Posted August 27, 2015
Starmaker: GOG will, if their games per user distribution is anything like Steam's. Since the purpose of any such metagaming system is to attract and retain long-term users (flyover users won't care either way), pre-emptive feedback is actually meaningful. I have yet to see evidence of this.
zeroxxx: And feedbacks are actually useful it brings anything positive. People whining about Galaxy don't bring anything useful when it's an optional client to begin with. It's so simple, it's an optional thing, yet people whining. I can't even understand the logic of GOG lunatics.
Galaxy is made for a reason. The reason, like for anything else GOG does, is to make people buy more games on GOG.
Different people want to see or prioritize different features, such as:
auto-updates
cloud saves
in-game chat
sales notifications
etc.
But some of the features might be mutually exclusive, and the design of any particular feature is (tautologically) mutually exclusive with any other design of the same feature. Thus, if Design A is implemented, it will fail at its job of attracting customers and increasing sales if most people wanted specifically Design B.
For example, there's currently an option to add friends by username or email, but it's a package deal -- it's impossible to pick one or the other. So people who would love to search by username but definitely don't want to have their GOG account findable via email have to opt out of the feature.
To extrapolate, there's a playtime counter. Many people llike having their playtime tracked, which is an incentive for them to use the client, through which GOG can sell more games to them. But some of them might want to keep their playtimes private for whatever reason. If this information is ever made public without an opt-out, they won't keep the client running, and, depending on how numerous those people are, GOG might not achieve the goal of selling more games.
Thus, posting one's opinion on website and client design can assist GOG in making correct choices, based on aggregate opinions. The fact that the client is optional has no bearing on the importance of feedback. I want them to make a client that I want to use. They're trying to make a client that people want to use. If they make a bad, resource-hogging, invasive and buggy client which no one uses, everyone will be at a loss. This is exactly the situation I want to prevent and you seem to rate as a perfect outcome. Buy a brain.
Post edited August 27, 2015 by Starmaker