A lot of this is being replaced by https://devportal.gog.com/welcome if devs integrate Galaxy. The problem is you still have to log into a website to upload a patch, from what I gather there is nothing like SteamPipe which basically allows developers to automate all of this without having to talk to someone at Valve or without having to access a website. And from a few devs I spoke to the Dev portal is buggy and they had issues with it. Apparently Galaxy's SDK is "weird" compared to Steam's but is essentially a clone of it.

But building infrastructure like what Steam has takes a lot of time, but apparently they are working on it somewhat now.


EDIT: It was confirmed by GOG that they DO have a SteamPipe type feature.

On Galaxy? There is no logical reason to have a Q/A for Galaxy patches if that is the case. I can understand needing Q/A for classic installers, but Galaxy has a role back feature for this very reason.

If GOG is still requiring a Q/A for Galaxy patches using the dev portal I can understand the dev frustration. That's just stupid.

No no, not for galaxy, for ANYTHING. If a dev wants to release a random bugfix, for example, it has to go through QA. But, yeah, i understand the QA. The QA is kinda necessary, but i'm afraid that devs who refuse to use galaxy might get slowlaned as low priority, since they really want to push galaxy. Even if that's not the case, there should be a method for pushing patches and fixes and having them up on gog before QA "gets around to it."

The fact that we rarely get any info from the devs smells of NDA. Why is it we know so much about steam and their process, but with GOG it's such a big secret? Possibly NDA, which allows everyone to point fingers but no one to know who's really at fault. It's for this reason that i'm afraid to reveal my sources, because i don't want them in trouble, especially as the most useful source of information is actually still uploading updates to GOG. If someone could prove to me that there's no NDA, i have some interesting screenshots of a dev praising gog that would be incredibly enlightening to both gog supporters and gog haters.

But it boils down to this: what we do know is that devs are a bit picky about update release times, and we also know that gog has a QA that buffer all updates before they go live on GOG. This alone can create a ton of issues. This could easily be fixed with an unsupported update channel.

So yes for Galaxy? I find that hard to believe, because I've seen patches show up on Galaxy on weekends and during very weird times (like when people at GOG would be limited due to late at night hours). I could be thinking of beta updates but I rarely use that feature. It seems unlikey anyone from GOG would have approved them.

If that is true though... no damn wonder devs aren't releasing patches here. The entire point of Galaxy was to cut out GOG as a middleman. Adding a Q/A process to anything on Galaxy would be stupid, again this is why there is a rollback feature for patches. If a bad patch slips through a user can rollback to an ealier build.

I'll pay GOG not to provide that level of "support".

Because GOG is afraid to let their buyers know just how outdated they are compaed to Steam. Their API's & SDK should be publically available, and in-regards to their API they should have a wiki like Steam that is public.

From what I have seen, more often than not, GoG Galaxy patches a game shortly after Steam does, talking about with in 15 to 30 minutes afterwards. This tells me that GoG Galaxy has a similar type system as Steam does. It is the stand alone installers that come some days after the patch actually releases, and no doubt that has to do with making the installers and then QA testing the installers.

Yes that is my experience too, which tells me this Q/A doesn't exist for patches submitted via the Galaxy dev portal. Galaxy does have a similar system to Steam, but nowhere as advanced and like I said you have to log into a website to upload them.

All updates, whether you're galaxy or not. Updates do seem to come faster on galaxy, but there's still QA in between, unless that was a recent change since I last talked to the dev who was open about all this (less than a year ago). Everyone knows how oudated it is, but we give it a pass because it's still in initial development. It's no more behind than that random browser project that random shmuck just started coding from scratch, yesterday. Or the new android phone code. Or that random app someone's building. Presumably, it must reach a certain level of development before we can say it's behind. It' just really, really slow.
This behavior must've been changed, then. Has anyone done any research into galaxy versions with a significant update distance from classic installers? Is this a thing?

What do you mean exactly?

From what linuxvangog said, the recent installer updates (the ones messing up Linux users) will allow GOG to release classic installers faster after an update releases on Galaxy.

https://gog.com/forum/general/linuxvangog_fantastic_linux_mac_guy_and_where_to_find_him/post140.

The few times I have looked, it was 2-5 days between a patch releasing on GoG Galaxy and the Stand alone Installer releasing. With the GoG Galaxy patch releasing with in 30 minutes after Steam release of the patch.

now that I think of it, there was 1 developer for a game fairly recently that literally stated that it would take some hours for GoG Galaxy would get the patch because his internet was slow. I'll try to remember what game that was and see if I can find the post.

Presumably he uploaded to steam first, and otherwise had the same problem with steam. I can't imagine why GOG would be special in that regard.

Specifically, since GOG is QAing classic installers, i'm curious if anyone has done research into seeing if there are any games that might have a larger spread than just a few days.

The devs aren't crazy, and we know the criticism they're giving GOG isn't because they suddenly changed their mind on DRM. It seems logical, then to narrow down specifically what the problem is. Since the devs aren't talking (for the most part), and since GOG isn't talking, we have to investigate all the avenues that are available to us.

There seems to be some confusion. Not necessary intentional, just some information noise, somewhere. Fact: games here DO manage to have timely updates. Example: Planet nomads (in-dev). They now entered different development phase, but they used to publish new builds every thursday. Same time both on Steam and on GOG, with same features. Available as Galaxy update immediately, few more hours for the packaged installer to become available. If the acceptance took 14 days, this would simply not be possible. Maybe developers have to do something on their side for this to enable this mode of operation, but the way does exist.

Would be nice to know what it is. At least, for the other devs. And hopefully it's not something too involved: remember, GOG needs to make the process as painless as possible for the devs and customers both (since devs are just another type of customer).

No, what I try to say is:
The reasons given for abandoning gog are
1. "complains and even refund requests because of missing achievements, workshop/mod support, cloud save and so on"
2. "Adding these GOG features to SC is indeed possible, but it would require a playerbase to cover the expenses. This has unfortunately not been the case"
3. "added workload of supporting 2 platforms instead of 1"

And I don't recognize these as valid reasons. I think going In-Dev was just a bad decision for this dev.
@1. I don't want to comment on the validity of the refund reasons, BUT I think many refunds are to be expected per se thanks to the loose refund policy of In-Dev games.
@2. I have a feeling that In-Dev is not very popular around here, so I'd also expect a smaller playerbase - most people will probably have put it on the wishlist.
@3. Yeah, well. Two is more than one. Caring for an In-Dev game involves probably more work with the platforms than a finished game.

*shrug*

Are you talking about this dev?
https://www.gog.com/forum/ghost_of_a_tale/about_the_update_delay_between_gog_builds_and_steam_builds/page1

yes, that is the one I was talking about. Thank you.

I don't have the GoG release of that game, so I wonder if they got that massive lag resolved?

What solution has gog.com given to this problem?

I have read many things here, I do not know if they will be true but I think gog has some things to improve so that developers are more comfortable on this platform.

On the other hand it is sad that there are developers who want to be in gog, with small indie games that are creating a good community behind them and whose games are not on gog.com because they have rejected them and that a developer whose game is accepted wants to leave and abandon the development of his game in gog.