MP in games are created this way now, developers think on the Steam user, and develop their games with Steam in mind. Following your logic, then the just fact of purchase games on a Digital Store is DRM, bacause they need that you log in to verify the games you own, but that is the difference between a DRM and ownership verification.

Galaxy is a third-party software required to access some features of games.
How can that not be labelled as DRM?

They promised a Linux version at launch. I define non-functional as decidedly non-brilliant, even maybe a failure. While I don't really want a client anyway, I do want Linux games to be brought to gog, and they won't if they can't even get a dummy library to allow them to implement the Steam-like features they want in the Linux versions. You know, features like achievements, which you seem to think are highly important. Or, more importantly for everyone, getting timely updates (or alternate "beta" channels, or more than zero previous versions available). Do you believe that if/when gog finally does step up, all of the games will be modified and ported to gog's version of Linux support, especially given the lack of even a dummy library that could one day be replaced by the real thing?

Yeah, I know. You give even less of a shit about Linux support than gog does.

It seemed to me that, when the FCKDRM campaign was active, its respective site had a list of criteria comparting/contrasting DRM-free to DRM and Galaxy requirements would have fit solely on the "DRM" side of things. I am aware games are created this way now and I say it is bad design. Fortunately, there are many games that don't have this bad design, so my question is why are we wasting time trying to shoehorn these ones here where the gamepages advertise "DRM FREE. No activation or online connection required to play." And may I ask why Cyberpunk 2077 singleplayer ("My Rewards") content necessitates client log-in access?

Galaxy is only required in Games that make use of it in multiplayer and this will depend from the developers and the designed multi architecture they did choose. The alternative would be having sub par half baking game versions for second class citizens or no gog game version at all. Very convenient for the competence.

Anyway you always could write to new games developers and order them to change their minds and design multiplayer only in the way you like.

But it could be case of someone non interested in multiplayer trying to decide how multiplayer must be designed for others.

About cyberpunk Galaxy rewards extras they are under Galaxy because they were intended as a gift/reward campaign for Galaxy users. They are not part of the base game. No DRM in Cyberpunk, not even DRM in the rewards, they are free goodies available with your GOG account. And Galaxy, but if someone does not want to use it, well, is his decission and his problem.
Things could change in the future, of course, once the consider the campaign over. Or not.

If that's all to consider GOG full of DRM everywhere, well, then things are pretty safe in that regard.

What I see here is a lot of overreaction and toxicity to be with this drama day after day. Any new user reading every day those whinings should understand that his games are DRMed, and sorry but this a lie that is repeated constantly but it does not make it real at least today.

For you a mod launcher is a DRM? Not every third party software is a DRM, in the case of Galaxy, it's just a tool the manage the connection with the server. I repeat, is just a tool, not a DRM, it's not the same as Steam that contains some specific.dlls that lock the access to tje game, or you want to play a multiplayer game without internet connection at all? It's the new way to manage Multiplayer online that devs implement, it's simpler and more effective, it's not my preferential type, but I'm not just a contrarian, your case is like hate WASD Keys combination because you prefer the old Arrow Keys combination.

No, you are comparing apples and oranges. I would argue that clients are far worse than drm. Drm can be cracked and bypassed. Client software however is a mentality. How many users here now know about offline installers or their purpose? How many know of open source multiplayer, local multiplayer, how to manage saves, how to fix things if the play button does t work? Sure for the moment offline installers are here, but as you say, why would companies want to have lots of different builds for different purposes, eventually it is plain to see that an offline installer used by very few people is not worth the effort. A lot of steam games are also “drm free” as are epic games, so what makes GOG stand out?
Eventually what will happen is one day you will look for offline installers and they will not be there, or they will be out of date, it is inevitable. Client software is designed to get people connected to the web all the time, dependant on the web. Simplicity, ease of use and functionality to lure them in. Why do all companies want their own client (even with steam and such like)? Simple, online dependancies, monopolise your clientele, data mine your customer base. It’s what it’s all about. Pah, drm, such a small part of the whole, mostly removed after a few months anyways as it always gets cracked. But people who need online for multiplayer, or achievements, or their saves, they are keepers forever. Try moving to Linux with your client/online setup!
So yes, a client, like say a gun, is just a tool, but it’s true purpose is not for your benefit.

I mean, it's definitelly worth having installed just for automatic updates. Many GOG newbies may not realize how annoying it was to have to download a patch manually via browser and install it every single time a game you had installed was updated

yep + cloud saves and achievements
just wish it would be better made like offline capibility , maintain your offline installers, better engine etc.

Most games don’t get patched that much (except in dev and in that case you should know what you are getting into). Grim dawn is one that does get updated often. Trick is not to keep everything installed all the time, another modern trait. I have perhaps up to 5 I can play at any one point. If I miss a load of patches for grim dawn it doesn’t matter, I just download a full version later on. It’s mostly the need to have everything installed that creates the issues. Also, how will newbies learn if it’s always hidden?

I admit I'm a GOG fanboy, but I'm going to try being impartial here.

Since Galaxy, I'm better organized and informed. I get the chance to know more about games, discounts, giveaways... And because of it, I'm buying way more than I used to. Timetracking, achievements and friend's activity are a welcome bonus as well. So, for my part, I consider it a success.

Aesthetically, I liked older galaxy better, but current one looks good to me too; still way better than Steam.

I admire the "one launcher for all platforms" purpose, it's ambitious, though I don't think most gamers will jump aboard, given Steam's massive popularity.

The integration with GWENT could've been done better, as it is now it's very limited and doesn't feel like it serves any purpose at all... Besides making GOG more known, maybe.

I do find quite worrying the long wait for customer support and the lack of communication regarding important topics. There is a lot of talk about GOG's financial state and remaining silent about it doesn't help; some reassuring words for those who invest here would be very welcome. Also, addressing the real possibilities of a Linux version of Galaxy would be appreciated too (even if it's a negative answer).

And the reason they have not done so is quite obvious once you realize that single player DRM is like an online verified keypad lock on the front door of a house, whereas many of the things that may make you consider multiplayer support to not be DRM-free are more like the architect's vision not matching your expectations, as in fixing that after the house has already been built is going to cost a lot more than just calling a locksmith to remove the lock in the front door.

I am not saying that we shouldn't even bother asking DRM-free multiplayer support from GOG, but that getting that is very unlikely for most games that have been already made and with even upcoming titles GOG usually isn't getting their say on the matter before it tends to be too late to make any major changes to the multiplayer design and implementation.

This is getting pretty far afield at this point. My original response was to refute the idea that GOG is somehow supposedly powerless to stop games with online-locked/client-locked content from releasing here. My response was indeed quite basic: GOG has the power to not have such games here, if they were to choose to exercise this power, it's really that simple. While I do personally believe it's bad design, the games don't belong here, etc, the original point is just that there is a pretty easy "fix" if the online-locks are seen as a problem: don't have these games here.

I don't really want to get into debating your analogies which are not 1:1 comparisons, but just as fun food for thought to continue along with yours, consider it's more like GOG is a homeowner's association with various rules on house design, yet some favored families/houses are seemingly breaking design rules for no real reason yet are applauded for it; meanwhile there are hardworking people outside this neighborhood who would be a better fit and would like to move in but say their application letters aren't even getting a response.