GOG Galaxy, version 2...

[Rath Darkblade]

Hmm. Does anyone know if it is possible to use GOG Galaxy in "offline mode", like you can with Steam?

I used to run Galaxy v. 1.2, and never had to log in. Now that the v. 2 update has been pushed through, I can't play any games without logging in and putting up with GOG's advertising and videos etc. It's very disconcerting.

So ... any ideas? *crosses fingers* Thanks!

[Tawmis]

I've not used the GoG Galaxy. I always download the game files and install directly, with no Gog Galaxy or anything.

So perhaps someone who uses it might have a better answer.

[MusicallyInspired]

You don't need Galaxy to run GOG games....well, most of them anyway.

[Rath Darkblade]

I know that, but I prefer to use something to keep all the GOG games in one place (like the Steam client does).

If I uninstall Galaxy, can I still do that somehow? Sorry, I'm not sure how.

[Tawmis]

I know that, but I prefer to use something to keep all the GOG games in one place (like the Steam client does).

If I uninstall Galaxy, can I still do that somehow? Sorry, I'm not sure how.

You download the offline versions - and just install it on your computer - and click the short cuts on your desktop to launch the game...............?

[MusicallyInspired]

No. If you want the accessibility of Galaxy then prepare for some online connectivity requirements.

[Rath Darkblade]

No. If you want the accessibility of Galaxy then prepare for some online connectivity requirements.

Oh, drat. Galaxy has some good accessibility features, I agree. But Galaxy version 1.2 had a thing called "offline mode", which meant you didn't have to be logged in all the time. (I think Steam also has something like that - see below).

steam.png (6.95 KiB) Viewed 10253 times

So if Steam has it, and Galaxy 1.2 used to have it ... why did GOG force people to log in before they could play the games they paid for? It makes no sense.

The things I liked about Galaxy (before the upgrade) were that compared to Steam, it was lightweight and quick to open. (I also liked the fact that it didn't force me to be logged in, but then, neither was Steam).

With this new upgrade, GOG threw all that away. Galaxy now takes a longer time to open and forces me to be online. Why, I wonder? Is it so that they could shove some advertisements down my throat?

[Tawmis]

With this new upgrade, GOG threw all that away. Galaxy now takes a longer time to open and forces me to be online. Why, I wonder? Is it so that they could shove some advertisements down my throat?

I doubt if it's anything to do about ads.

From what I see, it syncs save games to the GoG cloud, does achievements for some games, ensures you're running the latest version of your game, etc.
However, on their site, I did some looking around found where you can leave feedback. They also have a forum specific to Galaxy 2.0. In there, on their FAQ I found:

How do I revert to Galaxy 1.2?
For now, this is working:
Download 1.2 here:
https://content-system.gog.com/open_lin ... .67.58.exe
Install, but do not allow it to run on system startup and do not allow it to run now. Add /runWithoutUpdating to Galaxy's shortcut. It will look something like this:
"C:\Program Files (x86)\GOG Galaxy\GalaxyClient.exe" /runWithoutUpdating
This will prevent 1.2 from auto updating, but you will sometimes receive popups asking if you want to update to 2.0 now or later. Deleting or renaming C:\ProgramData\GOG.com\Galaxy\redists\GalaxyUpdater.exe will remove these popups.

Which was posted two days ago. So if you want to go back to 1.2, there's that.

You also may want to upvote the wishlist to stay with 1.2. (And probably comment why, adds some weight).

I did discover that the 2.0 client is in BETA, which may explain the issues people are seeing and why some features aren't there.

[Rath Darkblade]

Thank you, Tawm! Yes, I upvoted the wishlist, and will downgrade soon.

[Tawmis]

Thank you, Tawm! Yes, I upvoted the wishlist, and will downgrade soon.

Glad to help.

[Rath Darkblade]

Thanks again, Tawm! I downgraded last night, and everything went just fine.

Now for the hard part: making sure GOG don't do something sneaky again. Is that possible? The whole thing started because they sneakily updated me to their beta when I wasn't looking ...

[Tawmis]

Thanks again, Tawm! I downgraded last night, and everything went just fine.
Now for the hard part: making sure GOG don't do something sneaky again. Is that possible? The whole thing started because they sneakily updated me to their beta when I wasn't looking ...

According to that bit I found; make sure to run the command:

"C:\Program Files (x86)\GOG Galaxy\GalaxyClient.exe" /runWithoutUpdating

This will prevent 1.2 from auto updating, but you will sometimes receive popups asking if you want to update to 2.0 now or later. Deleting or renaming C:\ProgramData\GOG.com\Galaxy\redists\GalaxyUpdater.exe will remove these popups.

[DeadPoolX]

The "/runWithoutUpdating" trick doesn't work. I haven't tried deleting (or renaming) GalaxyUpdater.exe, but that might work... either that or the program will crash when it tries to force an update.

