So, one of GOG employees just commented on the Linux support wish, with this to say:
So, the announcement on the 18th will be probably disappointing for most of us. Unless they're just doing one of their bad PR stunts here.
Source: http://www.gog.com/en/wishlist/site/add_linux_versions_of_games Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
QuoteWe've seen a lot more of you guys voting on this wish recently and I thought it was only fair for me to update you. Linux is a great platform, and we love how much passion you guys are showing for it here on our wishlist. We definitely know that it's one of the top things our community wants from us, but it's also really difficult to bring the GOG.com level of support and ease-of-use to the wide variety of distros that are commonly used by Linux users. If we're able to bring GOG.com games to Linux--and we're constantly evaluating ways that we can do this--we want to make sure that we're doing it the GOG.com way: simple, easy, and it "just works." I'm not telling you guys to give up hope--we know how much you want this--but what I am saying is that this is harder to support than it might seem initially, and we're not ready to move to support Linux officially just yet.
So, the announcement on the 18th will be probably disappointing for most of us. Unless they're just doing one of their bad PR stunts here.
Source: http://www.gog.com/en/wishlist/site/add_linux_versions_of_games Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
Patreon
PayPal
I mean, being an ultra-vocal minority doesn't make us any less of a minority. And it's not like innoextract and basic .conf modification are that hard.
And WINE is no proper way to actually support GNU/Linux.
And there are more indie games available for Mac than for GNU/Linux.
And Windows 8 is around the corner, while Windows 7 still isn't supported by them.
Non-news. Unfortunately.
(still, thanks for the report ^^)
And well, no, not really. However, Linux users are not in a minority on their forums, and judging by the number of posts, it might be around 10% of their user base.
Still, I said from the start to assume the most likely, and this is the confirmation then. They are standing by their points from I think back in July or something. Too bad, but honestly, can't they for once do it half-assedly and just support one distro? They claim they'd have to support Ubuntu, Fedora, Arch, Mint, Debian, Red Hat, CentOS and a bunch of others...
I can understand the disappointment, but it still requires QA, it still requires packaging (unless they go with .tar.gz, but then you can be sure there'll be some whining from people who'd prefer .deb/.rpm and to hell with other distros), it still requires support, if they want it to run from the get-go it requires a standalone dosbox (and then say hello to problems in the long run, Loki and LGP have proven it more often than not)... Asking is the FIRST step in a LONG process if they want to give the same quality for GNU/Linux as for Windows.
"JUST ASK"? :rolleyes:
I'm with GOG on this one. I'd rather see them take their time than rush it and support *Ubuntu*. Ubuntu is NOT GNU/Linux. It's ONE GNU/Linux variant. Truth is, the simple fact they see it that way instead of "oh well let's support Ubuntu and f*** the others" like so many others is a great relief to me.
Sure, they could make things easier with simple zip files as far as DOS games are concerned (as a temporary workaround/helper, I mean). But I don't mind innoextracting their packages and cp/vim a common launcher to point to the conf. Never had any problems with that.
And Windows games? I don't WINE (anymore). So I couldn't care less. Things will get tough when they start with it... You can be sure there'll be whiners complaining that it's WINE. Limbo anyone? :/
And I'm quite unsure about our market share on GOG. Until I see an official statement about that, I won't trust any votes or... well, pretty much anything.
That doesn't mean I don't want them to support the penguin. It just so happens that being rude and lacking patience never helped developers and publishers come around to it.
Mostly agree with what you are saying - however, the fact that Loki games are having trouble running for some users (personally never had that many issues myself though) over ten years after release does not really indicate a problem with their methods. GoG was founded because of compatibility problems on the Microsoft end, so I do not see this as being a real bane for Linux.
If they could get the rights to Loki's old games (not that I ever expect that to happen, but I would be so happy if they did) they could easily take the ports and rerelase them in the manner that liflg already does (only this time actually being able to sell the game data!) without much effort - but what little effort they would invest would certainly be much appreciated.
That is really the point of the service. At least it was - I understand they have branched out a bit from their original goals. But that is what I would really like to see.
And that falls right into the "support" category. That kind of workaround will work for some, others will need the lib folder, some will have to use padsp/pasuspender while others are still using ALSA, and so on. An Arch x64 running on XFCE without compositing and on ALSA isn't an Ubuntu x86 with Unity and Pulse.
I wish it was as simple as shipping your own libraries and so on. Unfortunately, it isn't. That's my main concern. Even though DOS games should be pretty much unaffected by this. I mean, regressions aren't legion on that end.
