Feral Interactive have no plans to put their Linux ports on GOG

Thanks for your thoughts everyone. :)

Maybe Linus says it best, though he's talking about free software: "I'd like some free beer." ;)

I'd prefer if people used free (as in freedom) software, and that free software was more usable with the willing assistance of the hardware manufacturers. Better yet, open source the blueprints and internal specs of all the PC and smaller device hardware available.

But that's not going to happen, probably not in any of our lifetimes. DRM isn't going anywhere, either. I can't make enough money, code or wealthy family connections to significantly affect any of the important decisions being made about these things.

If I keep waiting on the world to get better, there are a lot of fulfilling gaming experiences I'd miss in the meantime. Missing those games would matter to me more than being a purist about DRM, and how companies treat me also factors into this.

If Steam ends up changing its policy to something so bad even I'd avoid it, I'd back up every game install directory and find another way to run the games. SC Controller means no reliance on Valve is necessary (and, deep down, I think at least Gabe Newell might want it that way). Probably would give up multiplayer, but that matters less than in-person co-op with my family. Yet another migration to avoid bad policy or functionality; distro, OS, makes no difference.

There's always a way to game with Linux, so I'm not worried. Even if all the storefronts went to crap, I'd use RetroArch and stuff like OpenMW or download self-hosting games like 0AD. Still would have a lot of options even if Steam went downhill.

Quoting: scaineAs Tim Minchin so eloquently put it in his Commencement Speech to the University of WA, you should define yourself by what you love. Don't get dragged down by the things you hate. Even if that means taking a knock or two on the way.

Just reading that was frigging amazing (I'll watch with family later). Thanks for sharing a speech like that! :)

Quoting: namikoBut that's not going to happen, probably not in any of our lifetimes. DRM isn't going anywhere, either. I can't make enough money, code or wealthy family connections to significantly affect any of the important decisions being made about these things.

One person alone might not affect it, but effect is a sum of its parts. Summed effort changes things. So for instance distributor which requires DRM-free has more leverage on publishers, than an a single individual. That's why for example buying from DRM-free distributors and avoiding DRMed ones has a meaningful impact on this. The bigger such distributors get, the harder is for DRM obsessed publishers to ignore the simple fact that they are losing money by not selling in such stores. So don't underestimate each individual impact, they matter when they are combined.

GOG gave a few interviews about their successful efforts to convince previously DRM inclined publishers to release DRM-free using normal business arguments. They have a dedicated team just for that purpose.


Last edited by Shmerl on 21 June 2018 at 1:55 pm UTC

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: PublicNuisance

Quoting: Linas

Quoting: PublicNuisanceDo you seriously not know of other games that have released a Windows version on GOG but not the Linux or Mac versions? Are you truly that uninformed?

I was under impression that we were talking about games from Feral Interactive.

Quoting: PublicNuisanceDying Light, Metro 2033 Redux, Metro Last Light Redux, Alice VR, Mafia III, Mafia II, that's all literally what came to mind in a matter of seconds and not a full list.

I also talked about how GOG is not a particularly inviting platform for Linux users or developers.

Sorry, but I am not sure what you mean by Mafia games. They are not on Linux at all, aren't they?

Feral developed the Mac version of Mafia II. My posts have reflected Mac and Linux games because it shows a consistent behavior of platforms other than Windows being kept off DRM free stores by a wide range of publishers and developers. This isn't a Feral problem so much as it is simply a problem that exists and needs to be dealt with. Everyone is too caught up with who should be blamed that few are actually wanting to deal with the issue.

Mafia 2 was ported to Mac by Aspyr, not Feral.

Not according to Steam. Look at the developer and publisher section in the top right hand section of the page. It is also showing on Feral's site. Aspyr did a Mac port to Mafia III though.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/50130/Mafia_II/

https://www.feralinteractive.com/en/mac-games/mafia2/story/

https://www.aspyr.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&search_term=&platform%5B%5D=Mac&view_option=Grid_View

Quoting: Alm888

Quoting: GuestTry as you might, there's nothing to indicate Feral's DRM stance one way or another. I put it to you that lack of xcom on GOG is about various business deals, distribution, quality control. Nothing at all to do with DRM.

