In Dev/Early Access is important to developers. Its Kick Starter + Beta Testing options.

I fully understand and back GoG introducing it. It allows inclined GoGladytes to back a project and help shape it. With out In Dev, how many copies would GoG miss out on.

I've got 6 In Dev titles, just waiting for teh devs to finish and release.

It's fine. Most people probably want it. It brings a lot of convenient features to the table that casts GOG in a positive light relative to Steam, and that's cool. If you want to do things the old fashioned way, you still can.

So... whatever. You can still do the thing you want. Doesn't mean they have to promote that as the ideal solution.

Thanks for the quasi "open letter' Netaro1000, I also thought about opening a thread like that.

I also have no intention of using Galaxy, but if history taught us anything than whoever is in the majority decides what goes.
I'm still far away when they flip the switch because the point of being able to download the games DRM free (at least for singleplayer here) is that you can do that. Be far away and without consequence. It'll be sad though. Maybe I will shed a tear or two.

This, essentially, is the question GOG has to have a long hard look at.
When it's forced for multiplayer like in Shadow Warrior 2 I could as well use steam (and probably will if it's one cent cheaper there in the future).

Most people, including myself, are likely going to be opposed to GOG pushing it so hard and will begin to complain if anything happens whereby Galaxy is mandatory.
Let's be honest here, though, pushing it as hard as they can is probably good for them. The forum's not gonna like it, sure, but it's a great business move. The vast majority of people (which we here on GOG are most certainly not) are fine with clients and would use it, if nothing else, for the fact that it installs stuff for 'em just as easy as Steam does and gives them (well, will EVENTUALLY give them, anyway) some decent functionality for their games.
Edit: Just now realized that justanoldgamer basically said what I'm trying to say, people feel the need for a client if they're not used to DRM-free installers.

Yes, but think, If everybody pleases the masses, could there be a niche of people really wanting to pay for that niche taste and the respective niche company, albeit smaller, living contently off that niche market?
If I look around my friend circle, nobody gives a flying fuck about DRM, so at least I WAS the one putting bread on GOGs table. If they move away from that target, they will have to compete with the other firms my friends buy from, and let me tell you, that's a thin air.

Ok, here is just my two-penneth worth...

Personally I do not use Galaxy nor do I have any desire to do so but I do understand that many people do. That's fine except that GOG have started dropping Galaxy stuff into their games now which can cause problems if you don't have Galaxy installed. Two examples off the top of my head are Victor Vran and Eisenwald: Blood of November - these games will not run if they are denied access to connect to Galaxy/internet (eg. blocked via a firewall). Now this is fine if you play MP but when you only ever play single player this behaviour to me is unacceptable and borders on DRM.

This, in a nutshell, is my gripe with Galaxy, its insidious reliance more and more on online services which impacts strongly for those of us who want a DRM free, single player gaming experience without the game trying to connect to a client that is not installed. At best it smacks of bad programming and at worst it is turning into an 'always needs a connection' Steam wannabe.

I know they say that the client is optional but the way this is heading it certainly doesn't feel like it will stay that way for too much longer. I really dislike the route GOG is taking with this - more examples, games getting updated via Galaxy first, no previous versions (rollback feature) available for non-Galaxy users - and if/when the time comes when it becomes mandatory that will be the day I will vote with my wallet and no longer buy anything from here. I know I'm in the minority here but there it is. My opinion :)

This.

It's ok, doesn't offer me anything, but doesn't detract either as i use it as a glorified downloader.
As long as it remains optional all is rosy. If/when it isn't optional, i will spend my money elsewhere.

Are you saying you can play offline if Galaxy is installed or you can't play offline at all regardless without internet. Because I just launched Victor Vran offline with no issues. If it's the first one, then likely that's a bug as it may be trying to find Galaxy and if your trying to block that then yea you may get issues. I've heard of a few instances of that, but nothing in a long time. If that is the case contact support and be specific with what the issue is as long as it's nothing your doing on your end.

There are some things that will be more geared for the client, that's how it is. Galaxy will get features that set it apart from the site. We never had rollback patches on the site so your not missing anything you once had. As far as getting patches first, devs can upload patches directly to Galaxy. They then have to be packaged and tested by GOG for the site, nothing GOG can do about that... holding up Galaxy users because GOG is handling the site like that always has isn't the way to go about it.

