Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Submissions have to be related to games
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No excessive self-promotion
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here and here.
Just did a GOG survey that focused on the idea of a paid membership option on GOG. Seems they're determining what people would be willing to pay extra for. Some of the options were
And others that I can't remember.
This is how enshitification begins, don't enable this shit.
yup, shit that we already have will start being gated behind the fee of the subscription
GOG maybe give us an option to turn off cookies inside your app before asking us money!
Notice to everyone about GOG Galaxy not in Linux: there is MiniGalaxy. It's not official but it works.
Making porting gog to linux a priority which has by far the smallest market share for computer gaming is the dumbest thing anyone in this thread is saying, where is that financially a viable option to cater to the tiniest percentage of gamers for gog? I know ill get downvoted but im tired of the fanatical linux posts on lemmy at this point. Get with reality they are going to work on the client where the money is most predominantly flowing from and its not linux or mac. Haters gonna hate the truth but its the truth from a business standpoint.
And yet, it's the three most upvoted community requests on gog
With the Steam Deck getting more popular and more SteamOS handhelds on the way, it has never been a better time for game companies to support Linux. GOG does already sell some games that have Linux support, they just don't have a convenient way to download and install them.
GOG galaxy appears to use CEF and Qt, as well as some parts (such as plugins) that use python. All of those are cross platform. So I doubt it would be incredibly difficult to port to Linux. The fact that there is already a macOS version indicates that it can be made cross platform and can run on Unix-based systems.
Making porting gog to linux a priority which has by far the smallest market share for computer gaming is the dumbest thing anyone in this thread is saying
Building a bridge across the river is totally stupid, because no one crosses that river to get to where they are going.
Building a house on that hill is dumb, because no one lives there.
Creating that new type of device is a waste of time, because no one has ever bought one like that.
...
You see the point, right? Not that I'm trying to give business advice. I'm just saying that these things aren't necessarily as stupid as you seem to think.
While I agree, it's also a chicken and egg problem. How can more money flow if they don't make it easy? Even just endorsing Heroic and providing them some APIs would work
and its not linux or mac
Except there's already a Mac version of GOG Galaxy.
This is a future proofing measure. With the enshittification of Windows there is a reasonably sizable share that is looking to migrate. Making an API/front end functional on the platform is just good business. I for one will be switching 95% to Linux the instant Microsoft acts on their patant for putting a mandatory advertising ticket on the screen. Literally the only thing I will use it for is programming things for work.
Or, you know, they could make the client portable, like so many software...
A Linux or Mac client doesn't need to be a different thing than a Windows client.
What if most of the people that want to pay a GOG membership are Linux gamers that would be willing to pay for official Linux support?
Lmao you have people seizing it’s hilarious
I hope they're not seriously considering locking option 2 behind a paywall. IMO that should be a required feature for all platforms, and should be free. If I buy a game at a specific version, I should always be able to play that version.
Honestly, I would totally move to GOG, however my entire games collection is on Steam, so it would be very very difficult and it’s rather tedious to have and use 2 platforms like that.
Oh well, I do hope they can get more people onto their platform. it’s a better Epic store for sure.
I honestly felt the same. Then I thought, eh, let's just try. Turns out I don't care about my library being split. I just add desktop icons for the games I'm playing and launch them from there without thinking about what platform it's on.
Is GOG a popular store among gamers?
It's my #1 shop for games. DRM free (my games, not just a licence) and I support preservation of retro games.
Among a subset of gamers who care about owning the things that they buy, yes
It's my second store, but it's still a distant second to steam.
Just put out AVP2
Anything but properly supporting the Linux community 🤡
How have they still not learned that the largest intersection of the people that care about their core value proposition (game preservation, DRM-free, etc.) are Linux users?? It's not like they have to create the compatibility layers from scratch; Valve did it for them.
If they provided a launcher for Linux users, I'd actually buy shit from them. Yes, Heroic Launcher exists, but I'm not paying GOG for the work that the Heroic dev did. I want first-party support.
What if I told you that the intersection between people who care and the 5% of their potential audience that are Linux users is very small either way?
I'm not saying Linux isn't a chance for them, but it's also an investment and very like not a profitable one for quite a while.
I'd love a gog galaxy client for Linux with proton support. I also agree though, that it probably wouldn't help them become more profitable.
At this point they should just hire the Heroic devs, I doubt anything they could build themselves would compare in terms of quality.
This really should be something they offer for free, and there are already some FOSS options that do this, although they aren’t as good as I’d like.
This is a feature they already have for free and there would (or at least should) be backlash if they were to lock that behind a subscription
Sure, neat.
Sure but said votes better have an actual impact.
I got the same survey. The ones that they definitely do not want to do, if they value their reputation, are things like "increased cloud save storage (that's still probably less than what Steam offers)" and things that they took away, like 1.0 installers. But some of the other options look to be more squarely aimed at the enthusiasts of the preservation program that this subscription is designed to financially support, as well as one or two actually good features like legal account sharing. Hopefully they go down that route instead.
A subscription seems like the exact opposite of what GoG stands for. I buy a game, I own it forever. How does a subscription improve that?
I got the impression they're aiming more for a "fan club" kind of thing where you get access to articles/videos/Q&A/voting rights, etc. So more a kind of Patreon like many creators have. I didn't get the impression that this would in any way change the business model of the store.
such a strange survey. it was all about "exclusive access" and "extra perks". i just want to support game fixes so that everyone gets access, but that wasn't part of it.