But they'll be on their own for most titles, methinks. I don't see Ubisoft giving them support for this old game that has weird behaviour on this and that distro. Even some indie/shareware titles can go wrong pretty quickly (see Sokoban by DanSoft and its libboost problems). It still requires some staff on GOG's end, and isn't as easy as "just asking". :)
Maybe we could knock the Linux activity up a notch on their forums? Provide info on running each game on Linux and help, make threads on each forums for each game and we could show them we are there and active. Maybe would lead them actually invest time into Linux. Just no spamming!
All they have to do to start is say "Hey - we'll support the DOS box games to start. Here's a forum, here's a .tar.gz of the dos files. Please submit instructions for various distros on how to get dosbox and/or gameX working and we'll post it in a support site/wiki/something".
Within a day, I'd bet they assign some wiki editors for this to compile the docs (and probably be overwhelmed :) ). BUT - *they* have to:
Take files they already have, and make .tar.gz of them.
*JUST ASK* for assistance
Compile the docs/how-to's/etc that the community will provide.
Heck, they could even go the route of "Hey - we'll trial this for DOS games. We'll provide the basics, you guys provide the instructions". Again, not hard. Just some time invested on both sides.
Starting with the DOS games makes it super easy for GOG and Linux users:
DosBox is already well established in Linux, so dependency suprises should be kept to a bare minimum.
There's plenty of existing DOS items in GOG to use.
Providing a .tar.gz of the game files is lower cost than packaging the game with a tweaked DosBox.
There are already Linux users buying DOS games there (albeit not officially sanctioned).
GOG can get a great feel for how this could go while having a pretty easy out.
That last point probably needs some clarification. If for some reason GOG thinks the venture is worth it, neither party is really left in the lurch - existing doc's could be made downloadable and .tar.gz (or even just .zip) still left as an option to DosBox users. (To be honest, if it wasn't going to work out, I would guess they'd simply leave it at DosBox games being 'best effort' supported and let the community police it's own issues.)
Any doc's can be moved to another forum or made downloadable.
Also, while I'm sure people would be upset that 'official' support for Linux DosBox compatible games were dropped, they really would not be worse off than before. Probably a bit better (since there were at least some doc's now).
Does all this take some thought to actually put into action? Yes.
Does it take GOG working with the community and vice-versa? Yes.
Will it take time to fully work out? Yes.
Is it hard? Nope.
Don't accept the 'it's too hard' excuse. Call it out as 'BS'. Companies like GOG just need to understand we'll help make it easy if they would 'JUST ASK'.
I mean, really, 7000+ customers basically stating "here, take my money" and they reply "oh, no...that would be too hard".
Still, there are a few things that are wrong - to me, at least.
* Community support? Fine and dandy. But it's still no support. Not sensu stricto, at least. Saying "got a problem? Check that with the community, we don't got nothing to do with that" isn't exactly professional. You can't blame GOG for not trusting the community either. The communities are full of helpful people, people who know their way around the system... But also full of noobs, and a handful of trolls. Not good enough.
* DOSBox .tar.gz - can't say I disagree with you on this particular point. Though I'm not certain you won't have people crying out loud that they want proper packaging and a ppa and then some. And maybe even some money too. May sound sarcastic, but it happens a bit too often. And some people couldn't ldd a binary to save their own life. Not sure they're not one and the same too. I tend to think .tgz is THE way to go as it's universal, where packages aren't, but how many don't?
* Then there are the OTHER games. Indies? Sure, enough of them have native binaries out there. But people will probably come on the GOG forums for support. If only the devs can solve it, there's no guarantee they'll be checking the forums often enough... Which may - and probably will, as GNU/Linux isn't exactly the engineer's hobby OS anymore - lead to further frustration. Then there's WINE. And the rest.
* GOG, as you say, is a company. They won't take "go to the community forum". Heck, I wouldn't. I want a SPOC. SomeONE I can trust. SomeONE I can build a commercial relationship with. That is ONE person or a relative small group of people. A helpdesk, one may say. Because tons of people can click on the shiny icons, half of those people are able to copy/paste weird lines in the black window and a quarter of those people are able to write said weird things themselves doesn't make them a SPOC. It doesn't make them a POC at all. As helpful as they may be. When GOG files a bug that impacts 85% of distro X users, they want it to be treated as it is: a P1 ticket, solved ASAP with strict SLA, with someone who can keep them updated on how things are going and can be held accountable if it turns into a PR nightmare.
