Starkrun: GWENT is designed for multiplayer, to play it you need galaxy,
No. That's a fallacy that publishers want you to believe. You don't need a client software for multiplayer.
And the argument 'it's free, so deal with it' does not mean that I cannot wish for a non-free, non-DRM-ed version. I don't like free-to-pay, let's-scam-our-customers-with-microtransactions games.
Starkrun: GWENT having DRM make sense,
Commercially for the modern GOG, yes. But compared to the ideals that GOG once stood and fought for, not. DRM on GOG is very, very sad but it is becoming the norm for multiplayer games.
To be clear: I am not against the option of having a central server with ranking etc, that is account bound. I'm not against the option to play multiplayer via Galaxy. The important word here is: option. If Galaxy is the only option that works, it isn't optional any more. GOG promised, that Galaxy would remain optional, but for multiplayer it isn't.
So, back to topic: I am quite worried that Cyberpunk will have online elements that make Galaxy de-facto 'necessary' and that those who insist on playing offline will only get a heavily castrated version. And multiplayer without Galaxy will surely not be included. Not because that wouldn't be possible, but because GOG does want to enforce Galaxy on everyone, if they can get away with it. But we will have to wait and see until Cyberpunk is released.