GOG finally remove the false "in progress" note about GOG Galaxy for Linux

Quoting: damarrinThere is no comparison between Valve's and GOG's support of Linux.

GOG reluctantly provide Linux versions of some games. They don't provide Galaxy which means there are missing features in many of those games, like multiplayer or leaderboards. They basically tell people: look, you can game on Windows and get everything, or, yeah, you can game on Linux if you're insane and are OK with missing features and a lesser experience.

Valve provide everything for Linux, from a full-featured client up to enabling Windows-only games to run on Linux with full features. Feral ports are Feral's fault, not Valve's. You can always install the Windows version, which Valve directly allow and enable you to do, to get cross platform multiplayer.

When you buy from GOG, you support the game's creators and GOG, who do nothing to make Linux a more attractive gaming platform. When you buy from Steam, you support the game's creators and Valve, who spend huge amounts of money to make Linux gaming viable (the reason why they do it is debatable, but irrelevant here).

So, yeah. No hypocrisy there.

So from what you're saying Feral's ports are Feral's issue not Valve's but it's ok to blame GOG for Linux ports on their store missing features ? Real fair. Also it's ok to have to use the Windows version of a game but not ok to have to use the Windows version of Galaxy ? This is the hypocrisy Linux gamers are spewing everywhere I go. They will bend their morals and ethics for Valve but get uppity if anybody else suggest they make the same compromise for them.

Quoting: RaabenI keep trying to support GoG, but they keep giving me less and less reason to.

Same here. I want to like them, but lately it's been screw-up after screw-up.

Quoting: PublicNuisanceI'll never understand the logic of Linux gamers. GOG gets criticized for not having a Linux version of their client by the same people who, a majority of, run out in droves to buy Windows games to play in Wine/Proton.

There is no inconsistency here whatsoever, the analogy is false.
It's about whether one has a choice. If people want Game X, and it's only available in a Windows version which they can play on Proton, then they will buy it that way. But most Linux people, given a choice of Windows with Proton or solid native Linux version, would go for the solid native Linux version. And if there were two companies somehow publishing the exact same game, but company A only made a Windows version and company B sold a Windows and a solid native Linux version, those Linux people would buy from company B, and badmouth company A for failing to do what company B does, much the way they badmouth GoG.

Quoting: PublicNuisanceSo from what you're saying Feral's ports are Feral's issue not Valve's but it's ok to blame GOG for Linux ports on their store missing features ? Real fair.

Yes, I think it is quite fair to not blame people for things that are not within their control, but to blame people for things that are.
The Linux ports on GoG's store are missing features that they would have on Steam, because GoG's Galaxy that manages those features is not available for Linux, while Steam's stuff that manages those features is. Making Galaxy available for Linux is within GoG's control, so it is fair to blame them for not doing it.
Your arguments are crafted to appear logical, but they are in fact completely fallacious.

Mind you, GoG no doubt have their reasons for not doing it. But those reasons are about their perceived self-interest, which does not obligate us to ignore our own self-interest that they are damaging.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 1 July 2022 at 5:45 pm UTC

Thinking of Proton, it's open source. If GoG wanted to set up their store so that when a Linux user bought a Windows game they could easily play it with Proton, like they can on Steam, GoG could do that. But they don't.

I'm a little sad GOG is struggling, but their business model failed and they seem to be struggling with what to do next.

Which is a problem when your business model is to be the anti-Steam and in the process, Steam becomes a near Monopoly.

I'm the end, turns out people are really more ok with DRM and a nice, albeit mandatory, client than they bet on.

How do you retake market space without alienating uses that bought in on those founding principles?

Perhaps the bigger problem is that they had principles in the first place.

These proprietary launchers tend to be very bloated, and so is Steam. I miss the non-Web and non-Electron launchers more. When will there be modularity and choice?

Quoting: denyasisI'm a little sad GOG is struggling, but their business model failed and they seem to be struggling with what to do next.

Which is a problem when your business model is to be the anti-Steam and in the process, Steam becomes a near Monopoly.

I'm the end, turns out people are really more ok with DRM and a nice, albeit mandatory, client than they bet on.

How do you retake market space without alienating uses that bought in on those founding principles?

Perhaps the bigger problem is that they had principles in the first place.

To begin with, GOG strayed from their initial business model a long time ago. Their name, Good Old Games, referred to them selling classic games that were not readily available and selling them without DRM. Perhaps that business model wasn't enough... hard to say... but a few years later they started releasing more modern, main stream titles. It's at about this time GOG slowly (or not so slowly, depending on who you talk to) started seeing the "Old" in their name taking less and less relevance. At this point, GOG was trying to compete with Steam for those games GOG could get. I feel they only lasted as long as they did due to the initial good will from their original core offerings (being good Old games).

With the release of Galaxy, it was blatantly obvious GOG was intending to compete with Steam. Any principles they may have started with were tarnishing quickly of their own making. I forget the game, but they actually released a game that could not be played without Galaxy... effectively DRMing the game.

Steam, at least, never claimed to be anything is wasn't, nor has it shifted strategies in it's self marketing. As far as Steam DRM... any game with DRM on Steam is totally up to the developers, and not something imposed by Steam themselves. There are actually quite a large number of games on Steam that actually have no DRM and can be played just fine without Steam running... it's just, why would anyone disconnect the installed game from a perfectly good launcher?

Back to GOG... GOGs one and, to this day, really still only true selling point is "Old" games. You looking for a easy to obtain copy of Decent, Pools of Radiance, the Wizardry series, etc, etc? GOG is still the easiest place to get those. All the other stuff? Steam has it, and I'm willing to wager those games on both GOG and Steam, they're DRM free on Steam as they are on GOG.

A shame. I would really love to support GoG for their DRM-Free approach and because i like underdogs. But after the initial phase where they got my trust in advance, i just can't justify it seeing how they essentially ignore Linux completely...

Biggest annoyance is not the lack of official client, but lack of support for Galaxy features on their server for Linux versions.

So no Galaxy API for updates (though there is a workaround using Linux installers and zip offsets that lgogdownloader can utilize) and no multiplayer either.


Last edited by Shmerl on 1 July 2022 at 7:59 pm UTC