It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like:Chrome,Firefox,Internet Explorer orOpera

×
avatar
shmerl: That would be coming veery late to the table, so to waste go all GOG's claims about how innovating and ahead of the curve they are. If they want to compete, they need to do it here an now, not in a year down the line.
avatar
JohnnyDollar: It would appear so given the trend and future outlook. Reading the response in post #680 makes it sound as if their projections are showing that its too costly or too risky a move right now given their current format.

Maybe they would need to tweak their policies a little bit to cut costs in order to make it happen sooner?
Maybe the Linux market is far smaller than we usually think and in the end it makes much less difference. After all the customers have not much data on that and we must leave the business decisions to GOG.

Basically GOG has to decide whether they want to put emphasis on growth in the future or profitability now and whether support of Linux makes sense or more games for the Windows plattform. After all their internal resources are limited.

What I don't understand is why they aren't offering the native Linux versions existing for many newer games they are selling. Just introduce Linux support on a piecewise basis. For me it seems like a waste of potential sales at almost no costs. I don't see the economic advantage of not doing it.

Well, with a competitor that offers Linux games the issue for the customers is less severe now. Everybody just go to Humble Store and buy DRM free Linux games there. No real need to complain anymore, except for those games which aren't there.
avatar
JohnnyDollar: It would appear so given the trend and future outlook. Reading the response in post #680 makes it sound as if their projections are showing that its too costly or too risky a move right now given their current format.

Maybe they would need to tweak their policies a little bit to cut costs in order to make it happen sooner?
avatar
Trilarion: Maybe the Linux market is far smaller than we usually think and in the end it makes much less difference.
Recently we got good data: Steam client usage revealed 1-2% linux percent... consistent with the numbers available since years via webcounters. But can't be debated away (like what happens with the webcounter numbers often) as Valve is highly interested in a big number here.

http://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/1lkn27/steam_hardware_survey_for_august_linux_drops/

avatar
shaddim: I'm always confused when people talk about a linux "platform".
avatar
JohnnyDollar: Don't let if confuse you. :D
I'm highly confused! :D How one can call this messy ecosystem a platform? It's...messy, hacky, dirty, multi-faced, organic and everchanging... something completely opposite to a stable and at best slowly evolving platform. ;P
Post edited November 13, 2013 by shaddim
avatar
Trilarion: What I don't understand is why they aren't offering the native Linux versions existing for many newer games they are selling. Just introduce Linux support on a piecewise basis. For me it seems like a waste of potential sales at almost no costs. I don't see the economic advantage of not doing it.
Their best reason for not supporting Linux is because they don't have anyone at GOG who uses (or knows?) it.

If they were to provide support for it, they'd have to hire or train someone and that is a cost (monetary/time) or let the community handle it (which wouldn't be under their control).

That said, if I were running GOG, I would provide the files in the extras, find all the Linux users who would provide pro bono support and set up a "Community Support" team of them, assign one of the existing support staff as their "co-ordinator" and if an official support request came in about a Linux problem, hand off the ticket to them (with a "Sorry, GOG do not support this but we have passed your ticket on to the Linux community support team to help you" to the customer). Then a small reward (5.99 GOG?) for the good, active support members each month or whatever.

And then I'd brag like hell in the public arena that my company was embracing the community to provide the best experience for everyone.
avatar
Trilarion: Maybe the Linux market is far smaller than we usually think and in the end it makes much less difference.
avatar
shaddim: Recently we got good data: Steam client usage revealed 1-2% linux percent... consistent with the numbers available since years via webcounters. But can't be debated away (like what happens with the webcounter numbers often) as Valve is highly interested in a big number here.
This was already discussed above, those numbers are useless for estimating percentage of Linux users, since Steam's catalog is not uniformly cross platform and many Linux users don't use Steam.
avatar
shmerl: This was already discussed above, those numbers are useless for estimating percentage of Linux users, since Steam's catalog is not uniformly cross platform and many Linux users don't use Steam.
And Steam's catalog is not focused on indies, whereas the percentage of Linux Indie gamers seems to be much higher (makes sense, indie gaming largely goes hand to hand with a large part of Linux philosophy)
avatar
shaddim: Recently we got good data: Steam client usage revealed 1-2% linux percent... consistent with the numbers available since years via webcounters. But can't be debated away (like what happens with the webcounter numbers often) as Valve is highly interested in a big number here.
avatar
shmerl: This was already discussed above, those numbers are useless for estimating percentage of Linux users, since Steam's catalog is not uniformly cross platform and many Linux users don't use Steam.
OK; obviously I was wrong... this numbers CAN be still debated! ;P. Vice versa, I see a bias for linux under steam as it is the ONLY service providing a significant amount of AAA games for linux.