* They *DO* have to support multiple distros. Saying it's unneeded is saying "who gives a f*** what version of windows?'. A Win7 won't have the same issues as a Vista or an XP. Heck, I'm willing to bet a good chunk of my pay your kernel isn't my kernel. I'd probably win.
All that you propose isn't bad either, mind you. But it would only be good enough for unofficial support. And are the publishers GOG works with willing to support THAT? Heh. Ubisoft doesn't even know how to treat customers right, and you expect them to understand such a thing as "unofficial, unsupported versions"? :|
I still don't understand why can't they just have a .zip/.tgz alongside the .exes. I hate the fact that they need to be installed to be unpacked right now, which means if I suddenly decide to install a game, I have to have wine.
And about multiple distros - maybe just the biggest ones? Ubuntu, Fedora and SUSE. That should provide enough coverage in packages that everyone will be happy, and then it's solved. Three distros is still much easier than three Windows versions.
Maybe in the meantime, we could get a nice wiki going, and just provide best configs, share launchers and tips on running the games. Would it be possible for one to start such a thing? Perhaps PCGamingWiki would be of some help, or maybe one of the porters that runs multiple wikis for Linux users about games? I'd gladly contribute by writing, testing and getting others on board, if we can get the ball rolling.
That much is true. But then again, there's no telling who the 7000 voters are, for starters, and how they'd interact. I know I haven't used the forums so much, I probably would if GNU/Linux support happened and would certainly help where I can, as best I can, but what of others?
They don't. Just install innoextract, and run innoextract ./setup_game.exe :)
Mmh... Yes, no, maybe. I don't have a problem with it. I'm a tinkerer at heart, so anything would do. I see a hint of a problem though. No offense, but Ubuntu pretty much hosts both chaff and wheat. I don't know about SuSE. Fedora's more for the happy regular user in my experience. How do we distribute? .deb/.rpm? Puh-lease, no. You may support only those officially, but you can't be unaware that others exist. Plus, you're forcing people to install in a predetermined folder, usually with admin rights. Maybe I'm a grumpy old fool, but a "portable" version, inno installer, good ol' sh with tgz, anything would be better. You'll find just as many who'd rather have packages. How do we solve that? Three versions? Thrice the work. :/
That would be a good thing, regardless of whether GOG sees it, acknowledges it and thinks about it. But don't forget that GOG is a business and has partners. It doesn't just depend on them. I sincerely think they need professional support before they can get this rolling. Not just for themselves, but also because a community isn't good enough for the fools out there who allow GOG to distribute their games. Seriously, I feel everyone's shooting the messenger here. ;)
Tim Schafer's words come to mind:
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/06/humble-bundle-devs-talk-gaming-on-linux
I think that basically sums everything up quite nicely. Just replace HIB with whoever has the knowledge and experience to step in and fill this particular void.
Still, to a certain extent, GOG has relied on the community to do those things, and then sometimes officially integrated the features. Could we not potentially just try doing a wiki for the sake of other users? We might be able to see then some actual numbers in regards of Linux users on GOG.
The community can and will step up if asked. If nothing else, it's a great way to get the ball rolling.
I do agree that leaving everything to the community may not best for the long run. However, it's a fine way to start and one that I think the Linux customers of GOG would be happy to start with.
Beemer
As a beginning template, here's some stuff I came up for Arch Linux (which could be edited for other distros or made more generic to fit most distros):
====Arch====
=====Requirements=====
DOSBox
* Available from the 'community' Arch repository
* Current package version (as of 10/16/2012) is 0.74-3
* Install using 'pacman -S dosbox' or, if using non-root account, 'sudo pacman -S dosbox'
* Always make sure to check your desired game [http://www.dosbox.com DOSBox] for version compatibility.
=====Optional=====
WINE
* Can be utilized to install GOG executables from which you can then extract the files needed to use with DOSBox
* Available from the 'community' or 'multilib' (for 64-bit users) Arch repositories
* Current package version (as of 10/16/2012) is 1.5.14-2
* Install using 'pacman -S wine' or, if using non-root account, 'sudo pacman -S dosbox'
InnoExtract
* Can extract the files from an 'Inno Setup' executable, with which you can then extract the files needed to use with DOSBox
* Available from the Arch User Repository
* Current package version (as of 10/16/2012) is 1.3-1
* Install package by downloading the package from AUR and using 'pacman -U packagename' or by using an AUR utility such as 'packer' or 'yaourt'
So we could paste that into games as we purchase and test. Any scripts that help (for example, backing up save games - StarFlight comes to mind...) with that game can go in a sub-page.