:) You know, it is kind of silly to try to hide an elephant behind a straw:

• The DRM-free version of the game is already available on GOG, but Feral® explicitly said it is not interested in GOG release;


• Feral uses Steamworks (as none of their games are on The Big List of DRM-Free Games on Steam.

Their (awkward) reasoning is of no importance to me. The hard truth is: Feral Interactive releases all their games as Steamworks-exclusives and it is entirely Feral's descision to do so.
You can condemn or approve this descision, but stop pretending it is not their own stance.
Sorry, but no "Feral is tied up with contractual obligations" rubbish from now on, OK?

Quoting: TheRiddickSteam does not stop developers releasing products on other platforms, so the decision is up to the original developer.

Got any proof? Some Licence Agreement scans? Or, are you one of Valve employees and has explicit right to speak on behalf of Valve? And in this case the original developer had already desided do release the game DRM-free, but Feral is of different opinion on the matter.

Quoting: LinasWhy do you assume that they are even allowed to release the games as DRM-free? The majority of the games they port are not even available as DRM-free on Windows. It's not like when they make a Linux version it becomes Ferals(sic) property and they can do whatever they want with the game?

Eeehmm… Hello again! It seems you did not fully understand the whole meaning of the news. Well, just in case you missed (sorry for being Captain Obvious here), "XCOM: Enemy Unknown" is already available at GOG. DRM-free!

Well to be completely honest we have no idea what the deal between 2K and Feral looks like. Having experience with license deals (not on games though) I can say that it's quite possible that Feral is obligated to release only on their own store+Steam with DRM, it's also possible that their license covers the version released and this new non-DRM release on GOG is a new version that Feral does not have license to.

It's also possible that Feral (with their much smaller market share) decided that the effort to implement the changes needed for this new release is simply not worth it.

And it could be that Feral is pro-DRM, I know nothing about their company structure since they are a private enterprise but perhaps they have investors that require DRM (basically 100% of investors require shit like that).

Personally I dislike DRM just as much as you guys but at the same time I understand that it might be a necessary evil for small companies such as Feral to survive. Call me a sheep but when having to choose between no Lara Croft and Lara Croft with DRM then I choose the latter any day of the week. This however does not mean that people should not criticize Feral to let them know that there exists a market for non-DRM games, the end game is of course to go 100% DRM free.

Quoting: F.UltraI can say that it's quite possible that Feral is obligated to release only on their own store+Steam with DRM

Why would 2K want Steam exclusivity with DRM for one version (Linux / macOS) and not for another (Windows)?

Quoting: F.Ultrait's also possible that their license covers the version released and this new non-DRM release on GOG is a new version that Feral does not have license to.

This is most likely the case, contracts are usually narrowly worded. But it's not a blocker, Feral can just make an additional contract or update the current one if the original publisher (2K) is OK with the idea to begin with.


Last edited by Shmerl on 21 June 2018 at 6:08 pm UTC

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: F.UltraI can say that it's quite possible that Feral is obligated to release only on their own store+Steam with DRM

Why would 2K want Steam exclusivity with DRM for one version (Linux / macOS) and not for another (Windows)?

For total control. Feral wants to sell on GOG as well well then they have to pony up more money or a higher percentage. Now this is of course complete guesswork here and I do not want to put 2K into the EA corner here but publishers often have strange ideas on how to control their assets.

Now I work in a completely different market (finance) but I have seen and been involved with lots of strange decisions by asset holders. E.g one company decided that the data they sat on was so valuable that they could not set a distribution price for it and they went bankrupt due to not having any revenue...

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: F.Ultrait's also possible that their license covers the version released and this new non-DRM release on GOG is a new version that Feral does not have license to.

This is most likely the case, contracts are usually narrowly worded. But it's not a blocker, Feral can just make an additional contract or update the current one if the original publisher (2K) is OK with the idea to begin with.

