I understand your point, however how much engineering effort is required? Which distro do you support? Which desktop enviroment?
I'm a Linux gamer but I understand why they decided to support Mac OS earlier than Linux. It has a larger user base (maybe not on GOG, but I suppose they are trying to change that this way). Also, Linux users are usually able to find ways to run windows games and aren't afraid to devote a lot of time to get a game running. I don't know about Mac users, but I suppose on average they don't enjoy solving problems of this nature as much.
What I don't understand though is why GOG didn't make this decision earlier. If they did, we'd have both Mac OS X and Linux support by now. You ask which distro, which environment? The majority of Linux users on GOG already answered this question in the Community Checklist. We'd be happy, I mean really, really happy, if GOG officially supported just one distro and just one hardware configuration.
We, as a community, would offer support for every other distro and every other hardware configuration. That's what we believe - developers and software providers shouldn't bother with support, they should concentrate on doing what they are supposed to do, develop and provide. We, as a community, are willing to help them by taking care of users who have problems running those games. If we find that the problem lies within the software itself, we'll let the devs know, no point in troubling the providers like GOG.
But, since GOG.com doesn't seem willing to let us provide support instead of them, all we ask for is for them to support one distro, most of us agree that Ubuntu is best for gaming. If they test it only on a single hardware configuration, we are fine with it too, as long as they sell us the Linux binaries (yes! we don't even ask for source code!). The only things we, the Linux community, want (I write it based on the comments in the Wishlist, so if someone doesn't like the fact I'm speaking for everyone, feel free to correct me):
- Linux binaries for games that already have linux binaries available (eg. through humble indie bundle)
- DOSBox / ScummVM games packaged in a way that can be easily unpacked without installing them on Windows first. (there are some workarounds, but it would be really easy for GOG.com to provide these)
Yes, that's it. Some people also wanted to see the WineHQ rating directly on games' pages, but this could be misleading since even gold ratings don't give any guarantee the game will work on some other distro or configuration.
Is GOG.com afraid of providing official Linux support because people will buy games, find out it doesn't work on their distro, then want a refund?
We have an answer for that - ask the player to try the game on Ubuntu. It's a free distro, really easy and quick to install too, so asking someone to try the game on the officially supported distro isn't as bad as asking them to buy WIndows.
In any case, I'm happy for all the Mac users who are delighted with these news, and I'm relieved myself that game versions for different OSes aren't sold separately. So overall I'm not trying to criticize anyone or spread hate or anything like that. I just don't understand why GOG.com won't let us handle the support. Everything apart from support/testing is easy to do and would bring them a lot of our money.
So... after all, the only REALLY important thing I have to say is... happy fourth anniversary GOG.com!