Check out our Monthly Survey Page to see what our users are running.
We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. See more here.
Well folks a lot of you saw this one coming, GOG.com have officially responded to us to state that Linux support just isn't happening anytime soon. Quite sad news really, was hopefull on this one since they are such a big name and a pretty decent store too.

Here's the message I got from Trevor Longino, their Head of PR and Marketing, with thanks to Piotr Szczesniak who also works in the PR dept.
Trevor Longino GOG.comHi Liam,

Unfortunately not much has changed in our stance towards supporting Linux in the last few months and there is one main reason for that. Since our birth over 5 years ago we have always provided full customer support for all games we have released. That is not going to change. For every game we release we provide a money-back guarantee: if we can't get the game working on the customer's computer with the help of our support team, we return the money. The architecture of Linux with many common distros, each of them updating fairly often, makes it incredibly challenging for any digital distribution company to be able to properly test the game in question, and then provide support for the release--all of which our users are accustomed to.

Sure, we could probably release a client and sell the games and let Linux users worry about the rest. We don't consider it, however, a viable option for the business model we have followed so far. Apparently our model has its drawbacks, as we cannot make everyone happy, but, as of now, we don't plan on introducing Linux support in the foreseeable future.


So folks no matter the hints, you have it direct from their PR head.

This line is the bit that gets me:
QuoteThe architecture of Linux with many common distros, each of them updating fairly often, makes it incredibly challenging for any digital distribution company to be able to properly test the game in question, and then provide support for the release--all of which our users are accustomed to

It has often bugged me just how many distributions there are, but it's more of a problem with their own policies of refunding if they cannot get it to work for you which is a good policy, but on Linux it is fair enough that it could be trouble for them when someone tries to install x game on "Look Ma I Built A Distro v4" that has some crazy new configuration somewhere.

I will just leave this here:
image

UPDATE #1, I asked if it was basically the amount of distro's and how often they are updated that's really the issue:
Piotr Szczesniak GOG.comIt's a bit more than that.

There are a number of distros. We can support just one (which is how Steam is doing it), but since we believe strongly in freedom of choice, that's not our preference. On the other hand, supporting everything in the world is more burden than any business could assume So, the last time we looked into this, we investigated supporting three common ones: Mint, Debian, and Google's Chrome OS.  We researched the number of OS updates, how often they occurred, when (and how frequently) various libraries are surpassed and deprecated. We then researched how often, for example, updates to these versions of Linux caused problems with DOSBox, SCUMMVM, and other tools that we make use of for our remastering process. 

There is a difference in GOG.com's business model from Steam or any other distributor out there. *We* are on the hook for support of these games. And we update our support as the OSes that our games are running on are updated. That means that, unlike a developer or any other distributor, when we release on a Linux distro, we don't have to test once and then we're done. Each time there is a major update in an OS that we support that changes compatibility, we have to devote substantial time and resources to updating our catalog to work with the update. Sometimes, it may even occur that we cannot fix it in-house but rather have to spend the money to get it fixed by outside resources or else we'd have to remove the compatibility for the game from its game card. Imagine if we had 400 games from our 600+ game catalog supported on Linux and we found that a third of them no longer worked in a distro that we supported. Imagine the time and effort that would go into re-building 130 games.

Now take that kind of time and effort--time and effort that is not required by other OSes except on a one every four or five years' basis--and think of the cost we associate with it vs. the possible revenue that we might earn from Linux. Even if, on average, a Linux distro only has big updates as often as, say, Mac OSX does (every four or so years), unless these big updates are synchronized across the distros (which, historically, they're not) that means we're seeing the need to remaster some of our games every 14 - 16 months. 

Until we can figure out something like a better way to automate testing and building games for GOG.com, there's no way that the economics of Linux support make sense for us. That said, we do know that there are plenty of people who want to be able to play their games with Linux-native support from us, and we continue to look for ways where we can automate this until it reaches a point where it is something that we believe we can do and not lose money at it.

So a long winded answer to basically say "Yes Linux is updated too often for us".

Strikes me as odd since even Windows which was once known for being exceptionally slow to make major OS updates has committed itself to having a much more regular release schedule now, along with Mac having yearly releases.

So, I have asked about that as well and I have also pointed out that Ubuntu for example has LTS (Long Term Support) releases which are meant for things like this, so people don't have to update every 6 months.

UPDATE #2:
Piotr Szczesniak GOG.comNo, it's not.

