Yeah, they promised Linux support years ago with Galaxy 2.0.
It's basically the reason why I always prefer Steam for my games.
I agree, it was something I would have thought would happened a long, long time ago. Then a few years ago I thought for sure when steam and linux were really picking up.
It is one of the reasons I dont use gog that much.
Marginal support happens a lot on Linux. See AMD drivers without Adrenaline. "You may use Linux if you must... at your own risk... we do the bare minimum to keep you runnig... our past stuff is in the open but we can pull the rug on future releases any time." You can install gog games and maybe some dude made galaxy work in wine, corporate has decided that is good enough.
This is what keeps me on Steam, along with Steam Input and Big Picture
It is UI for GOG? We have a Heroic Game Launcher. It can work with GOG.
I get into this on the post, but AFAIK community-built solutions such as Heroic and Lutris aren't exactly the same, with a lot of Galaxy's selling points being the cloud features such as save data sync and a friends list system for online play.
Different people may or may not find uses for these features, but it's still worth discussing IMO.
Imho, if they decide to put effort into Linux, I'd rather see them put dev resources into heroic to add these features than to make just another client. They are late to the market, that would make the most of it.
You can use heroic I guess...
We don't need third party launchers to buy or play their games. Why do you want this?
Besides what the other person said, there's also the whole treating Linux users as second class citizens. If they didn't had a launcher for Windows, then it wouldn't be that big of a problem, but the fact that they did created a launcher for Windows years ago and porting it to Linux has been the most upvoted feature request since then and they haven't done it is a slap in the face of a community that shares a lot of their beliefs. Valve is investing money on making Linux gaming a reality, GoG won't even port their launcher to Linux, despite not caring for a launcher I know who I'm giving my money.
I like having all my games in one place, on a platform where Linux “just works” and I don’t have to fuck around with it.
Eliminating third-party launchers sounds great in theory until you have 20 different half-baked second party launchers that serve no purpose other than being a barrier between me and the games.
You may not agree, but some people actually like the platform integration features that Galaxy and Steam and the like provide. Cloud sync and achievements and things that you may not care about are important to other people.
And then there's just the whole "They said they would, and this is not very reassuring about their commitment to Linux users."
Thanks for the reply. I appreciate you answering my question.
If third party launchers were as good as the first party ones, we wouldn't.
Maybe the author of the article/blog doesn’t know about Heroic?
They mention lutris, but note that it isn’t a functional equivalent to Galaxy. But as far as I’m aware, Heroic is (correct me if I’m wrong, I haven’t seen Galaxy in action).
I found Heroic today. Same games that won't run on Lutris won't run on Heroic either. The biggest disappointment was that it crashed a few times and I gave up entirely when it froze up. I'm not saying Lutris is flawless, it certainly isn't, but my experience overall has at least been acceptable.
That's my experience too. Heroic looks nicer, but functionalitywise Lutris is far ahead, having support for EA's and Ubisofts launcher as well. It's also a lot more stable than Heroic.
Discussions and news about gaming on the GNU/Linux family of operating systems (including the Steam Deck). Potentially a $HOME away from home for disgruntled /r/linux_gaming denizens of the redditarian demesne.
This page can be subscribed to via RSS.
Original /r/linux_gaming pengwing by uoou.
WWW:
Discord:
IRC:
Matrix:
Telegram: