Giving you a broken game--even as a bonus goody--is not the experience that we provide.
Perhaps not for every release but it happens! PROOF
So they can add tech demos from uncompleted games as a (obviously unsupported) free bonus but NO, it is important they do NOT support Linux in the same way. GoG prides itself of not supporting Linux in any way, shape or form directly or indirectly.
The subject of not enough resources and wanting to provide a quality service at all times actually came up starting from here
. Needless to say, apparently it's not as much effort as GOG likes to make it seem.
Making packages and distributing them? Yes, that's trivial. But what your poster in that thread doesn't account for is that we do a lot more than that with classic games. I'm not the guy in charge of testing, mastering, and building games, but let's just look at what *I* can think of that makes Linux release a very difficult proposition:
What distros do we support? There are 10 "fairly common" ones (Ubuntu, Mint, OpenSuse, Fedora, CentOS, ArchLinux, Debian, Slackware, FreeBSD
and, um, I've forgotten a couple). Hardware? What level of updates? Only FOSS drivers, or can we take some closed source stuff? Once we've decided on a test bed, we still have to check the games. Do they boot? What about oddball games like, say, Theme Hopsital? There's a version-specific DOSBox-related fix there. Does it in work in any distro? In all of 'em? Managing testing across the 3 OSes we support is tough and requires a lot of time, effort, and money. How much more complex will 10 more OSes make it?
The bit I bolded is completely wrong. FreeBSD is NOT a Linux distro, it is a completely different OS. Of course all of this is premised on official, tested support being the only possibility and the notion that GOG HAS to have an inferior version in cases where developers and/or publishers have official Linux clients.