I iz would laek achevmints... cus steem iz hav them nd steem iz da bomb! diz dum dounlooder theengy wishis itz wer az good az steem is dounloood faast nd l tink gog dounlooder is suk balls as wel as gog itz dum no gams...

so i iz say, gog shood hav betre daeonlasd;er nd claeyent nd den it wil mach steem...

No, don't let my negative rep fool you, I possess perfect english. Obviously kidding. In all seriousness though, in order for gog to compete with steam and attract other people who use steam, it needs to first improve it's download client. After it's done that, an ingame chatting interface and after that there's only cloud saves and achievements both of which are superficial features to me. Heck, to me everything about steam is superficial except it's DRM, which is horrendous. That's why I use GOG.

What's wrong with the downloader client?

I really hope this place doesn't get into chats, cloud saves, achievements etc.. because that all needs some connectivity like Steam's client and well it won't be soon until they would have to release a GOG client.

Don't worry I'm on you're side. However, there is nothing wrong with implementing new features, even a client, as long as it is all optional.

As for the current downloader client, I really fail to see the difference between using it and not.

As long as they are fully optional and don't involve DRM, I'm fine. I guess many people freaked out when GOG introduced an official download client, thinking it is the first step towards DRM.

Then again, I guess there are far more important things for GOG to channel its resources than e.g. trying to implement an achievement system for King's Quest 1 or Wing Commander.

I think most people here agree that there are more important things to work on but as GOG grows larger it's possible they will want to keep a compromise so not a lot of people leave therefor a client with chats and what-not is entirely possible. However, as you guys say, if it's optional I don't mind it at all.