One, because Windows' faster releases are promised, but I'll believe it when I see it. As for Mac OS:  "The desktop-oriented version, OS X, followed in March 2001 supporting the new Aqua user interface. Since then, seven more distinct "end-user" and "server" versions have been released." (seven versions released over 12 years or about one every other year).

Also, as I just noted below, to support Linux in a manner that we feel is consistent with our standards, we would need to support three distros each of which sticks to its own schedule and period for updates, and each of which brings in a tiny part of the revenue of Windows or even Mac. So, as I noted, it's a question of economics. Until we solve things our own end for how to make this scale economically, I don't see it happening any time soon. That said, we are investigating how to do this for a variety of issues beyond Linux support, so don't give up hope. Just don't expect it tomorrow, either.

About his Mac point - It was one every other year back in 2009 but Mac now does yearly updates, 2011, 2012 and 2013 will have all had Mac OS X releases and they have said it will be yearly.

So basically guys, if you're looking for native Linux support out of the box you'll have to look elsewhere than GOG for now.

We have Steam, Desura, Gameolith, ShinyLoot, FireFlower Games and one day soon IndieCity too. One day GOG.com may support us and I will thank them when they do and we can put all this to rest!

I hope one day they support us but considering their answers I don't ever see it happening. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly checked on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly.
See more from me
The comments on this article are closed.
182 comments
Page: «8/19»
  Go to:

DrMcCoy Sep 6, 2013
Quoting: darkone778Some of these developers have complained specifically about the debugging process using GDB (GNU Project Debugger)
Funny, whenever I have to use Windows, I bemoan the lack of great debugging tools like valgrind.
Liam Dawe Sep 6, 2013
Quoting: darkone778So I would recommend that GOL start actively asking developers their opinions on developing on Linux. I know in my upcoming interview with Hugh Jeremy from Unknown Worlds. Here is just one example of the questions I asked. 


There have been some developers who have brought their games over from Windows to Linux. Some of these developers have complained specifically about the debugging process using GDB (GNU Project Debugger) and the lack of good interfacing IDE's being the biggest determent to bringing games to Linux. Whats your take on the subject?
I may be mistaken here but why is developing directly on Linux coming into question? This isn't about making games on Linux directly but about supporting games that do run on Linux already.

A valid question to ask for another subject (creating games on Linux) but it's not really to do with this discussion.

Quoting: DrMcCoy
Quoting: TheEnigmaticTLet's take an answer like helsinki_harbor's from right above me: these are all generally community-run projects.
You know what else are community-run projects? ScummVM. And DOSBox.
 
 Let's suppose ScummVM pulls an FFmpeg and splits down the middle.
Exactly what I pointed out in an earlier comment, waiting for a reply on that one too.
helsinki_harbour Sep 6, 2013
Quoting: SilviuYou complained that Linux changes too fast, yes? Mint 13 is one of the LTS releases (based on Ubuntu 12.04 LTS), will be supported until 2017 and the base won't ever change. Only security updates will trickle down. No new features, no new bugs.

It's only frozen (apps too)...and still it's only one distro, the distro/DE/etc fragmentation problem is not solved.

The real solution for the ugly compromise of "app-bleeding-edgeness" and system stability is to separate the upgrade cycles of core system (slow) and apps (fast) by a half rolling release model. For that also a stable interfaces between both needs to be defined which would be an opportunity of fixing the distro fragmentation in general.
Guest Sep 6, 2013
The distro fragmentation is not a problem it's a feature and it's strength. There is a purpose for everything in the "chaos". There is a purpose to testbeds such as OpenSuSE and Fedora. There is a purpose to the "nutters" running a rolling distro such as Gentoo or Arch just as there is a purpose to Mint, Ubuntu and others. None of those projects are out there because some nerd wanted a bigger e-peen.

The "fragmentation" has already been mostly settled with people choosing Ubuntu and its derivatives. Look at the HW survey on Steam if you don't believe me. Ubuntu won, for better or worse.

Note that various "frozen" distros have ways to unfreeze and refresh applications (even parts of the core if someone so desires). OpenSuSE's build service and Ubuntu with its PPAs come to mind.
STiAT Sep 6, 2013
I'll stick with Steam anyway. I can get Steam running no matter if I use Arch, Chakra or Debian (hopefully soon Tanglu), and distributions get the things running on the different Distributions, as we can see on Steam.
x414e54 Sep 6, 2013
This is basically what the LSB and Steam Runtime, and sonames are for.

