Why is it Windows only when it is Windows, Mac and Linux elsewhere?
Will you add the other versions, too?

This release seems incomplete, you'd be better off buying it on Steam.

This is getting embarrassing GOG.

In another GOG forum this was explained:

The non Windows versions were converted and published by another company, and that company refused to remove the DRM from the games. So GOG could not sell the games without throwing it's NO DRM policy out the window.
SOme people here just love to hate GOG...
If you find GOG so horrible, just stick to Steam.

My thoughts exactly. This release is just bad. You gotta love that they are hawking this as "a $55 game marked down 75%"...really guys? I'd love to support GOG, but a price like that for a 6 year old game that doesn't include the OS X or Linux versions is something I can't do. Aspyr ported the game to OS X, but Virtual Programming did the Linux release using a proprietary wrapper. Could you please link this supposed thread where you read that Virtual Programming refused to remove the DRM, because I can't find anything about that using Google.

Also, don't tell people what they can and can't complain about on this forum. If you don't like it, log off and go play in traffic.

I quote from the thread in the general forums announcing Bioshock:Infinate:

"Unfortunately, Mac and Linux versions were developed and published by a different company and it wasn't possible to add their DRM-free version of the game at the moment".

Point is GOG cannot get DRM free versions of the game for Linux or Mac right now.


But you seem to be intent on attacking GOG no matter what.
And I think GOG is pretty tolerant, given the amount of abuse they take on fourms they own and pay for.

Yeesh. I want a Linux version too, but this kind of aggressive entitlement doesn't do the Linux community any favors.

Came here to find out if anyone had had any success running it in WINE, guess I'll have to figure it out for myself.

The only post on ProtonDB indicates it crashes, so I'm not optimistic about its emulated support.

Also, this same thing happened with XCOM so I wouldn't hold my breath for the other platforms to be made available.

I can't speak for others you're replying to but for a lot of people it's more disappointment than "hate". Eg, the $50 price tag for one version (Windows) of one game (Bioshock Infinite by itself) does seem "less than competitively priced" considering the Bioshock Collection (B1 + B2 + B2 DLC + BI + BI DLC) that comes with Mac & Linux for BI regularly goes on sale on Steam for the same price. Or in other words, for the same $50 "BI GOG Edition" it's not only missing 2/3 of the variants, it's also missing the other 2 earlier games that virtually get bundled for free elsewhere. Or alternatively when matching for content of buying all 3 games at once, GOG costs nearer £64 (discounted to £18) vs £40 (discounted to £10) everywhere else yet still comes with fewer platform options.

As much as I love to support GOG, a +62% to 80% price increase for removing DRM from three 7-12 year old games is one hell of a premium and pointing out that "DRM-Free sounds nice but I'm not paying almost double the money for less content" is literally the first response when recommending others new to GOG to buy it here is hardly "hate" or "abuse". GOG can't be blamed for stuff beyond their control like another studio doing the Linux version, but given the short time-frame of only a few months between acquiring B1-2 vs BI, I think they'd have been better off negotiating for the Bioshock Collection as a package deal from the start to avoid end up getting screwed on pricing buying the trilogy as individual games.

Hard to disagree but imo this problem is mostly on the publishers of the game since I doubt GOG is able to do the pricing like they want. Regarding the argument of "better nogotiating" it beggs the question if GOG was ever given a better alternative to the deal they have now. Sometimes it's a "take it or leave it" situation so we'll have to ask ourselves if we would like to prefer to not get it at all here. Don't want to make this sound better as it is, just want to say that maybe there was not that much room for improvement given to GOG at all - I just don't know.

Regarding the missing Linux build I cannot say much but if actually another company is responsible for the Linux port I would suggest people do contact this company and ask them what exactly happened and why there is a Linux port on Steam but not on GOG. The more people are contacting them the higher the chances that things might still change here.

I really wish GOG would put their foot down and not allow inferior releases on their platform.
You would actually get better support and more platform support if you buy from other platforms like Steam.

I don't like that GOG is knowingly selling inferior releases of games, it makes GOG look bad, it makes CD Project look bad, it makes the developers and publishers look bad, it makes the porting companies look bad.

Edit: And I love GOG, OK?

This would make sense but afaik the general port has already been done. So we are only talking about a DRM-free build which should not be that problematic or expensive. I never wanted to blame GOG or anybody else by the way - I am just analyzing things. I also still think that contacting 2K or the dev who is responsible for the Linux build and simply talk to them cannot really hurt.

Voicing a valid complaint about an incomplete release of a game that has been out for OS X and Linux since 2015 is hardly an "attack". It's perfectly reasonable to air these concerns, because they affect potential buyers, and I certainly wasn't advocating that GOG employees be beaten and stoned in the streets.

Seriously, quit being such a whiny faggot. Go whiteknight somewhere else.

The Linux community is guilty of this as well. They really hate it when things are straight forward and easy to use.

Notice how often people who are jerks love to accuse others of that sin?