Emico23: The Link @ussnorway posted worked perfectly. In the Post it says it will download the 2.0 Version but it downloaded the 1.2 version. That's the reason i was confused. ^^ So thanks Ussnorway for the link!

Emico23: @BlackSun Tanks for the Tutorial. That made a lot of things more easy for me. ^^

ChronicJuiceboxx: I downgraded to the 1.2 version only to be auto upgraded to the 2.0 version.

Yama-Kami: While I think the OP's silly to not want to be on Galaxy 2.0, as I myself have been using it without issue exclusively for some time now. Other platforms are now simply there as launchers/DRM in a nutshell. I would agree 100% it is a bit surprising there is still no way to access the forum via the platform. This is my 1st post in a very long time, due to this reason. It's truly the only complaint I have about it.

If the powers that be a GoG would please implement a way to access the forum via Galaxy 2.0, I am sure many more than just the OP and myself would be grateful. I'm sure it would be helpful for yourselves as well in getting more useful feedback as well.

cmclout: Well, golly gee, if you've been using it without issue, then CLEARLY nobody else has any reason to criticize it and CLEARLY nobody else can possibly have any problems with it. They all must be doing something wrong because Galaxy 2.0 BETA is perfect down to the quantum level and it's absolutely 100% impossible that it doesn't run perfectly for everybody or that anybody might want functionality it doesn't provide.

My Galaxy client was force-"upgraded" to Galaxy 2.0 beta, and I immediately noticed two huge issues:

1. Tags don't work. When you right-click a game in your library and select to assign a tag, it shows there are no tags, and when you click the "Filter" button at the top of the screen and select "Tags", it shows only "No tags", despite the fact that your library on the gog.com website does show the tags you have assigned to your games. This is a huge issue for me, as I use tags to define categories (need to install, won't play, in-progress, pending, purchased for soundtrack, etc). With the old Galaxy client, I could filter by tags to list only the games I wanted to see. Since tags don't work in the Galaxy 2.0 client, I can no longer filter my library based on assigned tags, which means I can no longer select to view only the games matching a certain category (such as "In-progress"), making the library virtually unusable.

2. The Galaxy 2.0 client does not support keyboard access. You MUST use a mouse to browse your library. There simply is no response to keyboard input. Also, clicking on a game automatically opens the game page, so you can forget about doing something like selecting multiple games and setting identical tags for the group of games.

The Galaxy 2.0 client doesn't even keep the column headers on-screen when you view your library in list mode. Instead, when you scroll the list, it scrolls everything -- column headers and all -- and it scrolls the list up the entire window, overwriting the buttons at the top of the screen (owned games, filter, search, etc).

On top of that, when I launch GOG Galaxy 2.0, it stays at the "Launching GOG Galaxy" window for at least 3-4 minutes, with constant disk access, before the Galaxy client actually opens the window and becomes usable. Windows' Resource Monitor shows the disk access is in the "galaxy-2.0.db" file, averaging 1 to 2.5 MB/sec read access with 99% highest disk active time. That's on a 3-disk 16TB RAID5 array which routinely averages 120+ MB/sec when copying files. That suggests horribly unacceptable database performance.

So far, the only positive things I see about the Galaxy 2.0 client are 1) the library list mode can show additional columns (time played, last played, release year, etc), 2) the interface uses dark greys instead of light greys, making it much more comfortable on my eyes, and 3) the library list mode can display the games with smaller height, allowing it to display more games on the screen than the old Galaxy client. Those three things are the only benefits I see in the Galaxy 2.0 client over the old Galaxy client. The Steam client is so much more usable and user-friendly than the Galaxy 2.0 client in every way I can see.

In short, this forced Galaxy 2.0 "upgrade" feels very similar to a Windows 10 "upgrade" -- it's a broken, beta-level mess forced onto users without any notice or ability to decline it, and it cause headaches for many people. I will admit that it has great potential. Time will tell if that potential is realized.

ZyloxDragon: Galaxy 2 Beta runs perfectly without issue while it's uninstalled.

Yama-Kami: Inherently nothing "runs" while uninstalled rather.... One would think that much goes without saying.

cmclout: @Yama-Kami:

With all due respect, the fact that you do not use certain features do not make them "trivial". Something as basic as not having tags working correctly is not trivial.

With regard to my comment about the keyboard not working in the Galaxy 2.0 client, of course everyone has a pointing device (mouse, pointing stick, trackpad, trackball, etc). That's not the point. The point is that the keyboard is not usable in the Galaxy client; it's entirely mouse-driven, from what I can see. Basic keyboard functionality is a "feature" of just about every computer program for the past 40+ years. The Galaxy 2.0 client doesn't even support the basic keyboard functionality of ALT+SPACEBAR on Windows (which allows you to resize or move a window). The only keyboard functionality I have found that actually works is ALT+F4 to close the program. My example of selecting multiple games and taking actions on that selected group (such as adding a tag to those games) is a perfect example of why someone might want keyboard functionality in the Galaxy client, and yes, that is something I do often in the Steam client. I also frequently use the keyboard arrow keys in the Steam client to scroll through my list of games, quickly view each game's library page, and make sure my tags/categories are correct.

