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

The whining about GOG is really bugging me. If you're happy with your DRM gods & Proton then good for you. Just stop the constant complaining about GOG. That's not "ignoring GOG".

Sorry dude, It's popular to hate on stores that aren't Steam here, with the exception of Itch.io, mostly because no one considers it a "real store".

Something, I do find interesting, although a bit tangential to this topic is what we as a community are willing to sacrifice for our comfort or easiness, myself included.

I saw a few posts above lamenting how it's not easy to play a Linux game from GOG and how antiquated the concept of downloading the game off the website is. Yet, we spend a lot of effort adding PPAs, learning the CLI (talk about something actually from before 1998), ldd, protontricks, winecfg, mesa, kernel stuff, tinkering, hacking, sometimes just to get mostly functional desktops.

I wonder how many of us really want to "play on Linux" (sorry for the pun)? The more I think of it, the more I wonder if I really do. Don't get me wrong, I love Linux and I like Tinkering with it in ways that I could never do with windows or Mac. I'll never go back! And haven't in over a decade.

But when I want to play a game, I find it really frustrating when I'm missing a library that I have to hunt down or a new kernel doesn't play nice with my graphics drivers or have to tweak wine/proton with my limited game time. It's like I'm frustrated because I'm reminded I'm on Linux with it's flaws and complexities. I just wanted the game to work without problems and relax!

Maybe for us the problem isn't GOG's Linux support. Maybe the problem is more that GOG reminds us we're still on Linux when we'd rather not be reminded of such.

Perhaps that's part of the allure of Steam. It's makes effort to make the Linux-ness of the system not apparent. With proton in the background, many things just work, like on Windows or Mac.


I find this an interesting contradiction and by looking at the comments, I think it's one many of us, myself included, are comfortable with having.

An interesting rumination. In my personal case, I didn't start using Linux to tinker. I'd prefer never to have to. It was partly because I like the concept of Free Software, and partly because Windows was annoying (and still is, although in somewhat different ways). Although I suppose the ability to tinker was part of the appeal--I find that often if something is wrong with Windows it's because that's how Microsoft wants it and there's nothing I can do about it, whereas if something is wrong with Linux it is actually possible to do some tinkering and fix it.
Example: I just recently set up a cheapo little box to hook up to the TV; we decided to stop paying for cable and my wife would just basically "watch the internet". There was a little wifi antenna thingie we were attaching to the cheap box and I wasn't totally sure about Linux drivers so I thought, eh, Windows is already on it, all I'm going to run is a browser, maybe I won't bother ripping it out and putting Linux. And yet with just that--doing literally nothing except run Firefox--Windows still manages to be annoying, always nagging about how you should be using their browser instead of Firefox or you should be handing over more of your data or whatever. My wife isn't very computer literate, so she's always calling me over to ask what the ominous messages mean, and they always just mean Microsoft are being tools. Drives me nuts! I'm totally going to rip Windows out and put in Mint because Mint doesn't jerk me around.

So the bottom line is, I run Linux because it doesn't mess with me. I don't run it with the aim of fiddling with it; I'm quite happy for my whole experience with Linux to work without problems and let me relax! So that's quite consistent with liking to use Steam.

I'm glad to see GOG doing well. I still pick up a few games from them but a lot of my money has been going to itch.io. I did recently pick up 3 games from GOG 2 of which were Linux native and one that was not but it's platinum with regular wine so it's all good.

If they bring Galaxy to Linux, I'm sure many would be happy but I don't want any launchers on my hardware.

I think, for me, the compelling part of GOG is the DRM free nature. When they go out of business (and they will), I'll still have playable games. When Steam goes out of business (and they will), I have no garuntee that the games I paid to play, I will be able to play.

I've been burned by other stores closing in the past, so I'm a little wary in that regard.

I still use both services and find them acceptable. Steam is very easy to use which I like. GOG lets me have control, which I also like.

Besides to be fair, what other stores are there? Everything else I can think of is either a key-reseller or novelty.

and one could overclock one's computer with a pencil

Hehe, takes me back. Good old Athalons. Wow I don't even remember how to spell it, been so long. Thanks for that, and for sharing your perspective. And thank you Purple Library Guy for your thoughts as well.

At the end of the day I don't care where people buy there games or how they play them but I hate hypocrisy which is why I asked my question.

do you buy Windows games on Steam ?

If they work fine with Proton yes, as they are counted by Valve as Linux purchases.

You can wrap whatever delusion and special wording you want around it to justify it but at the end of the day you are handing money over to publishers and developers who did not put in the effort to make a Linux version. The issue I take with that is when people give GOG flak for not supporting Linux (even though they sell Linux games on their store) but then hand over money to other people who also don't support Linux and somehow want to act like it's different. Either both are fine or neither are but you/they can't have it both ways.