I didn't really like Galaxy, but it was useful for updates. Now since they've removed the Downloader, the only way to download games on GOG (in a single EXE) is to use Galaxy. Otherwise you need to download a million smaller files, which is nuts and requires babysitting the damn thing.

As for Galaxy 2.0, I like it less than the old version, especially since there's no official support for Windows 7. Yeah, yeah... I know, MS stopped support for Win7. I don't want to hear it because I'm not upgrading until MS removes all the incredibly invasive data mining "features" of Win10. That thing is a privacy nightmare.

Galaxy 2.0 still runs on Win7, but there's no telling if that'll continue, so I probably won't purchase anything again on GOG.

As for Windows 10... Maia has Win10 on her work laptop and absolutely despises it. She's spent hours disabling crap and editing the registry to make the OS usable without it constantly spying on her.

If more software worked with Linux, we'd go with Ubuntu or some other distro for our desktops. Unfortunately, Linux only has moderate support at best and Mac OS is a no-go. So we're sticking Win7 for now.

[Tawmis]

The "/runWithoutUpdating" trick doesn't work. I haven't tried deleting (or renaming) GalaxyUpdater.exe, but that might work... either that or the program will crash when it tries to force an update.

Interesting. The post I got that from was from like 2 days ago (well, now like 5 days ago).

I didn't really like Galaxy, but it was useful for updates. Now since they've removed the Downloader, the only way to download games on GOG (in a single EXE) is to use Galaxy. Otherwise you need to download a million smaller files, which is nuts and requires babysitting the damn thing.

The files are broken into 4GB files. So usually one small .EXE then all the 4GB files that go with it (depending on the size of the game). Not a big issue for the older games, as they're typically just one small .EXE game still; but the newer games (DragonAge: Origins, for example, that's gonna be the case of a small .EXE with several 4GB files to go with it). But there's a reason for it:


The answer has to do with maximum compatibility and the limitations of the filesystem used on your memory card. By far the most widely compatible filesystem these days is known as FAT32 (for 32-bit File Allocation Table).

FAT32 is quite old–Microsoft first rolled it out with Windows 95–and it lacks some of the sophistication and features of newer file systems such as exFAT. Nevertheless, it has things going for it: it’s reliable, it offers solid performance, and, most importantly, it is very widely compatible. That last point is crucial, because it means that you can put your memory card in pretty much any computer and be able to read it without having to install extra software. Whether you’re using Windows, Mac, or Linux, a FAT32 external hard drive or thumb drive or memory card should work. So nearly all consumer devices aim to be compatible with FAT32.

But FAT32 has a limitation hardcoded into it: the maximum file size that it can handle is 4GB. Back in Windows 95 days, that seemed pretty huge. These days, not so much.

As for Windows 10... Maia has Win10 on her work laptop and absolutely despises it. She's spent hours disabling crap and editing the registry to make the OS usable without it constantly spying on her.

Out of curiosity - since it's her work laptop - does her work also put on additional software to protect it? CASB? Carbon Black? Firewalls? Antimalware? Blah blah? That's also going to obviously put a dent in performance and also has "spying" capability that her company probably collects to to know what their employees are doing.

I, like you, am also still on Windows 7. Also because I am not a fan of how Windows 10 is designed. But soon enough, if you plan to put your Windows 7 on the internet, there will be a security hole, I am sure, found that will allow potential hackers to "spy" on you much worse than Microsoft. Like I said, I am in the same boat, and will probably ride this machine until it dies. But eventually, should it die before I die, I will end up on Windows 10 probably.

Also every time I see you post on here (because it's so infrequent) - this pops into my head...

"A WILD DEADPOOLX HAS APPEARED!"

[Rath Darkblade]

@ graphic. I like it, Tawm. *thumbs up*

Interesting info about FAT32 - but I thought no Windows OS used that filesystem after Windows XP? I know that Windows NT 4.0 and Windows 2000 used NTFS 5 (as did XP and Vista ... I won't even go into the monstrosity that was Windows Me. Shudder).

As for Win7, I'm pretty sure it uses NTFS 5 or later. FAT32 wastes much less disk space on large partitions, but None of the FAT file systems (FAT16 or FAT32) provide the file security, compression, fault tolerance, or crash recovery abilities that NTFS does.

As for upgrading, I agree with you both. I never considered upgrading from Win7 to Win8.1 or (shudder) Win10 - not just because of the privacy concerns, not just because it looks and feels terrible (compared to Win7 and earlier), but because it's so bloated ... urgh. Even the default start menu is overly complex, and for no reason.

I have to use Win10 at work, and like Maia, I despise it. I try to do as little with the Start menu as possible.

As for all the bloatware, the horrific look-and-feel, and the privacy concerns ... sigh. There are some things that, for the sake of secure employment, I simply have to put up with.