I get what you mean, but for me that's two halves of a whole. Both need to be well crafted. Of course there is also the question if we even want stories in our games, and if yes, then in what way and to what extent. If a game can be substituted by simply watching it on YouTube, then it's not really a game worth playing.

I couldn't agree more. These types of announcements seem to always lead to bad things, but I'm holding out hope for GOG. The fact that GOG is already doing the exclusive preorder content garbage is a bad sign.

Where does it say it's doing the exclusive preorder content garbage?

You lot are so cynical. I for one can't wait for the announcement that GOG's purchase of Steam has been finalised.

There was more to it even. "Unveiling of GOG.com's new technology"... hmmmmm.

Naturally I'd consider anything that makes GOG more like Steam to be a complete desaster of an announcement - client, auto updater, Greenlight, Early Access, achievements and similar virtual badges, etc.

I still think this is rather about a much needed website update, e.g. clearer forum structure, more modes of expression and individuality for users, more control over wishes and reviews posted (and longer reviews of course). That wouldn't be the greatest leap for GOG of course, but remember how they routinely announce 20 year old games like the messias himself. ;)

But I guess it could mean a lot of things, and I guess that it would only really ring positive if the GOG people have really been creative here and it's something that we do not expect.

It's possible!

The best thing about this is it's on my birthday, so whilst I could care less about the witcher III the countdown clock at the bottom of the page tells me how long I have to continue to survive to have won another year.

Vainamoinen, how would an optional client and/or optional auto updater hurt any one in anyway?

Optional clients tend to become permanent obligatory requirements.

I am pessimistic but I will wait before I say more.

They talked in a Twitch Stream a few weeks ago about how they have been looking into a launcher like Steam for a long time, but would only ever even consider doing so in a way that ensured that it was 100% optional, and in a way that made sure the DRM-Free movement would be unaffected.

Personally, I would love to see a Launcher that would automatically look at your catalog, and give insight into all the games, with all the extras and everything, and help keep it all organised, what have you. Possibly a spotlight on games from your wishlist that are on sale, integrate all your messages and forum replies... things like that. Basically, give us a launcher that looks at your account, but is still 100% optional.

You know guys, when I read your comments, I feel like:
- GOG is offering one of the worst service in the world;
- The GOG staff are just untrustworthy people who are looking for every possible way to screw us;
- Every change that will come will lead to GOG becoming UPlay / Origin / Steam.

I can understand that you may not be happy with all the decisions made by GOG staff (the "good news, we'll have regional prices" stunt was not that good) but if you're systematically negative about a service, you may ask yourself why you're using it. It's not like you did not have the choice.

OK, you can just as easily just expect the best and when you get bad news you can just say "it's not that bad!, give me more punishment!"
Because that will make you optimistic.

Any negative comments by people here are based on several times when bad news for us came dressed as good news. Not on nothing.

If you want to ignore the past, feel free to do so. Also, no one here said GOG is not good. Don't put words into people's mouths.

First, I do not expect anything. I just wait for the news and then I decide by myself if it can be considered a good, a bad or simply just a news.

When I read your comments, it seems that (almost) all the news these past 6 years have been bad ones. That, I consider unfair because, IMHO, I think we got a lot of good things during this period (free games, Witcher 2 pre-order compensation, interesting sales...) as well as some bad (the regional price "good" news, the shutdown PR stunt...).

So, as I said, if you really believe that they are just trying to screw you, then vote with your freewill and wallet and go use other services which will respect you more. Otherwise, discuss facts and not a, I think, little bit distorded, view of the past.

You are again saying things I didn't say. I never said all news have been bad news. I never said all GOG is trying to do is screw us. Once again, stop accusing me of saying things I never said.
If you want to be pessimist, optimist or anything else, it's up to you. I have the same right to be whatever I want too.
Don't forget that.

The auto updater can not be optional, as that's a feature that's undeniably meant to replace executable patch files. It will become mandatory as developers will immediately delay and then stop delivering actual patches or even patched original game files ("it works on Steam"). In my opinion, implementing an 'auto update' possibility factually means making it mandatory.

"Automatic" here means a loss of control over the downloaded game files. It might be comfortable for some, but is clearly geared towards repeated and constant connection to the publisher's servers, always checking, scanning, updating, without bothering the player with actual info about it. Download once and archive all the patch files - a thing of the past. It's the opposite of what gog should stand for, i.e. the independence of game files from the publishing platform, all the while preserving the emergency feeling of the traditional 'patch'.

We all know that a "day one patch" generally meant that the developer fucked up and released his game too early. A day one update delivers the same files, but strangely isn't perceived as a fuckup any more. The number of patches a developer had to add was a direct measure of his incapability. The number of auto updates strangely isn't. I have my theories as to why that is so, and I'm certainly not getting in line for that mindset tomorrow. Sorry, but I just don't want to make updates too easy for developers because they're meant to test and finish their game before they release it.

I guess I sound old fashioned here - and that's probably exactly what I am. Judging from 25 years of gaming experience, I'll say that less and less developers are willing to deliver a finished game; I'll say that today Valve is even purposefully blurring that finish line with Early Access. Yesterday's open betas are sold full price today already, and tomorrow they'll sell yesterday's vaporware. Games will rise in popularity and fall into oblivion without ever leaving beta status. I assume you're seeing the beginnings as well.

GOG is in a pickle here because comfortable ways to change game files are an industry standard today and developers are demanding it. They are demanding it because ever more they are unwilling or unable to deliver a finished game.


I'll gather a few thoughts about the "client" later. In my opinion, there already is a kind of an optional GOG client. ;)

*cough* Kickstarter *cough*