I'm not sure I understand what you mean, presumably Gwent (being fairly Galaxy tied) doesn't work on XP anyway? Or do you mean using the .DLL from it in another game breaks XP compatibility?

Which is a dying and unsustainable bracket.

What makes more sense? Keeping it so games work on newer OSs and hardware....ORRRR worrying about EOL OSs that eventually will be extinct (outside of VMs) when the last of the hardware that support them dies off.

Did you raise this big of stink about Windows 2.0 when Windows XP rolled around? Same rough year gap as between XP and 10.

This thread is regarding an issue that only exists for Fallout: New Vegas Ultimate Edition, which is a completely new release on the GOG platform and comes with features not included in the original version of the game.

There's basically two versions of Fallout: New Vegas:
* Steam (released in 2010)
* GOG (released in 2017)

Acting as if these two very different releases were one and the same completely ignores all the hours and work that have gone into integrating the GOG version into the GOG platform (called Galaxy) and swap out all Steam related functionality.

You might not like that said integration creates dependencies that XP can't resolve and therefor breaks the game on XP platform, but as have been repeatedly mentioned that's a consequence of software development.

And honestly, there's not a lot you can do about it either. The game requires these DLL files to function because they've been marked as essential at compile time. If GOG should add support for XP then they basically need to maintain a dummy DLL file of sorts that have been coded to implement all the functionality of the real DLL file, but with none of the actual behavior. This means not only maintaining a separate development chain but also provide branch support in their download clients and spend QA time to ensure that the DLL file doesn't break the game in any way.

Ergo, supporting it actually costs money. Money that the very small percentage of XP users don't cover.

small correction :)
breaking WinXP support does not automatically cause problems for wine users. (unless you insist on using a 6 year old wine version). The Fallout game in question runs just fine from what I read.
This isn't about people using linux/mac, but solely about people insisting on keep using Windows XP.

just the DLL alone would break XP. compatibility.
It uses the same windows function (which is not present pre-Vista) as the DLL from Fallout.
so I would speculate that the presence of that piece of code in the DLL is simply because it is a newer version.
and not because Fallout is a Steamworks game.

but that is just my assumption, i don't know for sure
I guess we will see if this problematic DLL pops up in upcoming updates for games with Galaxy support.
Though most games with Galaxy support are probably not old enough to have XP support in the first place :p

never mind. i'm not in the mood for this today.

That's perfectly fine, but then those peoples should be ready to do extra work to have said games work on an unsupported OS and not expect Gog doing it for you. (And currently the extra work mean replacing a DLL)

That peoples want to still use Windows XP, 98, ME or even OS2 for whatever valid or semi-valid reason that's one thing and there is nothing wrong with that; but it is expecting that Gog will continue to support it or even to "not break something on older OS that are no longer supported neither by Gog nor its own creator" that is kind of silly.

not for this game in question, this is the first version on gOg, with the DLL which does not work on XP

I am quite sure that this is not The only way. Unfortunately I cannot prove it without access to galaxy.dll and galaxy_wrp.dll .

Sure, if we're being technical then there's other alternatives as well. Hell, even renaming an old steam_api DLL file (or any other DLL file that includes the essential functions, really) is a "solution", after all. The core of the sentence weren't actually how a solution would work, but the economical consequences of actually supporting such a solution officially would mean for GOG.

Unofficial solutions and workarounds are fine, as they mean nothing really for GOG. But official solutions aren't. Any solution that would be implemented and supported officially have economic consequences that just doesn't pay for themselves. I guess that GOG could provide a patch or version of the DLL file without any warranty, support or guarantee, but releasing an unsupported patch/fix officially tend to cause a major headache in terms of consumer expectations and support tickets.

I clearly over-exaggerated when I said it was "the only way", sorry about that.

With how their refund policy works... that would be a trainwreck.

I'm no coder, so don't quite understand why it can't be addressed with a "if... then... else" condition in that one and only .dll file, and requires instead a separate development chain and everything else you listed as a result of that. Note that I'm not referring specifically to Win XP, or GOG adding support for it, just making titles DRM-free without breaking whatever native compatibility an original release supported, with the full disclaimer that in the case of "else" one would get the DRM-free experience without any of the GOG Galaxy features.



You could have spared yourself the time and effort by simply checking the cog-link for "Posts by GOG Team":

You have a very small group of customers making demands that would cost a company more in time,trouble and money then they could hope to recoup from that smalle customer base.
Seems to me that it's foolish to expect the world to conform to your every wish and whm,,but,sadly a ltot of people don't get that.

MS Nanny was made for speshul people JUST LIKE YOU!!!. o.O
.
I don't run XP but I'm not about to buy games from people that break compatibility for the sake of "achievements".

If they can't be bothered to make a separate version for peeps that have to have them, they're worthless to me.