avatar
shmerl: This was already discussed above, those numbers are useless for estimating percentage of Linux users, since Steam's catalog is not uniformly cross platform and many Linux users don't use Steam.
avatar
Fenixp: And Steam's catalog is not focused on indies, whereas the percentage of Linux Indie gamers seems to be much higher (makes sense, indie gaming largely goes hand to hand with a large part of Linux philosophy)
About indie gaming, If we look at the later humble indie bundels (after the hype faded off) the linux purchase numbers ended with 5-6%, half of Mac. Also not overwhelming. http://cheesetalks.twolofbees.com/humble/#Indie%209
Post edited November 13, 2013 by shaddim
For that HB stats site, there is a proposal for better representing Linux+DRM-free sales, since now these numbers are skewed by HB DRMed and non cross platform releases too. See https://github.com/Cheeseness/humble-visualisations/issues/27
avatar
shmerl: For that HB stats site, there is a proposal for better representing Linux+DRM-free sales, since now these numbers are skewed by HB DRMed and non cross platform releases too. See https://github.com/Cheeseness/humble-visualisations/issues/27
This concern is not applying to HIBs which I meant specifically: fully cross-platform and DRM-free.
HIB7: 6.8%, HIB8: 6.3%, HIB9: 4.8%
Post edited November 13, 2013 by shaddim
For specific bundles yes, you have more useful stats. 6-7% is a significant amount. Depending on the bundle, Linux sales go even above 11%.
Post edited November 13, 2013 by shmerl
And yeap, while Linux desktop users has 1-2%, they generated about 10% of money incomes from sales on Humble Bundle store (check there cheesetalks. twolofbees. com/humble/ )
Don't be afraid to add Linux support, and Linux users will be gratefully.
By the way, Killing Floor' dev, found income from Steam on Linux sales enough to porting another their titles. So...
There is no good evidence that Linux desktop usage is 1-2%. Using web stats does not correcty show global Linux market share on the desktop. It should be higher. Though, it would be interesting for GOG to publish web stats as well.
Post edited November 14, 2013 by shmerl
avatar
shmerl: There is no good evidence that Linux desktop usage is 1-2%. Using web stats does not correcty show global Linux market share on the desktop. It should be higher. ...
Why should it be higher. Couldn't it be lower as well?

Anyway I guess that Linux selling potential is around 5%. That is kind of the average of all the values named here.
Trilarion: For opinions about that, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_adoption#Measuring_desktop_adoption
avatar
shmerl: Trilarion: For opinions about that, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_adoption#Measuring_desktop_adoption
This specific article chapter (and several other linux specific wikipedia articles) is pretty biased (questionable source selection). One could say, the linux user share among the wikipedia authors is clearly higher than 1-2%. ;)

I mean, it makes not much sense to palliate the reality by bickering on the numbers... Fact is, the normal desktop users rejected the linux desktop experience since 2 decades, might it 1% or 5%. The real solution here is to fix the weaknesses & to accept that the other major desktop OSs' did some things right where linux failed.
The point is, there is no clear way to estimate it globally, so tossing around numbers like 1% or etc. is useless. You can estimate it locally, i.e. such as GOG measuring OS usage of their own site visitors, HB measuring purchases stats and so on.

Desktop users didn't reject anything. The vast majority of them don't ever make a choice about what OS to use. They use what's coming preinstalled with the computer. And MS abused its monopoly to force computer manufacturers to bundle Windows. This has been going for years. Despite Windows doing maaany things very wrong.
Post edited November 14, 2013 by shmerl