It appears things aren't going overly well for game store GOG at the moment, under increasing competition they're starting to feel the heat.
First of all, in a report on Kotaku, GOG recently confirmed that they let go a bunch of staff. They claimed it was only "around a dozen of positions" while also bringing in new staff in other positions. Fair enough, that all sounds quite normal in the business world.
However, Kotaku spoke to an ex-staff member who basically said GOG haven't been doing so well financially. That seems to now be somewhat backed up a little, as GOG just announced today that they're ending their Fair Price Package program. This was the system that users could get wallet funds back on purchases, if the price of the game was more expensive in their country compared with North America.
What's also interesting in this announcement from GOG, is that they said they were able to cover the extra cost from it in the past and still turn a "small profit" which is no longer the case. As they say "With an increasing share paid to developers, our cut gets smaller.", so it sounds like they will at some point reduce their cut from developers (sound familiar?).
Their current plan for the Fair Price Package program is to continue it until 31st of March, so you have until then if you made use of it. Any funds you're given, will remain with you for 12 months so they won't vanish right away.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Quoting: ShmerlMost of the complaints about "GOG not supporting Linux" come from Steam users who think Linux support = updater client. GOG do support Linux by selling Linux games. Most of the Linux GOG users don't care about the client, let alone closed source one.
Problem isn't the client, but lack of some games caused by not supporting Galaxy infrastructure for Linux. But those who aren't using GOG (Steam only users) rarely get that, since... they aren't using GOG ;)
Being constrained with resources, I'm not surprised they aren't prioritizing Galaxy much. I get an impression that they tried to bite more than they could swallow with their current Galaxy effort. They should have started with something minimal (just updater) like itch.io. And once that was solid, move to more features and so on.
Anyway, it's sad that GOG seem to be struggling with being profitable. Hopefully they'll figure a way to get into the positive again.
Omg Shmerl , you're setting new lows every day when it is about GOG my dear Polish friend.
Things is :
Valve's Linux support : Client , games , developers, funding projects that you also use ( DXVK , working with CodeWeavers) with GOG games , drivers ( if it wasn't Valve no one would see Nvidia was fixing DXVK related problems or their RADV efforts ) etc. A veeery long list.
GOG's Linux support : Selling Linux compatible games , lack of client , port of Witcher 2
Now , i'm not expecting same kind of benefits that Valve gave us due to their scopes etc.
But saying Linux support = client updates , is just either being ignorant or trying to fool people.
Stop that.
Let people to praise Valve , which i do almost every time because they deserve it.
6 Likes, Who?
Draconicrose Feb 27, 2019
GoG is like third on my list of stores to look at, mostly because of what a PITA it is to download and install games bought there. So Humble and Steam usually get my money.
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: robvvCan someone tell me what all the fuss about having GOG Galaxy on Linux is? Speaking personally, I couldn't care less whether there is a client for GOG or not. Whilst clients for storefronts can be useful, I'm interested in the availability of games for Linux.
If Galaxy was to be available for Linux then what real difference is there from Steam? After all, some games even come with Galaxy dependencies.
The issue is that galaxy is needed for some online/multi player games and if it's not on Linux then that game definitely doesn't get included on GOG. Plus there Linux catalogue sucks compared to other stores that sells Linux games. Steam, humble bundle and itch do a much better job.
3 Likes, Who?
Regarding GoG's Linux support, I can't recall where I read it (it may have been during a conversation on Mastodon), but I've been told that they only have one person in charge of Linux updates, and they don't tend to respond to emails promptly. Which is a huge disadvantage for Linux devs since, as was noted on an article here on GoL, updates are sent to them via manual FTP and then manually applied at their end. So not exactly good service on their part.
Last edited by Nezchan on 27 February 2019 at 3:09 am UTC
Last edited by Nezchan on 27 February 2019 at 3:09 am UTC
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: DraconicroseGoG is like third on my list of stores to look at, mostly because of what a PITA it is to download and install games bought there. So Humble and Steam usually get my money.
I'm curious how GOG is any more of a PITA than Humble? Both pretty simple: go to website, log in, download.
If you're using lgogdownloader, it's even easier than Humble.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: robvvCan someone tell me what all the fuss about having GOG Galaxy on Linux is? Speaking personally, I couldn't care less whether there is a client for GOG or not. Whilst clients for storefronts can be useful, I'm interested in the availability of games for Linux.
