In all honesty I'm starting to have doubts.I wanted a Gog client originally for the downloading and game library management but it seems they are more trying to push online multiplayer aspect which much of the GOG customer base is unlikely to use
I'd worry about them trying to push silly multiplayer only games in the future...frankly stuff I'm not interested in.and then we have then achievements bs some seem to want....

Achievements? NoooooOOOOooo!

Uhm, if you don't want to use those features can't you just ignore them?

Online gaming is sort of a big thing. I don't do it much, and perhaps much of GOGdom doesn't, but many would.

Gog Galaxy just became obligatory for the first game - Divinity: Original Sin. Forget about the optional part - its just fiction nothing else.

GDocs explanation make everything clear: http://www.gog.com/forum/general/coming_soon_divinity_original_sin/post77

The game has single player - so why is the client obligatory in this case? Not so optional afterall is it?

I think that's a bit of a distorted view. GOG's original announcement at E3 discussed the purpose of their Galaxy offering was essentially two parts, client side aspects of acting as a downloader/updater and game library manager and related client side functionality to be optionally used by people who want such features, and as a set of optional services such as multiplayer and crossplay functionality.

The functionality either exists or it doesn't, there isn't any specific emphasis on anything - it is there or it isn't, and they indicated that they are providing all of these optional features in the future this fall. There are many gamers who prefer to have a client to manage their gaming library on a given service, to handle downloading/updating/installing within that cilent and various other convenience features, and there are many who do not care or want such features at all. The optional aspect of the Galaxy platform means that people who want these features will now have the opportunity to have them if they desire, giving them a new option on GOG that they did not have before, and that very same optional aspect of the Galaxy platform means that people with no interest whatsoever in client features and functionality have the option to continue to not use or need to care about it. Both people who want client functionality and do not want client functionality get their wish come true.

For the case of the background services that Galaxy will provide, there are people who want to play multiplayer games or to use other services that Galaxy may provide, and GOG providing these services in their Galaxy platform means that these gamers now have the option to have a better multiplayer experience and other features provided by Galaxy which do not exist at this time as an option at all for them. They will now have this option. People who do not play multiplayer at all, or do not care about multiplayer or the other services that Galaxy may provide that do not exist at all from GOG games and which they do not care about - can continue to not care about it and opt into continuing to play their games on GOG as they have before, oblivious to any new functionality GOG is making available through the Galaxy platform.

One of the troubling things I find as a gamer, is that some of the games here on GOG which do have multiplayer components in their original game such as Full Spectrum Warrior and its sequel, do not have any multiplayer option at all on the GOG.com release, while the Steam release of these same games does have full multiplayer support. Any gamer that wants to play multiplayer with a given game for sure, or who feels that they might want to at some point in time, or they'd like to have the option to do so - right now is left having to buy their game on Steam or elsewhere to even have the option at all. Other games on GOG may have multiplayer options but they are limited in other ways, such as being LAN-only or Direct-IP only, or both LAN and Direct IP, but the version of the game available elsewhere has other options that the GOG build does not.

These limitations and restrictions are not things that add value to the games on GOG.com, but rather they are features that do not exist on the games here which do or at least may exist on the same games available on Steam or elsewhere, and for gamers that do care about these features because they do want to use them - GOG's product offering is lacking for them and they are likely to buy the games elsewhere. I've done so myself as a matter of fact. I was thrilled to see the Full Spectrum Warrior games show up here and planned to buy them only to find out there is zero multiplayer in them on GOG, but Steam has full multiplayer. I held off and a few weeks ago the games showed up for super cheap sale promo on Steam and I bought them there because I want the option of playing multiplayer and I can't get that on GOG.com for these two games right now. It's a fact that many gamers out there will make similar decisions and buy on Steam instead of GOG due to features like this missing on GOG.

GOG's Galaxy platform is an attempt by GOG to enhance their product offering with various features that many gamers do actually want and are willing to buy their games elsewhere if they can't get them on GOG with the desired functionality, but to implement these wanted features in a way that is both highly respectful of the GOG customer, and optional so it is not rammed down everyone's throat whether they care about the features or not. GOG is making functionality which is highly desired by many customers now available to people optionally so that they can have more of their gaming needs met directly from GOG.com, without compromising what makes GOG.com great in doing so, and by doing it in a way that is optional which people can simply ignore and go about things without needing to use or care about Galaxy's client or other services.

