Quoting: hummer010

Quoting: KimyrielleBut make no mistake, GOG is NOT a Linux friendly company, ...

I disagree. EA is not a Linux friendly company. Bethesda is not a Linux friendly company.

While GOG may not be a champion of the Linux cause, the fact that they sell and support Linux games makes them a Linux friendly company.

Beth & Co. are openly hostile towards Linux. GOG is just "not friendly". Not the same thing. And sorry, but I don't consider a company that doesn't even port its own games to Linux "Linux friendly".

Yes, yes, I know that they are selling Linux games. And I appreciate that. But they have otherwise shown ZERO support to our platform. Compare that to Valve, which has actually invested money into Linux development, AND pushed developers into supporting it, AND ported their platform, AND ported all their games. Or Paradox or Square Enix, or all the other publishers that are actively supporting it, despite barely making any money with us. When GOG cannot even be bothered to pay a contractor for a few days of work to port their platform, let alone port their own games to Linux. Yet people think they are the salvation for Linux gaming and happily keep bashing that other company that actually DID push us more than any other. For no other reason than because they decided not to refuse doing business with those publishers that insist on putting DRM in their games. *shrug*

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Yes, they are good at their core competency - getting good old games to run on newer machines. I buy games from them for that reason, too. But make no mistake, GOG is NOT a Linux friendly company, and they really don't deserve that fanboyism displayed by some here. When I doubt, I give my money to companies that actually support us...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

In that context I find it funny how so many people here continue to bash Steam for its "evil DRM" and hype GOG - when in truth we have to thank Steam for having decent gamings options on Linux these days, while GOG never gave a flying fish about us, and their own parent company is refusing to port its games to Linux.

Just saying.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

There is no real need to install standalone Steam in Lutris, as it's considered a "runner". Lutris will actually install Steam only once (the first time you install the runner) and then every other game using Steam will get installed into it, so all your games are in the same context.

I recently installed Lurtis to replace PoL which has been unmaintained for a while and is borderline unusable now (it habitually fails to properly install Winetricks components) and I can't say that I am unhappy with it. I got some games to run with Lutris I struggled with getting installed before.

On topic:

That's awesome news! I hope the patches make it into WINE proper soon!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I backed it, so I guess I would get it no matter what.

It still sounds weird to make a working Linux client and then not sell it. Why would anyone in their right mind pass on additional profit?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: GuestBecause Valve want/need you to use their Steam client.

Tying hardware to clients is obnoxious.

*looks at Apple*

Yes...yes, it is.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

From what I heard, some developers are keen on -either- DX12 or Vulkan right now. Some voiced that DX11 is "good enough" and low-level APIs aren't worth the additional trouble.

If that holds true, Vulkan might not turn out to be the perfect solution for cross-platform development we hoped for, and we'd still face the issue that DX11 is both the better API and massively more popular than OpenGL.

Still glad to see that they're going to add it!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Not my cup of tea, and it will probably die soon enough anyway. MMOs tend to be utterly boring unless they can draw in a few hundred thousand players and I can't see how a cheap Indie production would ever be able to pull that feat off. Particularly one that seems to be an equal opportunity offender in combining infantile art with hardcore gameplay. What target audience is that sort of game even aimed at?

MMO devs these days seem to be obsessed with this strange notion that old-school MMOs were somehow better, when they in fact appealed to a tiny fraction of MMO players. Most present day MMO players wouldn't have touched Ultima Online or Everquest with a ten foot pole. And yet they bring back all these hardcore features that died for a reason.

I guess I will just continue playing GW2 and Star Trek Online in WINE. The good thing about nobody making a good MMO anymore is that all existing major MMOs run quite flawlessly in WINE. \o/

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: KelsThis sounds like the base game without any expansions is now much better than when it was first released.

This is -very- common for Paradox games. They sell DLCs (which some people hate them for), but release lots and lots of features for free as well. The haters can bash them for their approach as much as they want, but in truth everyone profits, even the players who never buy any DLC.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I am torn on seeing yet another TW game being ported. On one hand, strategy is hands down my favorite singleplayer genre (second only to MMOs), and it's a blessing to have such a great selection of strategy games available on my OS of choice. On the other hand, we have some glaring gaps elsewhere that still needed filling. Such as aforementioned MMOs, but also RPGs in general. If I knew that Feral can and will churn out another dozen AAA games this games, I'd still welcome this release - but if this is going to be one of three high-profile ports we will be getting in all of 2018 (like 2017 felt to me), I'd have opted for something else, given the choice.

View this comment - View article - View full comments