Steam Runtime is a set of standard libraries you can ship against and even redistribute yourself for non steam builds. They are guaranteed to always have a version that is compatible with the version you shipped. If there are specific problems with the binary versions on certain systems the run-time can be recompiled for different distributions whilst still maintaining the same binary compatibility to the shipped Program.

The LSB is a guarantee that a set of specific libraries will be available on any conforming Linux Distribution and between versions of that Distribution (which is a huge set) that nothing will become incompatible or deprecated. Any Library not in the LSB you statically link against or dynamically link and redistribute.

There is nothing stopping GOG providing their own Steam Runtime.
Anonymous Sep 6, 2013
Quoting: SilviuThe "fragmentation" has already been mostly settled with people choosing Ubuntu and its derivatives. Look at the HW survey on Steam if you don't believe me. Ubuntu won, for better or worse.

Note that various "frozen" distros have ways to unfreeze and refresh applications (even parts of the core if someone so desires). OpenSuSE's build service and Ubuntu with its PPAs come to mind.

The distro fragmentation is no strength at all. The choice which is important for users is the choice on apps and not the choice on distros. And the distro concept limits the app selection in several ways, one mechanism is that the infrastructure stops scaling around 10,000 apps (ingo molnar Technology: What ails the Linux desktop? Part I. in contrast to a platform structure with ISVs which can easily have millions. See this talk Bringing great apps to ubuntu (around third minute)
ZeroX1987 Sep 6, 2013
Actually I'm not the type to comment on topics like this, but I'll go out of my way this time around. I'm new to this site, no native english speaker and this is my first english post in quite a long time as well so bear with me.

I use Linux OS like Kubuntu and arch with KDE for about 4 years now and am studying computer engineering. Even so, it is obvious to me that i don't quite know a lot about Linux in comparison to some of you guys. So please help me out if I am missing something here.

Reading all this I know one thing for sure:
We have to look at this from both sides of the coin...

This whole topic is not about *we* as a small community against them as businessmen. Being pissed at their decision won't get us anywhere. We are the ones who want something from them, while they are making their decisions, after all. We want more support from them, so we, as gamers, can enjoy what we want to enjoy the most: Games.

Therefore neither a flamewar nor a counter to every argument will get us anywhere. TheEnigmatic came to us after all, even though he knew something like that was coming up. Wouldn't it be wiser to analyze what was said? Actio et Reatio...

Example:
For them, this decision obviously NEEDS to be about money. It simply is their job after all. But there is much more to this: Even IF we have the necessary amount of interest in games AND the necessary amount of money to make them interested, the whole process of support OBVIOUSLY is the actual issue here.

As was said way earlier (too lazy to quote/cite this) we as a community are united AND divided. Our freedom of choice (actually the current system behind it) simply is a curse and a gift at the same time. This whole issue obviously is about the "curse" part right there.
Anonymous Sep 6, 2013
Quoting: x414e54This is basically what the LSB and Steam Runtime, and sonames are for.

Steam Runtime is a set of standard libraries you can ship against and even redistribute yourself for non steam builds. They are guaranteed to always have a version that is compatible with the version you shipped. If there are specific problems with the binary versions on certain systems the run-time can be recompiled for different distributions whilst still maintaining the same binary compatibility to the shipped Program.

The LSB is a guarantee that a set of specific libraries will be available on any conforming Linux Distribution and between versions of that Distribution (which is a huge set) that nothing will become incompatible or deprecated. Any Library not in the LSB you statically link against or dynamically link and redistribute.

There is nothing stopping GOG providing their own Steam Runtime.
Sadly, the LSB has failed since 2006 to enforce a standard platform among the distros, binary deployment of software is still a pain.

Bundleing is nice approach but would need support by the distros... who hate it with passion as such distro agnostic approaches questions their role as central control instance.
Guest Sep 6, 2013
Quoting: AnonymousBundleing is nice approach but would need support by the distros... who hate it with passion as such distro agnostic approaches questions their role as central control instance.

What the? Since when do I need to ask anyone anything about bundling libs in my tarballs/installers? Seriously, WTF? Nobody needs to ask distros for anything. That is the whole point of a bundle.
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Reward Tiers: Patreon. Plain Donations: PayPal.

This ensures all of our main content remains totally free for everyone! Patreon supporters can also remove all adverts and sponsors! Supporting us helps bring good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
The comments on this article are closed.
Buy Games
Buy games with our affiliate / partner links: