https://dontvis.it/www.rockpapershotgun.com/2020/10/01/gog-galaxy-client-will-start-selling-epic-games-store-games/

I don't think this has been posted yet, but I thought it was newsworthy enough.
(Correction, it has been posted, but only in the Galaxy sub-forum)

GOG Galaxy is set to sell epic games through their client.
I'm not sure how I feel about this personally.
Either it will drive people to buy from epic more, or GOG more.
On the one hand, epic..on the other, GOG do get a cut of the sales.
(I'm not using the client, so I won't be affected that way anyway)

What do you think?

https://outline.com/EtSt5M

Think it's a clear step to try grow their market share, but i can't say i'm all that keen on it. Feel like they're trying to jump before they can walk so to speak! But hey, if it means they can preserve more titles lost to license limbo, then i'm all for it....as long as they don't lose themselves in trying to be like other storefronts. No one wants another St.Anger.

Not sure how I feel about this too. GOG gets a cut from what, the 12% Epic takes from each sale?

Also, wouldn't this incentivise publisher/devs to not bother releasing GOG versions of games?

This is really bad, looks like they are listening to the wrong gamers and becoming more like Steam.

Honestly, this for me does not change, because I keep buying only on GOG and on my Switch. Certainly the most purists will feel extremely uncomfortable, but they shouldn't, as these are the same ones who don't use the Galaxy. Regarding the positive side, I am happy for the possibility of greater revenue for the store. Remembering that they are selling selected titles and that they are not available here.

If this benefits the GOG fan base with new investments, it has my support. I just think they should better explain the long-term goal. We all know that they are not very transparent about certain things, starting with the methodology applied in the curatorial system.

Any games GOG is curating from Epic, these things need to be clear:

1. The base-game, its DLC's, and expansions should work offline fully period. This is NOT the case supposedly for Outer Worlds (source - https://www.gog.com/forum/general/epic_store_games_you_can_play_without_the_epic_launcher/post258), so...this needs to be fixed IMHO for GOG to support/curate it/hand-pick it.

2. DRM should NOT be added later in Epic version's period. It should be DRM-FREE period.

3. If the DRM is known (Securom, Denuvo, etc) for Epic version, it should be stated on the page.

4. If the DRM is NOT know for Epic version, there should be a warning to the GOG user that Epic Games may or may not have DRM.

5. If a game-client is required to download the game and/or run in the background - this also should be noted. In Epic's case, they don't do downloading installers via web browser...so you will have to at least download their EGS Game-Client App.

I don't even understand how this works.

GOG takes a cut for Epic exclusive games sold on Galaxy? And you can play these without the EGS client?

Then what exactly does Epic get?

Its 12% plus GOG takes another 30% cut, so either we pay higher prices or the devs get less? I'm so confused

#ConfusingMaths

The announcement in the Galaxy subforum:

https://www.gog.com/forum/general_beta_gog_galaxy_2.0/new_store_inside_gog_galaxy_launches_in_test_phase

I've just read the news on german 4players (I don't follow the galaxy discussion here) and I couldn't believe it.
I'm speechless. Has GOG lost it's mind? This is ridiculous!
So GOGs longtime goal is to just offer a free client and buying platform for other drm-stores, or what?

I'm honestly not seeing some spectacular "pull" to the store. You need the Epic client anyway for many AAA games so buying through Galaxy = Galaxy adds another layer of complexity rather than streamlining anything. In fact, buy a Ubisoft title like WatchDogs from the Epic Store via Galaxy and you're basically using 3x clients simultaneously (Galaxy, Epic & uPlay) to play the game. On a store whose core branding revolves around not being forced to use a client...

Likewise, people who are interested in DRM-Free + no-client games on this list often aren't interested in running any client (Galaxy included). As others have said, if GOG become a little too successful at seamlessly integrating Steam / Epic through Galaxy to such an extend where users don't know or stop caring which store they bought from, then "why bother with a GOG release?" devs will start asking swiftly moving onto the next step where Steam / Epic / GOG release = 3x sets of patching whilst GOG / Steam = only 2x sets "but you can still play them via Galaxy, so that's our 'GOG release'..."

tl:dr: I'll file this one under "Be careful of what you wish for because you might just get it"

I see this as a disturbing move in the wrong direction for GOG.

I always suspected something nefarious was afoot with Galaxy 2.0 as it was never designed to benefit GOG customers, since they don't care about its main 'feature' of launching all your DRM-infested games from one place.

Seems to me this news is the beginning of the revelation of what Galaxy 2.0 was really always about: GOG making dubious deals with DRM-launcher stores in order get some of their money.

I wonder what additional nefarious integrations with GOG & third party DRM-launchers are coming down the pipeline. But no doubt, they surely won't be good for GOG customers.

I just... wat?

How?

Why?

No, seriously, I have no idea what's going on. What's the point? Why would anyone use that? Why would anyone release games on GOG if you can buy them through GOG while they're still on Epic? Is this supposed to be some new great business plan or is GOG basically giving up on being their own store or what? Am I just dense? What am I not seeing?

Well, there's one thing we can be sure of at this point... it's a brave new world GOG is stepping into. I'm just not sure I want to be along for the ride.