How this causes anyone harm is beyond me to remotely fathom. People who don't want Galaxy can just ignore it and let people who are anxiously anticipating the new functionality be able to enjoy having the option. In the end, there are more gamers able to get their needs met on GOG.com, more developers able to provide functionality they want to customers through GOG and thus more likely to bring their games to GOG, and GOG stands to be more successful and profitable from their efforts to please all groups and people's needs, and the more successful they are, the further they will be able to carry their message of DRM-free gaming out there and bring more publishers on board for all of us in the future.

As for people claiming and trying to put a negative spin on things that Galaxy is going to be obligatory, that's nonsense sensationalism/drama. For the case of Divinity Original Sin in particular, Larian originally claimed that this game would have only LAN multiplayer and Direct-IP multiplayer on the GOG version period - full stop. And that the Steam version would also have centralized multiplayer services. GOG gamers as a result would simply have the same game but without the central multiplayer features. In more recent weeks people have talked to Larian about GOG Galaxy and requested they support that too in the future and they looked into it and appear to be listening to what people want. Now they've announced that Original Sin will have LAN and Direct IP multiplayer for everyone to use, plus they are working on also adding GOG Galaxy support as an option in the GOG build of the game too - giving GOG customers one more option to play their game that we would not have had before.

People who buy this game from GOG will now have 3 multiplayer options, and if they do not wish to use the GOG Galaxy multiplayer option they will be able to continue to opt out of it and use the LAN or Direct-IP multiplayer as stated by Larian instead. There is no mandatory requirement here to use GOG Galaxy client nor the other Galaxy services despite how some people want to paint a negative spin on things like that.

GOG has also stated that while the Galaxy client and the multiplayer and other services share the name "Galaxy" they are independent, and using the multiplayer component does not require one to use the Galaxy client as well. That was either in the E3 video, or it was in the communications shared by GOG folk in the forums here shortly afterword.

If people desperately want to see Galaxy as a negative thing that is going to destroy the world, they can easily concoct all kinds of doomsday scenarios and make all kinds of false assumptions backed by no actual facts just to be negative about it if they wish, but nothing that has been shared about Galaxy so far would seem to remotely back any of the false assumptions, fear, uncertainty and doubt that many people are trying to spread around.

Galaxy will launch in a few months by the looks of it, and all of the doomsday prophecies will quiet down as reality unfolds and we have some amazing new OPTIONAL functionality available to us above and beyond anything we have now. GOG will no doubt be providing additional communications about what Galaxy will and will not do in between now and then, which will further stand to assuage fears and concerns and to clarify what we can expect from the new product and services.

We're best to take them for their word and wait and see what additional things they have to say, and judge them on what they actually do than to make endless assumptions and accusations without knowing the facts. As they say, when you "assume", you make an "ass" out of "u" and "me". :)

Galaxy is going to be super hot shit awesome, that is my assumption. I'm willing to take my chances of being wrong in my own assumption. :)

G-Doc said in that post that it would soon be available for kickstarter backers.

How do you propose that GOG is going to make Galaxy mandatory for the single player of a game that is going to be available to a number of people approximately two months before the Galaxy client is released?

Well that's good. great for GOG. I'm just worried we will start to see those crappy indie MMOs or free to play type bs games coming onto Gog or multiplayer centric games :(.

Nobody is talking about Kickstarter backers. There is just no reason that the same version as for Kickstarter backers can't be released for general public today/tomorrow unless the client is needed for every version of the game.

And plenty of people in the Divinity release thread seem to be thinking the same at the moment.

But if it is needed for every version of the game then they would not be able to release it for kickstarter backers now.

I don't think it is a question of the client being mandatory for single player as you assert. it's more likely a really bad move on GOG's part to use the late GOG release of D:OS with optional* Galaxy support to drum up publicity for Galaxy.

