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

×
arrow-down2arrowcart2close4fat-arrow-leftfat-arrow-rightfeedbackfriends2happy-facelogo-gognotificationnotifications-emptyownedremove-menusad-facesearch2wishlist-menuwishlisted2own_thingsheartstartick
avatar
Matruchus: Actually its all a maybe. Remember that Dungeons 2 got a Linux version on gog a year after windows release. So its a posibility that the same will happen with Dungeons 3.
avatar
shmerl: I suppose that was before Galaxy problem became a blocker for Linux games?
It was this spring if I'm not mistaken. Galaxy is only a problem for games with multiplayer. Dungeons 2 I think was released as a singleplayer Linux version.
Post edited September 24, 2017 by Matruchus
avatar
shmerl: The main problem with this delay are releases that don't provide Linux versions on GOG, while do it elsewhere, because developers can't or don't want to go extra length to make Galaxy optional, and lack of Linux Galaxy libraries makes them cancel GOG Linux release altogether.
Wait, I don't get this part. How can Galaxy NOT be optional for titles with single-player content? Has something changed about Galaxy being totally optional unless the game uses it for multiplayer?
And if Galaxy IS optional then it's 100% the fault of developers if they don't want to release their Linux games here because there is no Galaxy for Linux.

Linux is low on GOG's priority list, which is quite understandable. They have their hands full with the Windows version, which is still far from bug-free and still has a lot of room for improvements if they want it to compete with Steam. Unless there's something I'm missing here, I wouldn't say that it's GOG's fault that developers think it's not worth to release their Linux versions here if they can't use Galaxy.
Post edited September 24, 2017 by Taro94
avatar
Taro94: And if Galaxy IS optional then it's 100% the fault of developers if they don't want to release their Linux games here because there is no Galaxy for Linux.
It is fault of the developers, but it's facilitated by GOG. I'd blame both.

Excuse of having hands full with Windows version is also their own fault. They didn't have to take so many tasks, as to make actual releases here suffer.
Post edited September 24, 2017 by shmerl
avatar
Taro94: And if Galaxy IS optional then it's 100% the fault of developers if they don't want to release their Linux games here because there is no Galaxy for Linux.
avatar
shmerl: It is fault of the developers, but it's facilitated by GOG. I'd blame both.

Excuse of having hands full with Windows version is also their own fault. They didn't have to take so many tasks, as to make actual releases here suffer.
Taking fewer tasks would mean Galaxy's development would be even slower. And it's already slow. The Linux customer base is very small in comparison to Windows. It's much more profitable to have a somewhat working Windows version than to have two barely working versions for Windows and Linux.

Linux games were released here even before Galaxy and they still are being released. I can blame GOG for many things, but Linux games not appearing here is not one of these.
avatar
Taro94: Linux games were released here even before Galaxy and they still are being released. I can blame GOG for many things, but Linux games not appearing here is not one of these.
Tell it to Kalypso and others, who use Galaxy as an excuse for missing releases here. It is clearly GOG's fault that they don't support Linux on par with other platforms, and it indirectly causes missing releases. GOG are OK with treating it as second class citizen here.
Post edited September 24, 2017 by shmerl
avatar
Taro94: Linux is low on GOG's priority list, which is quite understandable. They have their hands full with the Windows version, which is still far from bug-free and still has a lot of room for improvements if they want it to compete with Steam.
avatar
Taro94: Taking fewer tasks would mean Galaxy's development would be even slower. And it's already slow. The Linux customer base is very small in comparison to Windows. It's much more profitable to have a somewhat working Windows version than to have two barely working versions for Windows and Linux.
Agreed, it's quite understandable.

Now please explain to me why is there a Mac version of Galaxy out there.


EDIT: I'm assuming here that the Mac version of Galaxy is totally on par with the Windows one both in patches and functionality. Is it?
Post edited September 25, 2017 by muntdefems