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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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
GOG maybe give us an option to turn off cookies inside your app before asking us money!
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.
I really hate most subscriptions, because the prices are often too high, they rely on locking stuff behind paywalls, instead of providing a good service.
Here is the difference, I am ok paying monthly for storage space, servers, and hosted/managed open source web services, because there is competition and standard interfaces there. They do not hold you (or your data) hostage to their service, what they provide is good on its own.
For example, if GOG invests money into writing open source libraries, apps and APIs to efficiently and easily share save games between devices. Let people self host the open source backend, but offer up a subscription for a managed instance, with maybe some voting rights for new features or support for games/platforms to be integrated into the open source front & backend, then I would be willing to support this.
And other stuff like this.
Use subscriptions to offer good services, which also allow you to improve the whole ecosystem, while also not putting yourself as the gatekeeper, and locking people into their service.
How about instead of this subscription talk, GOG could:
-Remake GOG Galaxy. The client is slow with tons of bloat. Focus on your store, and make a native Linux client.
-Help fund Wine. I find it weird that the main non-DRM store is so againat Linux. I know people that would leave Steam If GOG came to Linux.
-Different version and a tool to backup games should be part of the new launcher and not part of a subscription. You guys talk about game preservations and then try to put parts of it behind a paywall.....
-A more realistic Dreamlist. Who had the idea of letting people submit any game they want? Dreamlist would work better if GOG choose a list of games and the community voted for what game for GOG to focus on. People really think that games that were console exclusive or old FIFA/NBA/Gran Turismo games will come to GOG.
-There are some games on GOG that don't work, FIX THEM! (Looking at you Kane and Lynch)
With regards to the Dreamlist, this is so that they have ammunition to bring to rights holders. They just started bringing previously console exclusive games to GOG as well, so that barrier has been broken down. If there's money in it, any game could be done.
What console exclusive came to GOG?
I don't belive GOG or EA would buy the license of old FIFA players just so they can publish old FIFA games.
It's better to have a smaller curated list where players can vote and GOG choose a game to focus on. Right now the fact we can vote for dead live service games to come to a non-DRM store is just weird.
You know, I just checked the ones I was confident on, and it turns out they each had an obscure Windows port back in the day that I never heard of. Still, the other popular trend going on right now for porting old console games like Tomba and Mega Man is to run them through tools that emulate the game and then output native code, and I wouldn't consider it a waste of time to show where the demand is. For old sports games, it may be difficult or impossible to acquire the old rights, but if it's at all possible, and these are customers that aren't making them money on the modern iterations, that's still worth it too.
I'm not saying that it's a waste of effort. I'm just saying that it's a way to disapoint people that don't understand what the dreamlist is for.
Internet can be a bitch when people don't get what they want.
I just did a quick search and saw Pokémon games there and some romhacks..... No way in hell Nintendo would sell their games on PC in a non-DRM store.
There is, if the money is there. Nintendo's also under new management these days, and if the old strategies don't work, they could pivot, just like Microsoft and Sony have.
Nintendo would most likely sell PC games from their website first, and then after some time sell them on Steam. But the odds of Nintendo porting Switch games for PC is extremely low.
I agree, but it'll be the only way they get my money. Everyone can see that PC line going up and that console line going down, so we'll see how long they hold their ground; probably one generation longer than Sony does.
Sony and Nintendo won't go anywhere any time soon. Console gaming is easier and "cheaper" than PC gaming, and most people don't care (or know about) non-DRM.
Consoles won't go away, but they're in the process of transforming. Peak spending on consoles was all the way back in 2009 and has dropped ever since. There are perhaps dozens of reasons for the change, but one of them might be that the average consumer picked up on the air quotes around the ways consoles are cheaper. As for non-DRM, as long as piracy remains better than the official option, there's money being left on the table, and I have confidence that a lot of that will change too, though it will be far slower than I'd like.
Does God of War count?
I know it came to pc as a whole but it’s available on GoG as well
God of War came to Steam first, it wasn't because of GOG efforts. The games that GOG manage to bring back (RE games and Dino Crisis for exemple) had japanese PC clients.
Pretty sure it released on both platforms at the same time, as far as I’m concerned any games that show up on GoG with no DRM take a bit of effort from GoG to actually verify and host the installers, more so when the contracts expire and they have to delist them and try to get them back
Yes GOG takes a bit more time to verify the installer, but I'm sure when Sony put the games on PC the reason was the massive Steam (and maybe Epic) userbase, GOG was an afterthought.
I like what GOG do, but gating features, even niche ones, behind a subscription sounds like the first step towards enshittification.
Also, I'm sure as hell not giving them extra money until they fix their platform on Linux/Steam Deck.
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.
It's not like they have to create the compatibility layers from scratch; Valve did it for them.
I do just want to point out, Valve didn't do that - Proton is mostly just pre-existing software that they packaged together into an officially supported feature. I love that they did it, and having it in the biggest PC game platform presumably did wonders for Linux gaming, but it was most certainly not made from scratch.
I agree with you for the most part, but valve also is funding the developers behind the most important things out of proton. DXVK and vkd3d-proton were almost non-existent before Valve employed them.
At this point they should just hire the Heroic devs, I doubt anything they could build themselves would compare in terms of quality.
I'd be happy if they did and adopted Heroic as an official launcher. However, if that happens, I'd still want proper controller support to be added so that browsing the GOG store in Heroic doesn't require mouse and keyboard bindings on something like a Steam Deck.
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.
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.
How about GOG Galaxy on Linux?
They need to fix their launchers on all systems before the do anything else. I'm happy to support them in their mission of game preservation, but they really don't do a good job at providing a high quality service.
Also, I've purchased things from them that were never provided, and they refused a refund (warcraft 2 battle net key). I know it was likely Blizzard's fault, but they could have at least responded to my emails with more than "no refunds, we are working on it".
The only thing that I could think of that would make paying worth anything would be if they had GOG servers for online play from games that their servers shut down. Aka GOG's KALI
The things I would be ok paying a subscription for:
Things that I feel it shouldnot be locked behind subscription and paywall:
If the tooks for backing up offline installers or ability to install previous versions of game are paywalled, that is going to invite more reasons for piracy.
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.
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.
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.