Of course they can, but the macOS/Linux marketshare is a small one and perhaps they think (which very well could be the wrong decision) that they will get a better return if they invest in new ports instead of re-releasing old ports on other stores when the original publisher does what 2K did with X-COM. Doing the needed changes and supporting a new store is not free (also if there is some anti-GOG feelings among the top decision makers at Feral then they will not open themselves to the domino effect here where if they release one game on GOG the demand increases tenfold for them to release other games as well) so it has to be weighted against the possible revenue from such a move.

I understand why they do this. I like GOG's DRM-free philosophy and in fact GOG should be the natural choice over Steam for a Linux user. But GOG's Linux support is just bad, Galaxy isn't available on Linux four years after it was launched.

Quoting: MaturionI understand why they do this. I like GOG's DRM-free philosophy and in fact GOG should be the natural choice over Steam for a Linux user. But GOG's Linux support is just bad, Galaxy isn't available on Linux four years after it was launched.

See, now, that's just not true for me. I choose Steam over GOG in most cases, because they don't have Origin for Linux over on GOG. I use Steam because of the incredible convenience - one library, play-time stats, integrated forums/guides, integrated multiplayer options, text chat with friends, status/presence which is also games-based, automatic updates. These are features that make comparing Steam to GOG impossible.

Throw in the awesome and regular sales, plus the ad-hoc sales, Steam is my first choice, every time. Until GOG release Origin on Linux, my decisions aren't based on DRM, they're based on features GOG don't have and apparently have very little interest in prioritising.

*Galaxy ;)

Quoting: MaturionBut GOG's Linux support is just bad, Galaxy isn't available on Linux four years after it was launched.

I see this a lot, and believe me, I want Galaxy on Linux as much as anyone*, but is this the only metric we can use to measure Linux support? Humble doesn't have any client for anyone, but they support Linux. I'd much rather use GOG's mojo setups for Linux vs. the "whatever the dev wants" situation at Humble.

A quick perusal of gogdb.org shows that GOG sells 2218 games, of which 598 are available on Linux. That's 27% of their games on Linux. In 2018, GOG has released 156 games so far, of which 59 are available on Linux - that's 38% of this years releases on Linux.** Seems like pretty good Linux support to me.



* - I'm not sure I'll ever actually use Galaxy, although incremental updates could get me there, but I want Galaxy on Linux just so companies can stop using the lack of Galaxy to not release Linux versions on GOG.

** - With GOG's bundling, and multiple packages of games, I'm not positive these numbers are super accurate. They should be pretty good though. The database dump from GOGDB lets you filter out packs and dlc.

Quoting: scaineThrow in the awesome and regular sales, plus the ad-hoc sales, Steam is my first choice, every time. Until GOG release Origin on Linux, my decisions aren't based on DRM, they're based on features GOG don't have and apparently have very little interest in prioritising.

I guess you're referring to Galaxy? But yeah, the lack of Galaxy on Linux is also the main reason why I stick to Steam. What I was trying to say is, if GOG offered my the same convenience on Linux than Steam does, I'd definitely chose GOG.

Quoting: hummer010I see this a lot, and believe me, I want Galaxy on Linux as much as anyone*, but is this the only metric we can use to measure Linux support? Humble doesn't have any client for anyone, but they support Linux. I'd much rather use GOG's mojo setups for Linux vs. the "whatever the dev wants" situation at Humble.

A quick perusal of gogdb.org shows that GOG sells 2218 games, of which 598 are available on Linux. That's 27% of their games on Linux. In 2018, GOG has released 156 games so far, of which 59 are available on Linux - that's 38% of this years releases on Linux.** Seems like pretty good Linux support to me.

Well, they allow Linux games to be distributed via their service. But overall, they don't do much for Linux users. As said, the lack of their Galaxy client for Linux is a huge downside for GOG. It's most likely the reason why Feral and others are avoiding GOG. And for me it's the reason why I buy games on Steam, even though a DRM-free Linux version might be available on GOG. I don't want to manually install and update my games.