I think it's a bad idea that will blow up in their face but I don't think it entails by necessity the Galaxy client to be mandatory.

As the Galaxy client will have its debut only once, it's a problem that will solve itself by the end of August (there won't be a temptation to delay other games for the Galaxy launch once Galaxy is already launched).

* for single player at least. though I expect some multiplayer modes to use Larian servers and this Galaxy to be necessary for those.

I don't know it just does not seem reasonable. I think they should just release the game tomorrow in the same version as for kickstarters with lan and ip support and that's it. Most people will play it in single player so its not much of an issue.

I totally agree with that.

I do not know if it was GOG's idea to delay it two month (using a big game for a marketing push for Galaxy maybe) or if it was Larian's idead (not wanting to have people complain that the GOG version does not have all the same multiplayer modes as the Steam version) but that is definitely a big fuck up.

It's not a fuckup that impacts me directly, BTW, as I rarely buy games on day one, but I feel the pain for those that want to buy it on GOG now but can't.

Where I disagree with you (and other saying the same thing) is in saying that it necessarily means the the Galaxy client will be mandatory, even for single player.

Is it a possibility? Yes, and it will remain one until it is released for everybody, though not one I am worried about.

But it's also a possibility that the fuckup originates not from DRM in the game but from other reasons (bad marketing decision on either GOG or Larian's part) and thus until I have actual evidence (and unsound logic is not evidence) I have to go with the prior probability and the prior probability tells me that GOG will release a DRM free game.

GOG fuck up enough for us to complain about it, no need to complain about things they haven't fucked up.

From what I've been able to gather from public information about Diviinity Original Sin, and Divinity Dragon Commander, is that Original Sin will have all of the exact same features and functionality that Dragon Commander does right now on GOG which everyone was more than happy about all along as far as I can tell - plus it will also have optional GOG Galaxy multiplayer support which the previous game does not.

So, if they released the game identically to Dragon Commander everyone would be thrilled and farting rainbows with joy, but because the company cares enough to provide additional options to their customers by additionally adding support for GOG Galaxy for people to optionally be able to use (or ignore), they are now evil and should be burned at the stake, and GOG along with them for daring to give people optional new features that they never would have otherwise had before.

Some people are just hell bent on taking anything new which they barely understand, making all kinds of negative worst case fear based assumptions about it, then crying out in fear and anger to burn witches based on their unfounded and irrational fears.

It's both amusing and worrying at the same time.

People aren't complaining about more feature.

They're complaining, rightfully, about the unnecessary delay decided to launch the game with those features (when it could have been launched now with the features added later) and many are complaining because they unsoundly concluded that this meant the the game would have DRM (they believe the client will not be optional).

The first one is, IMO, a valid complaint and the second one would be valid if it was true, but there is no evidence it is.

Applied to the "D:OS will have DRM on GOG" fear, I agree.

But it is not the whole of the complaints and the one about the delay is valid.

I'm speaking specifically about people who are actually complaining about optional features being made available to them as if they are forced to use them as mandatoriywhich is exactly the opposite of what GOG has stated all along about Galaxy. Likewise, many people think Galaxy is an all in one thing and haven't payed attention that it is separate things all under one name. A gaming library management client with some other features, and a separate multiplayer service. People hear about it but don't hear the whole story and then jump to conclusions like "Multiplayer fully requires Galaxy with no other option, and Galaxy is a client and you have to use the client to have the multiplayer therefore I am forced to use a client I don't want". Which is completely the opposite of everything GOG has stated about Galaxy to date.

People are complaining about many things, some of them they might have a right to complain about, but complaining about GOG adding new features and functionality to their service which are completely optional for everyone does not require anyone to use them or care about them. Some people are clearly thinking this is a lie, or they simply have not watched the Galaxy introduction video start to finish or read any of the additional details GOG has mentioned in the forums or elsewhere about it so far, so they're making up stuff in their own head as to how they personally think it will be, getting angry about it based on their own mind's assumptions which are incorrect, and then lashing out about it.

People are free to do that of course, but they create their own anguish to suffer in really.

If Galaxy would be becoming mandatory for any game, I'd have to rethink if I still spend my money here.