Lestat57

Definitely FOR it (actually I've found this page googling exactly "gog client" as I thought of it too), I don't see how anyone would have any problems with it as long as it'd be optional, I mean really now, why would you even care enough to complain? Maybe I'm just not seeing something through... if vidya remained DRM free, client would be OPTIONAL only for people who 'd want it... where's the harm in that? No one would force you to use it, you coud remain bloatware/client-free if you chose to. Why not allow people who'd want it to have it? Y so butthurt?
I'm new here and all but imho lack of (!optional!) client is holding this project back from wider user database. In today's world, I'd say it's not even up for discussion, that's a necessity. But that's just like my unbiased opinion, don't lynch me right away.

Why not take everything steam does right while avoiding just what steam does wrong? Why not make a best use of other's mistakes? Why so butthurt?

lugaidster

@Haters: It's *optional*! How can you negate the option to others when it doesn't affect you in any meaningful way? You sound like a bunch of whiny brats.

+1 for this as long as it's optional.

halldojo

Dear god no, never ever follow the path of steam bloatedadware, their setup is awesome just the way it is.

sckhar

Why everyone thinks this is so bad?
Make it optional, offer this like a extra feature, apart from GOG-Downloader and website.
The more options, the better.
As long as it don't force anyone to use it, I think it is a great idea.

RaikonLance

No. Steam clogging up my CPU and forcing me to use their third-party crap was the reason I came to this site.

ljyoun

or, instead of this, GOG can upgrade the downloader to include a tab of "Currently Installed Games" from which you could play/delete the games from.

falloutttt

NO to this!!!

Khoro

Have to vote no for this. It would become a huge drain on GOG's resources, and the less time they have dedicated to the actual games is bad.

If you want a client, you also have the option to make it yourself. It's not hard to do, and I'm sure some on the community board is available for this.


@Xanto:

If you have issues with too many shortcuts clogging your desktop, why aren't you using a gadget to organize it for you? Not enough options in it? Try to find out how you can completely customize your desktop (which is possible).


@those with low disk space:

How hard would it be to get a memory stick or even a bigger HD? You can get loads of space to very small prices nowadays.

genericUNDEAD

If I could downvote I would.

IranMalaka

Dear GOG please remove this wish. its hurting me so much.

Bllasae

One of the reasons GOG is so well-liked is there no bloatware, and this includes having a client. The way you can just download installers now is the perfect way to download games.

Xanto

@TheIRS:

No, the OP suggested a way to list installed GOG game, not a store to buy games from the client (though I'm okay with that). Steam is slow because it's programed horribly and bloated with a lot of features. It needs a complete re-write honestly. This would take minimal resources, and any modern computer should have no problem having the program running in the background while playing. It would simply be a library added on to the downloader.

Sure you could create a shortcut through Steam, but you said it yourself Steam is slow, shortcuts looks horrible in the steam UI, and perhaps there are gamers that want to get away from Steam and just use DRM free games. If you have a few games using the desktop isn't so bad, but once your collection grows it's impractical.

Having a totally optional client to download, list, or even buy games does not have to take away your ability to continue to buy games from the site and install them the same way you always have without the client. There seems to be the thinking that a client means DRM, when this is just not true.

If GOG wants to expand in the future, having a client that makes the process easier on the end user without forcing DRM and keeping in optional makes the most business sense. A GOG is a business.

TheIRS

"Why are people complaining about an optional feature?

. . . Lets think logically when commenting shall we."

I wouldn't consider it "complaining", but sure, let's suggest whatever legit problems anyone might have "illogical". At least have a level of understanding instead of viewing these people who disagree as imbeciles, please.

Besides, your statement was flat out wrong; it actually can affect how you play your games. Keep in mind the extra necessary tasks your computer would have to run with this kind of ultimately unnecessary software (and also keep in mind that the Steam software often runs slower than the website itself for this reason); even desktop icons can easily slow down your computer if they're not controlled, but hell, if those are already utilized and immediately accessible (they're automatically created by GOG installers as is), then that just leaves less of a point in creating something like this. It's already simple enough anyway. I figure that's a perfectly reasonable, and logical, objection.