Quoting: hummer010* - I'm not sure I'll ever actually use Galaxy, although incremental updates could get me there, but I want Galaxy on Linux just so companies can stop using the lack of Galaxy to not release Linux versions on GOG.

I'll only use open source client for Galaxy if ever, which most likely will be community made, since GOG didn't express any interest to open theirs.

Quoting: GuestEdit - conspiracy theory: Feral is paid by Valve to bring more games to SteamOS/Linux or Valve allow Feral releasing their ports on Linux for free (no -30% for Valve as long as the purchase is counted as Linux). That would make sense because Feral once said that "GOG is not viable".

Actually, I always thought that Feral is subsidized by Valve..
That would explain all this steam exclusivity...
At the end of the day, is a business.

Quoting: namiko

Quoting: RybladeMaybe it's because JudasIscariot can be painfully arrogant and belligerant when told he's not doing things correctly.

I really hated that guy. He felt like the PR guy who drew the shortest straw and was told "just keep 'em happy, and don't directly promise anything we can't deliver on".

Stop. This is not acceptable here.

For the record, they're one of the nicest people I've spoken to. They can only do so much, they don't make the decisions. Don't pin your frustrations on single staff members.

Quoting: liamdaweFor the record, they're one of the nicest people I've spoken to. They can only do so much, they don't make the decisions. Don't pin your frustrations on single staff members.

Feeling like I was being humored by JudasIscariot instead of being listened to left a bad taste in my mouth (it was the pre-MojoSetup days when they were asking the community about game packaging on the GOG forums).

It also took a lot of problems with GOG building up before I thought it was a good idea to leave, but Judas' behaviour was just one part of that decision. This isn't mindless dirt-flinging on a target of opportunity, there were reasons for me to talk about them specifically.

Even if it was rude, I still believe we Linux gamers should call out those who haven't been good to us so that we don't lose money, time or mental health on (what *some* consider to be) a bad deal. I can agree to disagree on this with you. There isn't anything else to say, rude or otherwise, about my experiences with GOG or JudasIscariot anyways.

Please also understand that technically, you're JI's business partner, they are obliged to treat you with respect. Your experience with them may not reflect the general Linux gaming community's experience with them.

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough: I've never seen them act in a way that wasn't polite and I do frequent the GOG forums, I might not post, but I read it often.

Keep personal attacks away from our comments.

Quoting: liamdawePerhaps I wasn't clear enough: I've never seen them act in a way that wasn't polite and I do frequent the GOG forums, I might not post, but I read it often.

I can second that. I use GOG forums for a long time already, and never saw rude behavior of their staff. And if they can't answer some questions, they won't.


Last edited by Shmerl on 15 July 2018 at 3:14 am UTC

Jesus Christ... I"M DONE; finished, over.

I was being honest when I said I didn't want to speak about GOG or anyone working with them anymore. Why are you doing this when I said I'd stop breaking rules in the post above?

I'm more upset that you thought it was necessary to bring out the big guns instead of trying to talk things over reasonably. I'd still like to try talking reasonably if you're also willing.

Quoting: namikoI'm more upset that you thought it was necessary to bring out the big guns instead of trying to talk things over reasonably. I'd still like to try talking reasonably if you're also willing.

I'm a wee bit confused by "bring out the big guns". Do you mean Liam restating the "no personal attacks" just there? I don't think Liam has ever stated that you can't bring your opinion to the table. Hopefully this is a misunderstanding of Liam's intent - not to berate you specifically on your last comment, but to be clearer about why he was unhappy with the original comments. The ones you've already said are now behind you, which is great.

Unlike most places on the internet, I've personally found GOL to be an incredibly reasonable place. And it's that way because of Liam's moderation, in my opinion, unlike so many places that are toxic because of the moderation (looking at you, /r/linux... and most Steam forum pages).

Not to say I haven't fallen out with Liam myself of course, but that was a couple of years ago now and I still think GOL deserves the patronage I give it.