To be fair though, so is the client ;)

Oh.

nah, if they were they wouldn't of bothered touting it as optional since there is a high chance there will be a pretty serious massive backlash if they all the sudden made it mandatory. Plus it would remove another thing that separates GOG from Steam, Origin, Uplay, Greenman, ect. and when trying to compete you have to try and keep as much of what makes you stand out from the pack as possible so they make Galaxy mandatory like say Steam or Origin is then what do they really have left to make them different and make people want to shop here instead of Steam?

Nothing. So unless GOG is all the sudden taken over by complete idiots that feel to compete they need to be exactly like the competition and yes I know there are some here that will say they already are(run by idiots) but that is a whole different can of worms, I highly doubt they will be THAT stupid as it will hurt their business since while the client seems to have attracted more customers who are into the simplicity and features of a client(i.e. updates their games for them, gives them pats on the head and cookies for doing arbitary crap in a game, helps them keep in touch with "friends", ect.) and devs no longer really have to strip stuff out of their games to bring them here and pending GOG has changed how devs releases patches here makes their jobs easier.

There are those who don't want to be tied into another client and by allowing them to still get their stuff directly from the website without using a client, they will happily shop here because they still have that option and even if they are a smaller customer base(not saying they are, just saying if that is the case) that's still money for GOG, money that they pending they can keep getting more bigger name games here they can take from Steam because, say both Steam and GOG get Fallout 4(look this is just a example) and given the choice of getting it from Steam and being forced to use Steam or getting it at GOG where they don't have to use Galaxy in any way shape of form to get it and play it then those anti-client people will buy the game here.

So in other words it makes more sense from a business stand point to keep Galaxy optional because they can court the client crowd, get devs more interested in selling here and keep the non-client users buying stuff. The only logical thing I can think off that they wouldn't(again baring my previous statement of them being taken over by twits) would be if it ends up costing them more to do so then it would to just make everything work via galaxy which I doubt since the files are still hosted on the same damn servers all they need to do is offer direct links to them which they already are doing.

I do, they already announced that the downloader wont be supported anymore, meaning browser or galaxy, meaning if you have poor internet connection you either use galaxy or its a case of tough shit.

The Downloader had to be installed in a similar manner to Galaxy, though, correct? Can't Galaxy be thought of as a "glorified Downloader", in a way?

it is, since like the downloader you can just download the installers and not touch it again after that. But since it's labeled a client, people get worked up over it.

The reason why I don't like the idea of Galaxy is that I've been seeing how bad the website is, and I presume it's made by the same persons, at least some of them? Being more complex than a downloader, many more things can break, just like on the website.

I assume 'bloated' would be a more appropriate word for people who don't care for it.

Downloader is a downloader, and yes its choice, one i didnt mind, but with the way things are heading it will eventually mean that galaxy with all its silly bells and whistles will be mandatory. And that i dont like that. Makes it no better than steam IMO

What way exactly? As far as I can see Galaxy is exactly as it was advertised for the past year: a client for running games. Full of bugs, true, but nothing since its release indicates that standalone installers will disappear.

You say that "if you have poor internet connection you either use galaxy or its a case of tough shit" but following this line of reasoning one could say before Galaxy's release: "if you have poor internet connection you either use downloader or its a case of tough shit". The downloader was just as "compulsory" as Galaxy. How come no one was complaining about the downloader then? (As a side note, it's not "tough shit"; plenty of download managers out there).

If there are any signs that Galaxy will become compulsory, I'm honestly curious to hear about them, since I don't use Galaxy myself, so maybe I am missing something. But so far the line of reasoning seems to be: Galaxy Came Out ergo Galaxy Will Become Compulsory.

I agree somewhat, but if 100% "mandatory" does happen, some people will simply have to make a tough choice.

Nah. Choice won't be tough at all. I'm here for the DRM-free games. If it comes to the point where GOG's client becomes compulsory and the games are effectively no longer DRM-free, then I'll be done with GOG. Personally though, I don't see any reason as of yet for this fear of Galaxy becoming required. I think these fears are overblown.

Fair enough. Some people will have a touch choice, but not you. ;-)

:D