In terms of my hardware -- desktop computer, Intel Core i7-3770K 3.50GHz 4-core/8-thread, 32GB memory, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB, and a 16TB RAID5 array using 3 8TB WD Red Pro drives. As stated, my RAID array routinely reaches 120+ MB/sec when copying files, so the delay with the Galaxy client starting up, with database access at 1-2.5 MB/sec, has little to do with media type and everything to do with the database structure and database queries.

Let me be clear about that delay -- the delay I'm talking about is when the Galaxy client starts for the first time. Of course the Galaxy UI starts quickly when the client is already running in the background (this takes about 10 seconds on my computer). If you kept the default settings, then the Galaxy client starts automatically when Windows starts, so that delay would be part of the initial boot/login process. I do not have the Galaxy client starting at boot because the Galaxy client (the old one and the 2.0 one) has an issue either with the computer being on for a long period of time or with the computer going to sleep and waking up; after a while, the Galaxy client stops working (clicking the icon to run it creates a new process, but there is no other activity), and I need to manually kill all of the Galaxy processes and then start the Galaxy client in order for it to start working correctly. To avoid this problem, I exit the Galaxy client (close the Galaxy client window and then close/exit the system tray icon) when I'm done playing a game.

With regard to the Galaxy 2.0 client being the only client at some point, of course, that's a given. It's also a given that issues occurring while in beta status shouldn't be surprising. It was for that exact reason that I intentionally chose to not enroll in the Galaxy 2.0 beta when it was announced. I didn't want to "upgrade" to the 2.0 client until it was ready for release. GOG decided to ignore my wishes and decided they wanted to emulate Microsoft and force beta-level software on their users, which is completely unacceptable. If someone wants to be a beta tester, good for them. I don't want to run potentially buggy software; I want to wait until that software is as bug-free as possible (this is true for gaming clients, operating systems, productivity software, and everything else). That's the same reason why I rarely play in-development/early-access games, even after purchasing them -- I want to wait for the finished product.

Yama-Kami: As such please do participate in the beta. As your feedback would be valuable, being you can articulate your findings quite well. Making it all the more useful. Constructive feedback is appreciated among what is more tantamount to complaining if not whining, which is all too common in the present society.

obliviondoll: Not being given a choice about whether or not to participate in the beta is one of the biggest problems here.

Galaxy 2.0 is not ready for launch yet. It should not be forced on users who don't wish to be part of beta testing. They are doing so anyway, while openly acknowledging that it's still in beta. And people are defending them by pointing out "but it's still beta" as a reason why it's ok. But as long as they admit it's in beta, they need to TREAT IT as beta, which they are not currently doing.

Yama-Kami: I wasn't trying to say it's issue free (there is reasons for it's beta status after all) apologies if it came across that way. IMHO the issues boil down to things that are trivial at this point, and more over features that I do not use. (case in point what PC user does not have a mouse in 2020? Or at the very least a tracking pad of sorts?) So for me the presents issues have really no bearing on my usage of the platform. Aside from the aforementioned lack of forum access. That's just me though, different strokes for different folks as the saying goes.

The slow disc access issue you speak of is rather interesting, I would have to assume this is hardware related however. As I can only tell you that this is certainly not the case for me. Steam takes a shed load longer to open, update (and spam advertising) than GoG does to start up in my case. That said it's not like Steam is particularly slow either just a damn sight longer than GoG.Given this and the mouse issue would I be correct in my assumption that you are using a laptop with an HDD rather than a SSD? OR at the very least not using an SSD?? (purely curiosity on my behalf don't feel obliged to respond if you value your privacy in this regard)

I would also point out however that at some point there will only be a 2.0, and to assure all these issues various people have had, and/or sill have get solved. It likely seemed prudent to roll it out to all users. That said I can see why some would be irritated by it. However the other side of the coin is that this is inevitable at some point. Whilst it is still in beta, issues should be less surprising. Rather than role it out as complete and finished with bugs remaining, where people would be upset thinking that it was flawless. As is often the case with games when PC gaming. Though perhaps it could have been done more tactfully too as it did seem to rub many the wrong way undoubtedly. That mush aside this is likely the best way to get more people to experience 2.0 and unforeseen issues. PC is a very complex and varied platform after all. The many different setups with various combinations of hardware and software will without fail mean some people will have issues where others do not be it for the GoG platform or a game or any software really.

For this reason I hope all users with issues (serious and trivial alike) report them on the official thread for doing so with as much detail as possible (such as including specs for hardware and software like OS etc). This will serve to make the platform better and more accessible and user friendly for all gamers. You'll find it's much better and even more useful to be proactive rather than reactive.
Yama-Kami: Inherently nothing "runs" while uninstalled rather.... One would think that much goes without saying.