• @TheEntity
    link
    English
    221 day ago

    Not nearly the same degree. GOG sells actual Linux games with no 3rd party software necessary to play them. The same cannot be said about EGS, one simply cannot launch an EGS game in an officially supported way.

    • @woelkchen
      link
      English
      121 hours ago

      GOG sells actual Linux games with no 3rd party software necessary to play them.

      Ah yes, stand-alone binary installers that work only on a very tiny set of Linux versions because they rely on specific version of system libraries, sometimes contain distribution-specific hardcoded paths, and so on. I especially like those older Linux ports that exclusively target Nvidia drivers because why would anyone just have coded to the OpenGL standard back then…

      We have Flatpak Runtimes and Steam Linux Runtimes since years. CD Project / GOG can’t even be bothered to pick these existing open source solutions.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      For a very limited subset of games, they provide linux binaries. For the rest? You are up a creek and in the realm of “Figure it out”. Which… is generally the Heroic Launcher (or Lutris for a subset) which puts you in the same boat as Epic.

      If you insist upon saying one store is more virtuous than the other… okay? I personally don’t like defending companies but you do you.

      But for the vast majority of games? Epic and GoG are in the same category as basically everything but Steam. And both are in the exact same category regarding launchers and download services since they both heavily rely on the Heroic Launcher (which is awesome).

      And, to be clear, neither should be applauded for Linux support.


      Well, to be clearer. The folk behind the Heroic Launcher (and Lutris) SHOULD be applauded. And I think there is actually a very strong argument that store fronts should not be expected to build out entire social media ecosystems with attached updaters (what launchers basically are). But both Epic and GoG have decided to half ass that so they should be called out for not doing it “right”.

      • @TheEntity
        link
        English
        120 hours ago

        If you insist upon saying one store is more virtuous than the other… okay? I personally don’t like defending companies but you do you.

        Could you please not put words into my mouth? Neither is “virtuous” and I am not defending them. Let’s stick to the facts instead. It’s clear that EGS is being actively hostile towards Linux, while GOG is merely negligent. EGS actively removed Linux support from previously supported games on at least one occasion (Rocket League).

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          16 hours ago

          You’re doing it again.

          As a publisher: Yes, Epic stopped the Rocket League devs from continuing to build Linux binaries. To my knowledge, they have not disabled “support” for Proton in any of the anti-cheat solutions.

          Similarly, the development branch of CD Projekt (the parent company of GoG), apparently had Linux binaries for The Witcher 2. They do not for The Witcher 3 or Cyberpunk.

          Both companies decided it was not worth internally supporting Linux and instead rely on Proton/Wine to do it for them. Whether that is good for gaming is debatable, but both are “actively hostile towards Linux” in that regard.


          If you do want to criticize the handling of Linux then I would suggest looking into the Unreal Engine marketplace (or whatever they call it now) being a complete shitshow for Linux developers. Which is ironic since the UE documentation is actually great for Linux devs. I cannot speak to the CDPR efforts with their modding SDKs since I haven’t opened one since The Witcher 1 (when it was either a hacked version of the NWN toolkit or an officially hacked version of the NWN toolkit).

          But that is Epic and CDP not EGS and GoG.