Now it being optional I suppose I can see, but even then it just takes more time and resources out of the GOG team to constantly build and monitor and fix and update the software (keep in mind, their company isn't like Valve). It would ultimately be up to them to create the software, but I doubt they'll want to, especially because this kind of thing can already be done in Steam with GOG games (except for the updating and installing from the client, but you can sort them in the menu and start them and such, but I fail to see the point in that as well because of the obligatory desktop icons, which are simple enough and, frankly, easier).

Xanto

Why are people complaining about an optional feature? Is that what's cool now? To complain about something that is optional and would not effect the way you buy GOG games at all.

They already have an optional downloader and adding a library function to start games would not effect how you play your games now at all. Not all of us want to go through the start menu or create a desktop shortcuts for all of our games.

I support this 100%. Lets think logically when commenting shall we.

TheIRS

Frankly, I see no point in doing this. All it would do is actually make the whole process of playing games more difficult since it would just bloat your operating system (which, for Windows users, bloating is already really bad as a whole), and if you really wanted to do this that badly, you can work around Steam to perform this task for you anyway.

Eroen

Please don't do this. Having a client program is another complicating step, fraught with possible problems. Look at Steam, that still doesn't work reasonably (although it's less about convenience and more about a DRM-enforced visit to marketing-land). An opaque wizard performing tasks for the user mainly serves to keep the user ignorant, which is great from a DRM perspective, and bad for the user once the wizard is no longer "wise" enough to perform it's task in the current environment (this is very contrary to gog's goal of future/modern compatibility).

deathmachinept

Nah I use steam and for me it's a pain the A$$ I hate that interface and makes simple stuff harder than it is, I can buy a game and download it here in 10 secs on steam can take minutes!!

What is easier installing an App or going into a website?

ReverendBrown

No. I don't want a client for every vendor I buy from.

1ray0ng

Another solution would be to improve the downloader by adding in a tab allowing you to view what games you have in a nice clean GUI.

FedeII

Completely against it. Please don't.

Michiduta

I don't understand where all the client hate is coming from. Sure, the Steam client is packed with DRM and other not so useful stuff in it but it does provide an easy way to keep the games updated, easy way to manage your library of games and is generally a much more user friendly and easier way to handle your games and spend more time playing instead of having to manually check for updates or some other stuff. Plus, as long as the client is optional and DRM free it would not impact those that would not want to use it.

If one does not like a product one should not buy it and should not prevent others from buying that product. It's the same thing here. Just because some don't like using clients to manage their library of games doesn't mean the others have to do the same. That's what freedom of choice is all about. Giving the users options and allowing them to decide how to best spend their time.

+1 to this idea.

One_of_Many

I'm completely against this "feature". A client, even if initially not mandatory, would be a little step toward DRMs.

Nilok7

As long as it was optional and not punitive if you do not use it, knock yourself out.

qianxu

I was actually looking for this kind of client, and that brought me here. I just thought it might be more convenient to have a dedicated program with easy interface to browse your games, updates, fixes and all that.

1ray0ng

Pefect idea. This is what I'm looking for. I would buy more games from GoG if they provided games through Steam or Desura or have their own client. I hate Origin and Uplay though.

I travel very frequently and only carry an ultrabook with limited hard disk space, so downloading everything I have is not a viable idea. External hard disks are cumbersome as well. I have desktops all over the world and need to know what games I have or not on server side. Making a manual list (even with dropbox) is too bothersome and lacks a clean GUI.

