[...] My guess is that GOG did this to make linux users doing repackging with WINE much more painful and forcing them more or less to use GOG Galaxy under Wine. [...]
IIRC, someone posted in the updates thread that they changed the format, so they can automate the creation of the standalone installers, directly using the updated content uploaded to GOG Galaxy by the devs/pubs. And yet, updated standalone installers often take more than just a couple of/few days.
They put the news on Twitter too.......
Was that on the GOG.com Twitter account or on the Galaxy 2.0 one?
[...] Have we "served our purpose" in supporting GOG's growth and are, therefore, expendable? Will we get an official response concerning our protest?
Yes, we have, and yes, we are, but not quite at the point of completely dropping us, hence the effort to hide this new DRM-agnostic store from those of us that DRM-free standalone installers are a prerequisite for more purchases.
I said it before, but I guess no one reads my messages so that is ok:
Whether or not the Epic games sold through Galaxy have DRM or not is pretty much irrelevant to the big picture. The following bigger issue would still be there even if all those Galaxy Epic games were DRM-free:
GOG (Galaxy) is starting to provide and sell games of their (formerly) direct competitor, relying on their competitor's service and ecosystem. The game is purchased and downloaded from the competitor's service, and also uses their services for e.g. multiplayer and such. [...]
I'm not sure that the wording of the official
announcement - "the brand new store we’re working on", "In the new store, we will be welcoming games from both GOG.COM and beyond", "we will be [...] expanding the store's catalog" - suggests that the deal is for GOG to rely on their competitor's service and ecosystem. Combined with the statement that these purchases are covered by GOG's support and refund policy, and Chandra's comment about the Epic client, it reads like how Steam's handling things for EA/Ubisoft/etc games they sell, i.e. the content of said store is hosted on GOG servers (under a different domain, obviously), and accessible to users of GOG Galaxy 2.0 that make a purchase via the client. That it's called "Epic store" (based on a screenshot posted in this thread) seems to have more to do with the fact that it's currently only EGS exclusives, than anything else.
GOG's just hiding it within GOG Galaxy 2.0, and spinning it as being something completely unrelated to their brand, and with no effect to the userbase that doesn't use the client. This also obfuscates the fact that income from GOG.com will now be directed to develop and support a client-exclusive_DRM-agnostic (at best) store.
I could be wrong, of course, and I don't expect GOG to be transparent about the actual foundation and works of this "new store". LiquidOxygen80's suggestion
is what will make the argument that GOG =/= Galaxy 2.0 actually true.