Seems like game store GOG is doing well overall in their new figures with revenue up 114%

Quoting: scaineSteam is just a better experience for me. GOG could match it, but choose not to. So yeah. I think that's a perfectly valid opinion. Sorry (not sorry) you see it as whining.

It's not the opinion that makes it whining, it's the tone & context. We're commenting in a positive news about GOG.com. But you (not just specifically you) still have to come & point out that you think they're "terrible "supporters" of Linux". From the first 4 comments, 3 are negative.

Then you (specifically you) even fail at that but still need to come back to again point out that you think they're "terrible "supporters" of Linux".

What else am I supposed to see in those comments than whining? You don't have to like them, just don't bother people who prefer DRM free releases.

Quoting: CatKillerCDPR is Europe's largest game company; they aren't really the underdog any more than Ubisoft is.

They're not. Ubisoft is much larger (18000 vs 1100 employees, more studios & developers). Besides GOG.com is only a small part of the company. Unlike Valve, CD Projekt can't throw away money as they like.

Quoting: einherjarWhat "underdog" are you talking about? The "underdog" with these billionaires at the top?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/daviddawkins/2020/12/14/cyberpunk2077-made-its-polish-cofounders-billionaires--but-the-game-failed-to-live-up-to-its-hype/?sh=2c7a9527380f

Apparently that's the result of their game development division and not the store front.

But yeah, GOG is perhaps too large to be called an "underdog". And while I failed to find a good comparison of digital PC game stores showing how much of the market each owns, my gut feeling is that GOG still pales in comparison to Steam. So I stand by my general sentiment, and will rather support the smaller of the behemoths ;-).

Quoting: GuestFor myself, the convenience of GOG is that it doesn't require some extra client to download the games - I can grab them directly from the website and use stand-alone installers. I prefer this personally, where available.

I with you on this. I tried Steam. Did not feel it. Chuck my account for a few bucks. Now I'm down to GOG, itch.io, Stadia and direct from devs.

I just things out of my way when I'm gaming. Whatever brings me to click and play on Linux gets my money.

Quoting: GuestI hope they don’t.

The only upside of GOG.com is the DRM-free installers, and they already started to hide these in favour of their Galaxy malware. The lack of a Linux build of Galaxy is the only thing preventing them to add DRM-gated features to the Linux games they sell.

Agreed. I wish they did not create Galaxy at all. It is what it is.

Quoting: poiuz

Quoting: scaineSteam is just a better experience for me. GOG could match it, but choose not to. So yeah. I think that's a perfectly valid opinion. Sorry (not sorry) you see it as whining.

It's not the opinion that makes it whining, it's the tone & context. We're commenting in a positive news about GOG.com. But you (not just specifically you) still have to come & point out that you think they're "terrible "supporters" of Linux". From the first 4 comments, 3 are negative.

Then you (specifically you) even fail at that but still need to come back to again point out that you think they're "terrible "supporters" of Linux".

What else am I supposed to see in those comments than whining? You don't have to like them, just don't bother people who prefer DRM free releases.

You sound as frustrated that people hold negative opinions of GOG, as I am disappointed with GOG for their attitude towards our platform. And where else to voice that disappointment if not a thread about GOG? In fact, all the more reason to point out that disappointment, given the money they're earning, reported in this very article! Because frankly, a big, big part of the reason I'm so vocal on this is simply because they could do so much more, but have clearly chosen not to.

But defend away, by all means. We all have different views here and the things that are important to me (which I outlined above) are likely not important to you. That's fine. It's just weird to be called a whiner by someone... who by that definition is also whining (about whiners)?!

Since we are on the topic of GOG and Linux, do we even know how GOG tracks the Linux sales? I brought quite a few games on GOG which I have yet to play and for all I know, the purchase might have defaulted to Windows, as is the case when buying games on Steam through browser (and not playing them within 2 weeks).

Quoting: scaineYou sound as frustrated that people hold negative opinions of GOG, as I am disappointed with GOG for their attitude towards our platform. And where else to voice that disappointment if not a thread about GOG? In fact, all the more reason to point out that disappointment, given the money they're earning, reported in this very article! Because frankly, a big, big part of the reason I'm so vocal on this is simply because they could do so much more, but have clearly chosen not to.

But defend away, by all means. We all have different views here and the things that are important to me (which I outlined above) are likely not important to you. That's fine. It's just weird to be called a whiner by someone... who by that definition is also whining (about whiners)?!

I defend because false claims are made. Yes, GOG.com had a pretty good year, mostly based on the Cyberpunk 2077 release.