Well, yes.
Is it comfortable to play Windows games through Steam? Most of the time yes it is, if they aren't playable on Linux I dont buy them.
Is it comfortable to play Linux games through GOG? Not really, although I need to admit "back in the day" when I wanted to migrate from Steam to GOG and some time latter from Win to Linux(which made me stop the migration to GOG) I didn't know things like Minigalaxy exist. On the other hand as I tried the last time playing Gothic through Minigalaxy I eventually gave up and brought it on Steam.

I don't care for clients and actually prefer downloading the install files and running them without a client and also like knowing they're DRM free. I'm the minority I know but I like what I like.

Personally, no. I only buy games with native Linux support. If a dev doesn't support Linux, then I don't support them. Why would devs consider porting games to Linux if Linux users will buy their game either way?

I agree. I can't stand it when I see people on forums saying how "game x" has some issue on Proton or Wine and hopefully the developer makes a Linux version some day so they can play it properly. They fail to see that they have no more leverage, they already own the game and the publisher and developer has their money. If someone wants to buy Windows games then by all means do what you want to but it is delusional to think that buying the game without Linux support will somehow make a publisher change their mind about Linux support.


Last edited by PublicNuisance on 29 April 2021 at 3:40 am UTC

You can wrap whatever delusion and special wording you want around it to justify it but at the end of the day you are handing money over to publishers and developers who did not put in the effort to make a Linux version

There is no delusion or special wording, buying a Windows game on Steam and playing it through Proton counts as a Linux sale, end of story. Otherwise I agree with everything you said. I prefer buying native games and will do so 8/10 times, but if there is a Windows game I really want to play I will buy it on Steam once it is at least half year old and on at least 50% sale.

Otherwise I prefer to use Itch.io and GOG to Steam, unless there is a special case for buying the game on Steam, like yesterday, I bought Spirtifarer on Steam instead of itch.io, because of Remote Play Together.

I can't stand it when I see people on forums saying how "game x" has some issue on Proton or Wine and hopefully the developer makes a Linux version some day so they can play it properly. They fail to see that they have no more leverage, they already own the game and the publisher and developer has their money. If someone wants to buy Windows games then by all means do what you want to but it is delusional to think that buying the game without Linux support will somehow make a publisher change their mind about Linux support.

But it happens. Not often, but it does. Most recent example would be Metro Exodus. (OTOH we have publishers who drop their well established Linux ports.)

The issue I take with that is when people give GOG flak for not supporting Linux (even though they sell Linux games on their store) but then hand over money to other people who also don't support Linux and somehow want to act like it's different

GOG mislead Linux users by stating their intention for a dedicated client and then not keeping their word.
I don't want GOG to "support Linux". I want them to keep their word and give Linux users convenience, like Valve does. After all we pay for the games, we're not asking for favours.


Last edited by Dorrit on 29 April 2021 at 10:16 am UTC

At the end of the day I don't care where people buy there games or how they play them but I hate hypocrisy which is why I asked my question.

do you buy Windows games on Steam ?

If they work fine with Proton yes, as they are counted by Valve as Linux purchases.

You can wrap whatever delusion and special wording you want around it to justify it but at the end of the day you are handing money over to publishers and developers who did not put in the effort to make a Linux version. The issue I take with that is when people give GOG flak for not supporting Linux (even though they sell Linux games on their store) but then hand over money to other people who also don't support Linux and somehow want to act like it's different. Either both are fine or neither are but you/they can't have it both ways.

It isn't "having it both ways". When I buy a Windows game on Steam, I'm supporting a Developer who doesn't support Linux, but some of my money is supporting Valve. Valve definitely supports Linux. Valve pays employees to contribute to open source projects that support Linux. Linux gaming wouldn't be where it is today without Valve. Period.

When I buy a Linux game on GOG, I'm supporting a Developer who supports Linux, but some of my money goes to GOG, who has done the bare minimum in order to sell Linux games, and has really done nothing to further gaming on Linux.

As long as GOG remains the underdog, my support goes (mostly) to them. ...

What "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


Last edited by einherjar on 29 April 2021 at 1:26 pm UTC

As long as GOG remains the underdog, my support goes (mostly) to them. ...

What "underdog" are you talking about? The "underdog" with these billionaires at the top?

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

Steam 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.

CDPR 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.

What "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 ;-).

For 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.

I 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.

Steam 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).

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)?!

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…

Couldn'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).

To 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".

For 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.

The 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...

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.

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.

I 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.

...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.