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Plus, something else that is very relevant is that games often have inferior/outdated/incomplete versions on GOG.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.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

"Epic store will increase competition, stores will have to innovate or improve" - price gouging screws smaller (i.e. non-Steam) stores, forcing them to remove novel and positive features and lay off employees. Cheers for "competition" through non-competitive means, yay!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I actually use this feature, there is a bunch of Windows games that are on my wishlist just in case they someday get a port. But I think this just highlights how badly the wishlist works, and how poorly thought this feature is.

You have a single wishlist, so you can't separate the games that you plan to buy, the games other people might gift you, the games you want to be notified about sales, the games that you are waiting to come out of early access, and the games you wish were ported to Linux. It also becomes a huge mess to navigate your wishlist, as it gets way too full and there is no way of creating sub-lists.

The system requires you to opt out of Windows games recommendation or you won't count, which is counter-synergistic with SteamPlay (you now can get Windows games, and they even count as Linux sales, right?)... and more importantly, with itself. You have to add non-Windows games to your wishlist for it to work, but you have to stop seeing Windows games for it to work. If you only want to play Linux games, you probably don't want to add Windows games to your wishlist (unless you don't use the whishlist for anything else already).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I find this really exciting. The Steam Workshop is quite convenient, but having mods limited to a single store and a single generic platform is limiting. People often mention that console versions of games don't have mods at all, which in my opinion is ridiculous. Having a single unified mod system for all the platforms they support is good for everyone. Plus, the Paradox Launcher is still in beta but they already have a Linux version, which is just great.

Also, there are already Paradox mods that don't use the workshop (because they are too big), and problems with the workshop itself - sometimes it won't download the mods you want, or just the lack of a good versioning system (for games that update as frequently and drastically as Paradox titles, mod compatibility is a huge deal). For me this is one of the big draws of a Paradox launcher - mods could be managed in a much more sensible way, across different stores and all.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Frankly, not impressed. Their excuse is "we would have to update it later so why bother", which to me raises the question of how bad their support for the Linux/Mac versions will be. And after their optimistic (but obviously non-commital) messages in the past, this doesn't sound encouraging - still not even a release date.

I hate the cliche argument that games are released "unfinished" or "incomplete" (bad games happen for many reasons and they can improve after release), but in this case I think it has merit. This was a crowdfunded game that "released" a year late, and six months after is still cleaning up the messy release. It finally froze development so they could actually port it to the platforms it had promised. This isn't just patches and good DLC, this is the game finally leaving Early Access and getting a real release.

Also, their crowdfunding campaigns talked so much about how being an indie studio meant they could do amazing things that their new talk about how being bought by Microsoft is the best thing ever makes me cringe.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

There is also a CK2 sale on paradoxplaza.com (the publisher's website, it sells steam keys) for the 7th anniversary of the game, with 75% discounts on most DLC. For some time now CK2 DLC was never discounted more than 50%, so this is the lowest price ever for some and the lowest price in a long time for others. It pairs pretty well with the Humble Paradox Bundle 2019.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdaweSo uh, GOG just announced they will also have it as a day-1 release :)

That is really great. CK2, EU4 and HoI4 aren't even available on GOG (Stellaris is their only recent game -and thus their only Linux game - available on GOG). I suspect because they rely on Steam features, while Stellaris is being tested with their own launcher and even has a console version. This probably means Imperator will not be so restricted, which is great.

That said, when I buy Imperator it will probably be on Steam. GOG is lagging far behind with their Linux support; their flagpole feature, Galaxy, isn't even planned for Linux. I really regretted buying Stardew Valley from GOG instead of Steam, and many games just lack features or are updated less frequently.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestWe sure aren't lacking strategy games on linux

Yeah, as a strategy gamer I feel like I am particularly privileged within Linux gaming. Most of the biggest titles - Civ, XCOM, Total War, Paradox - have native support, and a respectable number of indies.

It is not perfect - Stardock and Slitherine publish many titles, rarely if ever with Linux support, for example - but I feel like it is so much better than for the fans of action games, shooters, action rpgs and other AAA games in general.

I think only fans of programming games have better luck playing on Linux. :D

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ziabiceAm I the only one that still uses the official issue trackerto report things? It's very well maintained, they (Valve employees) reply in minutes, and sometimes you can talk with Codeweavers developers.

That said, there are 1576 open issues, 647 closed.

The open issues that are whitelist requests are 445 (that means games that work without problems, with a Platinum or Gold rating), while 913 issues are "Game Compatibility - unofficial" (that means that the game can work with workaround or not at all, it depends).

So we have already nearly 500 games that are click'n'play, that's great! :D

I reported a bug there on the early days (a weird thing with some timezones in Unity games), which eventually was fixed in upstream Wine. I was quite satisfied with the results.

But I feel like GitHub issues serve a very different purpose than a compatibility "wiki". GitHub issues are great for reporting bugs, but not for users wanting to know if a game works or what are the workarounds. Issues posted have to include a lot more details (like logs), and even then it not necessarily is enough for developers to fix the issue. On the other hand, ProtonDB is more convenient for finding games and for "unofficial" tweaks and fixes.

Still, I find that just looking at the rating (Platinum, Gold, Silver, Borked) is not nearly enough. Considering that Gold will always include some tweaks and Silver will always include some problems (and because people misunderstand the ratings, many platinum and borked games are misrated), the description is crucial.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I agree that it is very unfair to consumers. Changing something crucial right before the release, after taking pre-orders, is not cool. You can't just change your mind after advertising and selling your product. And of course... exclusives are bad.

All the while, Epic is trying to "compete" in the least competitive way possible - by removing consumer choice and using its resources to push publishers/developers into exclusive deals where they can't sell their products anywhere else. Frankly, there is no way Epic's success results in a "competitive" market. It might push Steam into reacting, but it is going to be even more hostile to smaller stores and will still result in more anti-competitive practices. Instead of investing into creating a superior product, Epic is trying to create additional barriers to its competitors (which right now is mostly the absolute market leader, but in the future might not be).

I am also not sure if Steam's "competition" will be entirely positive. Let's hope Valve doesn't change its mind about having exclusives of its own, or doesn't decide to cut down from investing in other areas to lower prices.

View this comment - View article - View full comments