New site layout is awesome and way more convenient than it used to be.

So it looks like now I don't have to go get my Planescape: Torment and other games' saves (that are hopefully covered through the cloud) from my old computer's hard drive. GOG coming through in the clutch!

Such awesome! Thanks, you guys!

Seems like a nice update - but any news on the Linux-Version would be nice, too....

So the update installed today and now I can't use the client because it shutsdown with an error about not reaching some GOG Communication server? I never had any issues until this update. I can't seem to find anyone else with this issue.

Just do it!

After losing a save file with dozens of hours of progress while transferring saves between computers, I've been a big fan of portable gaming when possible. Why move just the save when you could make a boneheaded move like I did and overwrite the save, when you can take the whole game with you?

My current method is installing to a flash drive and using Launch Box to organize my installed games. It currently works without issue and I find it practical. But the cloud saving feature, while it's support is apparently still in it's infancy, of Galaxy appeals to my cautionary side.

I would like to install Galaxy on each computer to run games that aren't portable (e.g. Spiderweb games which save to the /user/My Documents/ folder) and everything else to a thumb drive to be imported into the Galaxy library/list/whatever. How well does Galaxy mingle with portable gaming. For instance, if I take my flash drive to another room and leave it there, will Galaxy have issues when it can no longer detect it? Will it just pick it up once re-inserted without having to do integrity checks or the like?

Essentially, how seamless is Galaxy with removable drives? Can anyone share their experiences on this?

It always boggles my mind how arrogant Linux users are.
Linux has what? 2% market share on Desktop Computers? On Steam 0.77% of all users use Linux. So you guys are a forgettable minority and basically third class users/gamers (behind Windows and Apple) and yet you act like you're so special, precious and important that you can "demand" something.
Be thankful what you get and have and if you want more support, switch to an OS that isn't basically dead, unimportant and uninteresting to every developer and publisher out there...

I couldn't agree more.
Also, as shmerl has also pointed out: open-sourcing the API for galaxy along with the protcol used would go a long way as well.

Arrogance? Perhaps look in a mirror. A Linux version was promised. A Linux version has yet to be delivered after multiple years. We do not even have news on it. Some of us are getting a bit understandably impatient with the foot-dragging.

As for switching to an OS that isn't "basically dead and uninteresting," the Linux market share has been rapidly growing, and the Linux community has quite the foothold here at GOG, and elsewhere. Most indie games lately have been released with a Linux version. Ubisoft, EA and the like haven't shown any signs of budging, that is true, but Ubisoft and EA are well known for the kinds of abhorrent business practices most of us are at GOG to avoid, so what do I care? And for the record, Squeenix isn't much better, if any.

I might also point out that the Linux userbase on GOG is likely higher than on Steam simply because of the confluence of ideals, where Linux is the OS best for user freedom, which bears a striking resemplance to DRM-free ideas. However, we do not have exact numbers for GOG, so I can't say for certain. What I CAN say unequivocally is that your numbers for Steam are old and no longer valid.

There is also a sizable Linux gaming community, and we do stick up for ourselves. Claiming that we deserve third-class status simply on the basis of bizarrely skewed numbers that have very little relevance for determining whether it would be worthwhile for a company to put in the (fairly minimal) effort to add support for us in exchange for a drastically increased likelihood of recieving our money is moronic. Use your bargaining chips as a consumer. Even those companies that go out of their way to make consumer-friendliness their brand aren't going to consistently act in your favor without prompting. Simply being grateful for the scraps tossed your way by those who have a great deal is for corporate slaves and fanboys. If you want something from a company above and beyond bland mediocrity, you frequently have to force their hand.

You insinuate that we act like we're entitled to this. No, we're just using our bargaining power as consumers rather than surrendering all control of our lives to faceless corporate entities. You have this bargaining power as well, and using it would be good for you. However, it is in no way the fault of anyone else if you opt to cede any semblance of autonomy to those with influence and funds in favor of not having to think about what's really in your best interests as a consumer. Just don't attack the rest of us for using said bargaining chip to improve things for everyone, yourself included.

Are you saying that all Linux users are arrogant? Are you saying that Linux users do not have the right to ask to be treated better than they currently are? Are you saying that Linux users should not have any games?

I use and have all three systems. If possible, I always play the games on linux. I find the environment to be so much better in terms of stability and usability. Yes, there are not that many users out there. Yes, Linux users are loud. But without an active and loud userbase, there would be no such a thing as "gaming on linux".

While I agree that Linux users aren't in any position to "demand" anything, you're being needlessly dismissive.
Linux' market share went over 2% last year, and has continued to grow, with conservative estimates pointing to it getting to 3% this year.
Steam Linux percentages have jumped around a bit, topping out at about 2%, currently at 0.77%, but has stayed near 1% as Steam continues to exponentially grow, so Linux Steam gaming has been growing at about the same relative rate as Steam itself has been growing.

A "dead" OS doesn't continue to trend higher in market share than it had before. If developers find Linux "unimportant and uninteresting" then why did Microsoft go through the trouble to integrate Linux development tools in the latest Windows update? Why has Unity gone through the trouble of adding a Linux export feature?

Linux has been one of the most important operating systems for the internet in general (a huge percentage of servers are Linux servers), and many of the roadblocks that have held Linux back (both on the consumer/user side and the developer side) are being fixed or dropping away. OpenGL/Vulkan are viable (and open) alternatives to DirectX. Development tools are making it easy to make Linux ports of games. Installing, maintaining, and using a Linux system no longer requires the use of the command line, with GUI solutions being put in place for almost everything.

TL;DR: Linux desktop market share is growing, developers already use Linux anyway, and the barriers for games on Linux are dropping away. Linux is not dead, Linux is not "unimportant and uninteresting."

P.S.: I have a hypothesis that one of the reasons Linux has not gained more market yet is because we still have a huge percentage of average computer users that did NOT grow up with technology, and so are not willing to learn a whole new OS, as they don't find the use of technology to be intuitive. As the average computer user demographic trends more and more to people that grew up with technology (and thus have a greater intuitive understanding), more and more will continue to give Linux a fair shot. Not everyone is gonna switch, but I'm guessing you're only gonna see Linux's use grow faster and faster.

Hahaha. Did someone really say Linux is a dead operating system? Looks like ignorance is indeed bliss. Mhm, that's why 99,9 % of world's super computers and ALL of top 1000 of them use linux derivative systems. Linux is that bad ;)

wrong thread