But the money they're earning is not reported in this very article! It's actually pretty insignificant, especially compared to Valve or the Epic Game Store. Only 10% of all Cyberpunk 2077 sales were made through GOG.com but this seems to be almost 50% of the revenue (I don't think there are exact numbers for this, only a graph). So it's pretty save to assume that Valve made more on Cyberpunk 2077 alone than GOG.com in the whole year. It's quite possible Valve made more in one quarter with Valheim (a pretty cheap game, price-wise) than GOG.com in 2020 (including Cyberpunk 2077).

GOG Galaxy doesn't even provide some features you require at all (no workshop & multiplayer experience is rather poor with most games limited to GOG Galaxy). So it's reasonable to invest in the general improvement first before investing into a really small user group which, as you perfectly explained, won't use GOG.com or Galaxy anyway.

According to the GOG.com forums it's not even an investment worthwhile for Windows users…

Quoting: kon14Couldn't care less. I lost all interest in CDPR and GOG after the TW3 and Galaxy linux releases were both silently dropped.
I'd rather buy (possibly) drm'd games from Steam and support Valve's efforts in revolutionizing the platform rather than pay a single cent to a company that treats me like a second class citizen even though I'm paying just as much as everyone else.

They literally redesigned Galaxy and still ignored Linux, thus I'll ignore them, at least until they fix their mess and start supporting us properly.

My gripe with them is that a couple of years back, they made this big song-and-dance about how they were going to have this big push into the Linux Community... And for a brief period of time, that was true - we ended up with quite a few high-quality Linux titles almost overnight.

Since that time, 90% of the "new" Linux titles are "shovelware" and probably one out of every ten "new" Linux games is actually worth buying... If that were not enough, they refuse to make even most of their own titles available to Linux users (such as Cyberpunk 2077).

Quoting: PublicNuisanceTo all those who refuse to buy Linux games from GOG due to them not releasing Linux versions of their client or newer games: do you buy Windows games on Steam ? Just a curiousity........

Nope.

As they say, "No Tux, no bucks".

Quoting: GuestFor myself, the convenience of GOG is that it doesn't require some extra client to download the games - I can grab them directly from the website and use stand-alone installers. I prefer this personally, where available.

Actually I would really rather there not be a GOG Galaxy client if it meant that games started to require it. I would also much rather an open source client as well.

This.

If The people want a "Galaxy" client, give it to them (especially since GOG have repeatedly promised that it's coming) - but I absolutely don't want it if it's going to become mandatory at some point, which is what I suspect will happen... I prefer to install my games manually, not with a custom front-end.

Quoting: GuestThe only upside of GOG.com is the DRM-free installers, and they already started to hide these in favour of their Galaxy malware.

And this is quite literally the only reason I shop at GOG over other stores, where ever possible...

Quoting: GuestThe lack of a Linux build of Galaxy is the only thing preventing them to add DRM-gated features to the Linux games they sell.

This is what I fear - that "Galaxy" is a discreet way to move people towards a "controlled" installation... Granted "Galaxy" is not DRM in the traditional sense, but like with Steam, it gives GOG a way to "control" installations and indirectly "secure" games (to a point).

You get people comfortable with something like that, and it'll be much easier to completely "lock" people to a platform like they do with Google's Android and Apple's iOS / iPadOS / macOS / tvOS / watchOS (and Microsoft I suppose - they have an app store in Windows, don't they?)...


Last edited by Cyba.Cowboy on 8 May 2021 at 1:42 pm UTC

...and here I am, the outlier, opting for steam due to its built-in controller support...lol. I may look into those GOG clients to see if they offer the feature but don't think it is. Guess that still counts as convenience since you just click a checkbox.

Quoting: Arcadius-8606

Quoting: GuestI hope they don’t.

The only upside of GOG.com is the DRM-free installers, and they already started to hide these in favour of their Galaxy malware. The lack of a Linux build of Galaxy is the only thing preventing them to add DRM-gated features to the Linux games they sell.

Agreed. I wish they did not create Galaxy at all. It is what it is.

I wonder if this is what stopped GOG dead on their tracks. DRM is the last thing any Linux consumer wants. Still, with so many clients already offering library management, I don't get why people are upset for not having a first party client; I predict the complains will then be "feature x works on steam, why is it not on galaxy," etc. In my mind, GOG is the lesser of two evils. Not to discredit steam's efforts either tho.

ps: might not be the popular choice but my long term goal is throwing win in a VM, pass it a GPU, game on it and chill. I'd buy from any store at that point. This would obviously be for windows titles only.

Quoting: sneakeyboard...and here I am, the outlier, opting for steam due to its built-in controller support...lol. I may look into those GOG clients to see if they offer the feature but don't think it is. Guess that still counts as convenience since you just click a checkbox.

98% of my gaming is on controllers and has been for a very long time. I think the last time I had issues with Linux and controllers was 2002 to 2003 after that I don't recall any issues. Steam is a good store and all of that but they just don't do it for me. I prefer launcher less gaming and since my library is small management is a non-issue.