If Galaxy was to be available for Linux then what real difference is there from Steam? After all, some games even come with Galaxy dependencies.
The difference is in the simplification for Windows-minded people. Not many people are able to run the Linux installers from GoG, while having a UI that does everything on one click is what those kind of people require.
On my experience of introduce many people to Linux (mainly my girlfriend) I discovered a lot of things that I though that were so simple and "just better than on Windows" weren't as such for them.
Unfortunately for GoG, the work that has been doing Steam all this years has make me completely forget about their store...
0 Likes
GOG Galaxy support is a big deal, if for no other reason because it is their flagship feature right now. They advertise like hell the thing, it is obviously important for them, but then they don't even release it as a beta for Linux users. It says a lot. But there are plenty of features associated with a client besides just downloading and updating games - multiplayer, access to betas, achievements and social features... All features Steam already has, mind you; even with Galaxy they aren't at feature parity yet.
Plus, something else that is very relevant is that games often have inferior/outdated/incomplete versions on GOG. Including, for example, a Linux version on Steam but not GOG (talking specifically about Age of Wonders 3). And that is not entirely their fault, I would blame it entirely on developers if it were not for a recent article about how their upload system is horrible and in particular for Linux, but still makes it a less attractive option.
The thing is that it is simply too hard for GOG to compete with Steam right now, or even with super-crap stores like Origin that have exclusives. Which sucks a lot, because they have strong selling points: besides the DRM freedom and old games they have some nice initiatives like GOG Connect and cool features like the lists of games. And I really like the interface they have for downloading "extras" for the games (such as soundtracks, manuals, etc), the wishlists, the client being optional (I like the client, but having it as an option is even better), etc. But network effects are too strong for this kind of online business - the bigger Steam is, the better it is to sell your game there (and less opportunity cost for not selling it somewhere else), the more games someone has there the more convenient to get games from there moving on, the more likely you hear about it or get your first game there... Steam doesn't even have to do anything bad to keep their dominance, because that's how the market is. And as for the big publishers, who can leverage their deep pockets to use noncompetitive practices, they might cause a minor inconvenience to Steam but can really hurt smaller stores like GOG and Humble and even itch. Which are the ones who could offer real, quality competition. Imagine if GOG and Steam were head-to-head, and Steam had to take a stand against DRM? But no, it is Steam against Origin and Uplay and Blizzard store and Epic store, and instead of competing against DRM-free Steam has to compete with exclusives. Ugh.
Plus, something else that is very relevant is that games often have inferior/outdated/incomplete versions on GOG. Including, for example, a Linux version on Steam but not GOG (talking specifically about Age of Wonders 3). And that is not entirely their fault, I would blame it entirely on developers if it were not for a recent article about how their upload system is horrible and in particular for Linux, but still makes it a less attractive option.
The thing is that it is simply too hard for GOG to compete with Steam right now, or even with super-crap stores like Origin that have exclusives. Which sucks a lot, because they have strong selling points: besides the DRM freedom and old games they have some nice initiatives like GOG Connect and cool features like the lists of games. And I really like the interface they have for downloading "extras" for the games (such as soundtracks, manuals, etc), the wishlists, the client being optional (I like the client, but having it as an option is even better), etc. But network effects are too strong for this kind of online business - the bigger Steam is, the better it is to sell your game there (and less opportunity cost for not selling it somewhere else), the more games someone has there the more convenient to get games from there moving on, the more likely you hear about it or get your first game there... Steam doesn't even have to do anything bad to keep their dominance, because that's how the market is. And as for the big publishers, who can leverage their deep pockets to use noncompetitive practices, they might cause a minor inconvenience to Steam but can really hurt smaller stores like GOG and Humble and even itch. Which are the ones who could offer real, quality competition. Imagine if GOG and Steam were head-to-head, and Steam had to take a stand against DRM? But no, it is Steam against Origin and Uplay and Blizzard store and Epic store, and instead of competing against DRM-free Steam has to compete with exclusives. Ugh.
1 Likes, Who?
GustyGhost Feb 27, 2019
This year, I have spent more money on FOSS games than I had spent on proprietary games in the previous. Put your money where your mouth is.
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: Leopardyou're setting new lows
Quit trolling, no one is interested.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: einherjarIt's some kind of "half hearted" Linux support.
