Don't want to see articles from a certain category? When logged in, go to your User Settings and adjust your feed in the Content Preferences section where you can block tags!
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 came back to check 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: «13/19»
  Go to:

burzmali Sep 6, 2013
Quoting: DrMcCoy
Quoting: Quote from burzmaliunless you count the cluster of workarounds
This is because NWN was not release with the binary on the disc, you idiot.

This procedure there is actually easier than what you had to do back in 2003.
In 2003, Bioware had a website with instructions, now we have a forum topic with end user workarounds for the bits that no longer work with the archived downloads, that was updated last in 2011 and a quick google shows that it is out-of-date when it comes to multi-arch support.

Oh, but it works on at least 2 distros, and any other, that isn't 64-bit with multi-arch support, and that has easy access to the half dozen or so libraries that seem to have gone out-of-date since the last bundled version.
DrMcCoy Sep 6, 2013
Yes, because BioWare fucked up in that respect. What's your point?
burzmali Sep 6, 2013
Quoting: DrMcCoyYes, because BioWare fucked up in that respect. What's your point?
They failed to support the product over time, GOG is cool in that they do support over time. I'd like to think that the Linux world has evolution to the point that we aren't breaking binaries across the board ever few years, but I can see the hesitation on GOG's behalf.
Kristian Sep 6, 2013
"All of this leads to a single point: the processes are not as simple as you think they are, and the risks are higher than you believe they are. We did not make the decision to move into the MacOS lightly, and it was something that took a lot of time and work to do. If we ever move into the Linux space, it will be because it looks like we have figured out how to add Linux support in a manner that is consistent with our core values, and something that we believe we can be proud of and you can enjoy."


This is what will never happen. The fact that GOG provides support for new games(typically indie games) is a fundamental flaw with GOG. It is an insane business model.
Kelhim Sep 6, 2013
The GOG.com PR-guy has been very polite in his answers, and has tried to make the company's standpoint clear.

I find it quite disrespectful how some commenters here are all "fuck them" and "that's bullshit". No, it's not. It's an understandable business decision, and at least they take the time to explain themselves. Of course, the company could release some Linux versions of games, but in contrast to other online stores, they are responsible for maintaining them themselves. And maintaining means work, which most possible far outweighs the money they'd make from selling Linux games.
Kristian Sep 6, 2013
"but in contrast to other online stores, they are responsible for maintaining them themselves."


No they are not. They CHOOSE to maintain things themselves. Nothing is stopping them from abandoning that stance either entirely or just for Linux.
adolson Sep 6, 2013
Quoting: TheEnigmaticT
Quoting: Quote from liamdawe
Quoting: Quote from Quote from TheEnigmaticTMaths stuff
I understand your reasoning now but I completely disagree, using market share like that (and a complete estimation of the actual marketshare which is heavily debated pretty much anywhere) should never be used like that.

Sure. Let me just add a coda here that, while I did not use any of our internal numbers for discussion here, we do know how many of our sales come from users who are on our website using Linux, and we were able to draw our own conclusions as to what expected growth we would see after we officially supported Linux--based on our own experience with MacOS--and while our numbers were quite different, the conclusions we reached are the ones I'm giving you.
What incentive do you have to officially support Linux if Linux users are already giving you their money? I know how I would feel if I ran a business and saw Linux users demanding support, yet giving me their money regardless.
scaine Sep 6, 2013
View PC info
  • Contributing Editor
  • Mega Supporter
I hate to say it, but perhaps you (GoL) could have put the update in a new post, as we now have a hellish mix of comments from the first "we won't support linux" post and now the "we might in future support linux" update.

Not a great PR response though. It seems that they won't support linux because our impossibly high standards mean it's too much work and compromise is not an option? It would be absurdly simply for them to narrow the scope of this to say "We support Ubuntu LTS releases only" and an absolute flood of sales would come their way for minimal effort. And I suspect that the bulk of non-Ubuntu users wouldn't really care either, because they'll know that if it works on Ubuntu LTS, it's really likely to work on their distro too. Everyone's a winner (eventually)

But no, as Caldazar notes, they appear to treat linux as all or nothing. It's a goddam miracle they're not counting Android as one of their three "distros". Does anyone bar GoG consider ChromeOS to be a "distro"?

Bizarre stuff. But no need for the disrespectful responses people. It's their business and they'll run it however they want. Some of the chat on here sounds like petulant teenagers arguing about whose ball it is!
Hamish Sep 6, 2013
Well, thanks everyone for flooding my inbox. It is a hell of a thing to come home from work to see 91 messages waiting for me...

If there is one thing that could make me a GoG customer, it would be for them to sell games without any modification on their part at all. Just the plain original MS Dos versions, or even better, just the game data without any other components when selling games that have source ports. This is something that I have been wanting to see for a long time, as it would make it much easier to fashion my own solutions, and really would take next to no effort on their part. Not even negotiating for the rights to sell on a new platform.
PopeJamal Sep 7, 2013
Wow. This thread is childish and embarrassing. This is why people are wary of the Linux community. :(
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.