2. It's optional. If you like how GoG is now, then continue using it that way. No one is forcing you to use the proposed client. Think of the client as an organizing software instead of DRM.

daydr3am3r87

I'm for this. The actual downloader kinda sux. It's not that something will change. A library option with integrated shop, news and updates.
The games will still be DRM free and so the client will be optional. It will also be nice to have autoupdate instead of having to update the games when you start them or to download updates. This is a good option if you have more than 1 GOG game installed.
Another good idea is that the user should have the possibility to download games via downloader as installer (Origin does this) or preinstalled, like Steam does. Might be useful for those who don't have enough space to download the kit and then install the game. Of course, the games will be the same and no Internet connection should be required to start it or play games.
The truth is I personally prefer retail games but I I have to chose one online platform I will go with Steam because of this, even if I hate freaking DRMs. The whole buy-get-play process is a pain in the...neck on GOG.

MarshalVaako

No client. Just No..please. Thanks.

Lockyy

As Nroach said I feel like the gog downloader as it is is very lackluster. Adding a library section to make downloading easier would be very welcome.
Even better would be a store within the client. This would help make gog.com a place I actually think about buying from regularly instead of just the place where I go when I can't find something anywhere else.

Since games could also be downloaded/bought etc. via the website and the client would be completely optional it wouldn't be "yet another client." as IranMalaka mentioned below.

As it is the gog downloader really doesn't bring much to the table in terms of enhancing the gog.com experience, whereas I think having a steam style-client really would.

NRoach44

Yeah, just update the downloader to add "Library" functionality like the Humble Bundle's android app - show those that are installed, aren't and the ones that need updating.

IranMalaka

Please dont do this ! ! !

IranMalaka

NO NO NO NO ! ! ! Not another client, please

kojocel

This is actually a brilliant idea. But then again, it should be completely optional. This way it would make happy those who desire it, and it won't throw away customers who dislike the idea.

+1 for the idea.

jm11744

I'd love to have this.

boeftim

optional is the keyword guy stop getting mad

SvDKILLSWITCH

As long as it's completely optional, and not required to run the games (either foreground or background) I don't see this as an issue.

All it would be doing is streamlining the GOG.com process into a program in which you can view, download and install all GOG games quickly and easily, and keep them consolidated and organized across different computers.

Tesno

I'd like one clear view of my games in steam, gog and shelf automatically updated, so I won't buy same game twice =/

ELFswe

Wow, so many people that don't seem to understand that the client would be optional, ie. you don't need the client to download and play the games, you would still be able to use the website for this.

WHRM3

I want one so I can browse the GOG store and download games without opening my browser every single time. Oh, here's a thought the client would be 100% optional and wouldn't be required for anything.

koeolaw

NO, JUST NO

Juniper

I definitely DO NOT want this. I buy from GOG because there is NO client. The download process for games on gog is incredibly easy. There's even the downloader. You press the button and then double click the .exe file and you're done. The start menu and shortcuts are made automatically. How much easier can it get? If I need to download a client to play a game, I won't buy the game, it's that simple. I never use steam for this very reason. How will a client make it easier? Clicking your start menu and the gog folder and the game name is less steps than loading up a client. Or am I missing something?

Kabus

All voters on wrong place to play PC games. This is against to DRM-free revolution. GOG Downloader very enough for us.

alvorsam

No thanks. I have a browser – don't you?

Nanoloque

NOOOOO, GOD ! No, God, please, no ! No ! No ! NOOOOO !

Thoughtless

You can add games to Steam if you want to, but no client is needed here.

Reever

Not another client, please -.-"

irgendjemand

No client - right now it feels so pure to me just for the reason there is no client !

tokisto

Being optional I totally support this.

Gareth321

I strongly support this wish. Updates are impossible to maintain without such a client, and even just downloading individual games is much less convenient than having a single client do it all for me.

dpape39

Its still OPTIONAL and the games would stay DRM free. The client should just be capable of downloading GOG games and starting them, this doesnt mean that you cant download games from GOGs homepage.

JoeBold

I would really love that as long as it keeps being optional like it is with the downloader right now. Many people like GOG for one simple reason: One can simply play their games without being forced to use yet another software to able to start their games. So as long as such a "Steam like software" from GOG would exist as a optional choice, that would be a good addition I think.