For those who weren't around back then:
https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/gogcom-dont-plan-on-introducing-linux-support-in-the-foreseeable-future-updated.2369/
2 Likes, Who?
I stopped using GOG entirely the moment I realized they aren't going to support linux with Galaxy.
Won't even buy Windows games there any more, because what's the point, really? In all likelyhood, I'd just be able to play it via Steam Play on linux anyway, so to Steam it goes.
Last edited by TheSHEEEP on 27 February 2019 at 7:46 am UTC
Won't even buy Windows games there any more, because what's the point, really? In all likelyhood, I'd just be able to play it via Steam Play on linux anyway, so to Steam it goes.
Last edited by TheSHEEEP on 27 February 2019 at 7:46 am UTC
4 Likes, Who?
Sir_Diealot Feb 27, 2019
Quoting: PhlebiacQuoting: einherjarIt's some kind of "half hearted" Linux support.
For those who weren't around back then:
https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/gogcom-dont-plan-on-introducing-linux-support-in-the-foreseeable-future-updated.2369/
Thanks, I wasn't around then and it's an interesting read.
GOG have been supporting Linux as was discussed back then for years, yet people keep whining.
I wish people were more honest. Like most Windows users won't ever use anything else most Steam users won't use anything else either. It's change, it's inconvenient and people don't like that. I understand, just cut the excuses, please.
1 Likes, Who?
Like I said it before ...
-> https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/gog-are-doing-a-black-friday-sale-with-some-good-linux-games-cheap.13033/comment_id=141499
-> https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/gog-are-doing-a-black-friday-sale-with-some-good-linux-games-cheap.13033/comment_id=141499
QuoteNo Galaxy-Client = No GOG-buys!
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: Sir_DiealotGOG have been supporting Linux as was discussed back then for years, yet people keep whining.
I wish people were more honest. Like most Windows users won't ever use anything else most Steam users won't use anything else either. It's change, it's inconvenient and people don't like that. I understand, just cut the excuses, please.
There's no excuses, just plain facts. I think all the people that commented here liked GOG but it hard to support a store when objectively they don't care that much about you.
The excuses are that GOG is too small to have the ressources of port Galaxy on Linux. Sure GOG is much smaller than Steam but it is bigger than Itch whose client works nicely on Linux. GOG have money or ar least they had. Like any company they prioritize where to invest it. Feature parity for Linux customer is just very low on their priority list. Even if they had ten times the money they have now they would most probably use it to gain market shares on Windows or Mac. I think they put their efforts into bringing big developers to GOG. Through the years many big publisher have joined. This is surely a better move for the business than suppprting such a small niche as we are.
So GOG support for Linux is minimal. Many people here said they do not buy on GOG anymore. So this cannot be fear of change but just going towards he ones supporting Linux
3 Likes, Who?
GOG’s installers are much better than what Humble puts out, where it’s just a zip file with even no icon. That said, it’s still completely incomprehensible for someone coming from Windows that they then need to enable the 32-bit architecture and install a bunch of libs in the terminal before the game they just installed can work.
When I have a game on Steam, I miss having an installer I can just copy places and install on various computers without installing a client. When I have a game on GOG I miss automatic updates and just being able to click to install something without looking for the installer or going to the website to download it. Having the Galaxy client on Linux would give me the best of both worlds and make GOG my preferred platform, but alas.
When I have a game on Steam, I miss having an installer I can just copy places and install on various computers without installing a client. When I have a game on GOG I miss automatic updates and just being able to click to install something without looking for the installer or going to the website to download it. Having the Galaxy client on Linux would give me the best of both worlds and make GOG my preferred platform, but alas.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: NezchanRegarding GoG's Linux support, I can't recall where I read it (it may have been during a conversation on Mastodon), but I've been told that they only have one person in charge of Linux updates, and they don't tend to respond to emails promptly. Which is a huge disadvantage for Linux devs since, as was noted on an article here on GoL, updates are sent to them via manual FTP and then manually applied at their end. So not exactly good service on their part.I covered that here: https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/putting-games-across-multiple-stores-is-not-easy-as-developers-keep-noting-recently.13421
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: Sir_DiealotLike most Windows users won't ever use anything else most Steam users won't use anything else either.
