What I can't understand is that CDPR is willing to confer legal rights to play their games in perpetuity in stark contrast to virtually every other similar platform, yet they don't bother to hire a few developers to maintain a Linux client, effectively forcing its users to be at the whim of Microsoft, which surely is going to have its users' best interests at heart.
I don’t entirely disagree, but I believe that GOG has always been focused on simple file-based DRM-free distribution (just download the zip).
GOG Galaxy has been experimental until recently and it is more concerned with being a unified gaming client rather than the primary way to distribute GOG games. In the last couple of years it has actually become quite unstable anyway and it is barely being maintained, clearly not a focus, Linux or not.
“Forcing its users to be at the whim of Microsoft” is quite a stretch.
It isn't a zip file (that is Itch) but an installer (you can't easily install it just as a non-admin user on Windows, although on Linux it does install under the current user). They had a .tar.gz for Linux at first but now use a self-extracting installer there as well. A few years ago they said (didn't save the link) that only something like 5% of customers just use the offline installers (and I'm fairly sure not all that many more ever downloaded them, although it might be higher now after a few update issues in Galaxy). It is unfortunately not uncommon for games released on GOG to not have Linux versions available elsewhere. CDPR games have had Galaxy-exclusive bonus items, which is hardly being friendly to offline installers.
I don't have any inside knowledge but there is clearly an internal battle at CD Projekt (and their investors since they are a public company) between those who want to print money doing the unethical stuff that other game developers and stores do and those who want a more customer friendly approach. They tried a more ethical online focused thing with GWENT (that ended up partly under GOG due to relying on Galaxy and was a big reason they pushed for higher Galaxy use for a while) but it ended up not really making much money. Things like this California law are great to help support the availability of DRM-free games.
Also, GOG has around 6500 games now and I'd be supprised if they were involved in getting more than about 100 of them to work on modern systems. Galaxy has been around over half the time GOG has been in business (as an online store, not counting the early CD Projekt days). You are thinking of the early days of GOG but they are quite a bit larger now and CD Projekt as a whole is much larger now. I still think they are the best option to support DRM-free games but they are not the same as when they started (not only in bad ways, the refund policy is great now).
I might have exaggerated a bit. I haven't really tested GOG out much because it doesn't do those things like having a Linux client I expect a consumer-centric platform to do and it caved in to the Chinese government just like everyone else.
But if the idea is that other platforms might screw you over some time down the line and this platform will have your back, I am not convinced if they entirely dismiss Linux. I know it is not practical for CDPR to develop Proton like Valve. The bare minimum they can do though is to show they have contingency plans in case Valve stops upstreaming its translation layer. Otherwise, why not stick to the platform that is too big to fail and is actually doing something useful?
If the concern is CDPR’s character, I believe their first-party games are known to be remarkably Linux friendly. CP2077 actually run best in Stadia at launch, which I believe was Linux based.
Also consider the fact that a large fraction of GOG games are painstakingly restored old games, where revenue is clearly an afterthought, they sometimes seem like a nonprofit. You can’t reasonably expect them to also add Linux support to games from an era where Linux gaming was practically nonexistent, modern Linux translation layers will most likely be completely incompatible.
And again, they have not had a client for most of their tenure, and I cannot think of anything more consumer-friendly or consistent with Linux ideology than literally letting you download the files and do what you want with them without any DRM.
I am just a bit concerned about their attitude. If they were to release a decent open source Linux client with compatibility layers (just free ride Valve for now...) and commit to maintaining it, then I guess I am on the boat. Last time I checked the process was not very polished and games could be outdated.
Steam (via Proton) generally works, though, for those who wish to use it. (Steam+Proton also works with things downloaded from outside of Steam, too, and has for years[0].)
Proton itself is open-source[1].
If someone wanted to package up standalone Proton binaries for a Linux distro, then I don't see any particular barriers that would prevent that.
On GoG's part, they do provide the ability to just download a game with a web browser (the old-fashioned, DRM-free way). From there, I can manage the games I that own in any way that I choose.
Thus, I'm simply not seeing a problem here that needs solved. I already have the freedom to do whatever I want.
Which part of this situation is broken, do you suppose, and why does GoG in particular need to fix it?
It would be the best if they could provide a package manager-like experience (managing dependencies, auto-update, etc.). I don't like the idea that I have to deal with those issues myself even for popular contemporary games. Granted, I already have to put in some work running games on Linux so this might as well be what we get.
It sure would be convenient if retailers like GoG had awesome controlled support for various and sundry Linux distros, and for MacOS, and for the TRS-80 Model III and the Amiga 500, but:
What does a person buy when they buy a game from GoG?
In my own experience with buying from GoG: What I buy is a copy of a Windows installer, and [often] a Steam code.
---
If I then want to do something on my Linux box (or my Amiga 500) with that Windows installer, then: That's on me.
---
I don't think that they owe me anything else here. YMMV.
I would love to do that, but I have always had trouble getting it to work well with GOG. Maybe it is something odd with my systems, but I have found it is easier to just download the games from alternative sources than GOG and run them in Lutris, setting them up manually.
Heroic game launcher has huge flaws, one of this is to update a videogame, you have to download another copy of the game. Updating baldur's gate on my steam deck takes 180gb.
I have purchased several games for Linux from GOG. I have never needed a "linux client" nor do I ever want one. Why would I want that kind of shitware when I can download the installers right off their website? The only reason that sort of software ever became normalized (e.g. Steam) is because it acts as DRM, but GOG doesn't have DRM.
It's not just money. Some companies did DVD linux ports 10-15 years ago which haven't been installable in years. The linux environment isn't as stable as windows.
There are Linux releases on GOG which are not playable on a modern distribution without heroics. Too much churn in system libraries/dependencies/whatever.
The only way to ensure I have a working backup of a GOG installer is to download the Windows release even when Linux is an option.
Technically the parent company is CD Projekt S.A. that has two main divisions, CDPR (for game development) and GOG (the store). CDPR is quite a bit larger and has a few legal entities.
CD Project Red, Polish game studio known for the Witcher and Cyberpunk. (and in this context their willingness to just sell you games no strings attached)
Hey, Linux user with 5 software subscriptions, including all jetbrains products, here. Every Linux user I know has a similar amount of paid software, even the ones that keep talking about how everything should be OSS in an ideal world.
Can we please for the love of all that is logic stop repeating this cartoonishly inaccurate stereotype?
Isn't the whole point of DRM-free that people who don't pay don't pay and those measures hurt legitimate customers the most? Especially for PC games, piracy is extremely prevalent no matter which technology is used.
Of course, Linux users might pirate the games, as do Windows users. I am purely talking about legal rights here. I have to imagine there are quite a few developers with a primary Linux PC who are much more inclined to purchase a game if it doesn't require pulling out a special purpose Windows machine or dealing with an unofficial hack that barely works. Maybe those potential revenues don't justify the high costs of changing some compiler flags to CDPR.
I'm not saying they pirate it, I'm saying they don't believe in making money off software through selling products, but instead through beggary. They're such a small market share (2-3% on most games) that it's just not worth the effort.
Linux compatibility layers are actually getting pretty good anyway, and it's easier to get your game to run that way than to actually properly port it to linux.