Being able to download the installers for off-line use is a big part the DRM-free identity that sets apart GOG from Steam. Losing that would lose them customers, as at that point they'd practically be a Steam-light without the playerbase, catalog or big titles, and you're simply not going to beat Steam at being Steam.

Because your failing to understand what people actually want and the market? The majority of people like the Steam experience, but many also take issue with Valves policies or hold on the market with little to no competition.

Do I like the Steam client? Yea but I avoid using it for the most part (though it's hard to avoid completely). Then you going to say why if it gives you everything you want Galaxy to be and my response is yea it does.

I prefer GOG to Steam for a few simple reason:

1. I don't like how Steam allows third party DRM, Steam DRM itself is fine with me personally, but I won't deal with limited installations or online check-in's to play a game. On GOG I don't have to worry about this regardless of Galaxy, and I don't have to worry about accidentally buying something infested with third party DRM.

2. I don't like that Steam will allow anything on it's store with no quality control, I don't like that older games tend to be broken and are still being sold. GOG is leaps and bounds better than Steam in that department, again regardless of Galaxy.

3. I don't like the whole paid mods fiasco.

4. I don't like that Steam has very little competition, meaning Valve has no incentive to actually get off their ass and improve Steam for the community.

Number 1 & 2 are generally the biggest reasons I'm on GOG...

So yea there is a big hunger for a Steam like experience, but one that is not necessarily backed by Valve, GOG can find a nice place in that market with Galaxy. Generally gamers like what Steam provides, they just don't always like how it's handled by Valve. There is also ways GOG can do better than what Steam is doing, see rollback of patches, not forcing features, universal cloud saves... as GOG begins to set Galaxy apart it will look a lot more attractive to Steam users.

I also understand that some people (like you) came to GOG to avoid everything Steam stands for, but I also understand GOG is a business, and GOG's knows remaining niche isn't what they want to do nor is it good for there long term success as a business. I doubt Galaxy will ever be totally mandatory, but holding back features or pandering to a few in the minority on these things probably won't be on the table. I'm sure GOG has the data that backs up how their users are interacting with the site and what is being used the most.

Now this just looks like your looking for an excuse to blame Galaxy for something or mad that people are generally lazy as hell. Cloud saves are just a copy of your local saves, it doesn't remove your saves on your computer when they are sent to the cloud. You can back these up manually or use a service like OneDrive or something. Blaming GOG because they give you extra protection for your saves with Galaxy in the invent they might close someday is crazy. They could close tomorrow without cloud saves and your system could crash and there goes all your saves.

You generally just seemed mad that people would rather let some piece of software manage everything for them rather than do it themselves... and that's just a weird thing to be mad about. It's that works for you, great, other people don't care enough for that.

That debatable... Saints Row 4 and other big name Deep Silver games, things that are leaked to be coming like Oblivion, Fallout New Vegas, Space Engineers, etc. Something that we would have said "quit dreaming" about as little as 3 years ago. Yea GOG has it's slow/bad periods, but it's defiantly gotten releases that we never would have thought about getting before.

Agree, it'll be more accessible to new users and will help GOG in that sense stay relevant going forward. I like the ease of use myself.

My only negative with Galaxy is I only open occasionally and there's usually an update waiting for me, so for a quick stop in the web browser is quicker (on browser now).

I never really understood what's there to manage with my games? I mean, I have at max 5 games installed and I usually only play one of them. Why do I want to have an extra piece of software managing them, or downloading them, or updating them? I don't care about all the community, achievement and cloud features either. The community is here, achievements are in-game or I don't care and I don't need cloud saves at all.

Galaxy is completely useless to me. If it helps GOG staying in business, then it's good for me as well, but the more it becomes a necessity to access certain game features, the more I dislike the client. Like with Steam it encourages devs to rely on client features instead of including them into the game, making pure standalone games more and more impossible. Not what I'd call totally DRM-free in the end.

One thing that could be a bonus would be if Galaxy automatically updates your backed-up installers when they get patches/updates. Not sure if it does this though.