That's not my experience at all. From what I've seen, people (by which I mean those who are not actively following the gaming market) will do anything and everything to get the game they want to play running. I remember going over to some friends' house who just bought Ubisoft's Tintin game for their kid. Apart from the fact they needed to get a new gfx card for it (to which their reaction was, ok, let's go out and get a new one), there was the whole Uplay client and the always online thing which I thought was pretty atrocious, but they didn't even give any of it a second thought, as long as their kid could play the game.
If people were unwilling to use anything other than Steam, Fortnite wouldn't be the most popular game right now. I see people complaining about the Epic client on gaming forums, but there's vastly more people who just want to play it and they don't care what they need to do for that to happen.
4 Likes, Who?
Quoting: TheBardThere's no excuses, just plain facts. I think all the people that commented here liked GOG but it hard to support a store when objectively they don't care that much about you.
Well, we look at all the nice things Windows and even Mac people have and we're pissed off we don't get the same treatment. GOG's point of view is be grateful we're even doing this much for you, with you being so few and, as shown by what happened with W2, you being all c**ts (self-censorship here) anyway.
Valve have all the money in the world for the moment and someone there decided Linux needed supporting for whatever reason and put money into it. GOG's decision was probably externally-motivated. They didn't have anything to do with Linux (and probably still don't) themselves, but heard all the buzz generated by Valve and got all the requests and said, yeah, ok, this is a thing we need to do apparently, so let's try doing something and see what comes out of it. As far as I can tell, nothing has. We hate on them because they haven't given us what they've given others, they still don't care about us because we haven't brought in the money.
Last edited by damarrin on 27 February 2019 at 9:12 am UTC
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: damarrinGOG's point of view is be grateful we're even doing this much for you.[...] We hate on them because they haven't given us what they've given others, they still don't care about us because we haven't brought in the money.
I don't hate GOG. They are a business, they want to grow and Linux is certainly not the best place to invest for that. It respect it. Actually i buy a lot of games on GOG, more than on Steam! So i'm definitely not a hater but there are problems and the excuse that they're not big enough to have Galaxy on Linux is just plain wrong as Itch which is much smaller does very well for a long time. One of the reason i desperately want Galaxy is updating can be a nightmare. Games that have several DLC are a such a pain to update. I have to download the full installer for the base game and one installer per DLC available, then replace the game folder because overwriting does not always work and install each DLC manually! When you consider GOG have games in early access which updates often, then you spend a lot of time updating. In the Steam client, this is just a checkbox per DLC with all activated by default and automatic updates. This so much more convenient!
Not to mention i don't have a fast connection so downloading the full installer per update is annoying. In Steam games updates are generally much smaller. And finally there is the multiplayer issue, cloud saves, overlay, social features, etc. I don't blame GOG for treating us like this: they are a business, they make the decisions necessary to grow. But we, as Linux gamers, have to acknowledge that GOG support for Linux is the bare minimal and that it is their deliberate choice to not prioritize it. We can not blame someone for not loving you. The best behavior in that case is moving on.
My guess is GOG always thought their best way to grow is convincing big publishers to come on the store. Bethesda and 2K have recently joined so this is clearly what was to be done. But i fear GOG did not invest as much as it should have to offer developers an easy uploading experience. There's gonna be many big stores now. It becomes harder and harder for developers to upload their games on each "big" store. Providing an effort-less uploading experience is probably going to be a strong point to get love from devs.
Recently i asked the developers of "The Long Dark" to upload on GOG the last version. They answered promptly that they already sent the new version to GOG but it took several weeks (yes i said weeks!) for users to finally see the new version available. When you consider many games left GOG recently (like "The Long Dark" for example), this is not clear if those game are going to be updated. Fortunately this is the case for this game, but it will not be for all.
Like probably many people here i care about DRM, i would love to see GOG support us like first-class citizen and i understand this is not their best move as a private company. Like one person said above, they're just being rational, so must we. This is not hate, this is acknowledging problems and selecting which company we want to support exactly like GOG select which gamers they want to support.
4 Likes, Who?
Draconicrose Feb 27, 2019
Quoting: hummer010Usually Humble also gives you a Steam key. ;)Quoting: DraconicroseGoG is like third on my list of stores to look at, mostly because of what a PITA it is to download and install games bought there. So Humble and Steam usually get my money.
I'm curious how GOG is any more of a PITA than Humble? Both pretty simple: go to website, log in, download.
If you're using lgogdownloader, it's even easier than Humble.
5 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me