Works for me on Mint, even finished the game. Only issue I found with it is the slow performance and memory leak after some time. Its not the most optimal port which is a shame considering the awesome game it is.

Oh, I'd blame it on developers, not on the game ;) They should learn something about Large File Support. See

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support
* http://users.suse.com/~aj/linux_lfs.html (see Using LFS there).

And the fact that on Linux, when they build 32-bit programs, LFS is not enabled by default. Compiler has to be instructed to switch it on. For instance, for GCC you need to compile with -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64

To be clear, lack of LFS doesn't just affect files larger than 2GB. It also affects using partitions larger than certain size (which hits XFS more than most).

The problem is complicated by the fact that different filesystems work inconsistently, when LFS is not enabled and the program runs on 64-bit system. The fact that it works on EXT4 more often than on XFS just obscures the problem, and developers think that's how it's supposed to be. Nothing of the sort. They simply are doing an incorrect assumption. So it's not a problem of XFS, it's a problem of developers having no clue about the topic.

And as a responsible distributor, you can ask your QA team to have a routine test, whether the binary is built with LFS or not. Run any incoming 32-bit game on 2TB XFS partition, and if it borks, inform developers about this issue. Educate them. It's much more effective when coming from you, than from us, users who are hit by this obnoxious issue. Even better, ask them to provide 64-bit version to avoid this whole mess.

Given how many game developers are still making this same mistake over and over (including Obsidian in recent Tyranny, who still didn't fix it until now), I'd say such QA check is a must for you.

The problem is that XFS just exposes the issue, but building 32-bit programs without LFS is plain wrong. You can of course criticize GCC for not enabling it by default, but that's just how it is. Developers should be aware of that. The least you can do, is simply inform all developers who submit 32-bit games, that they should always enable LFS. It shouldn't be hard to make it a known point, that you communicate to them, no? It might not prevent all such cases from slipping through, but it definitely can reduce their number, if you raise developers' awareness of this issue.

Indeed. Who said EXT4 is immune to it at even larger partition sizes? Violating the spec relying on undefined behavior is a bad idea, and GOG clearly can do something to make sure developers are aware of this issue.

Yes, I get it that developers can have practical reasons for not being able to provide 64-bit versions. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying, is it possible for you, to inform developers that if they are providing 32-bit only, they should make sure LFS is enabled? Just mentioning that for them in informative way can mitigate most of such cases. Coming from you, it will increase the quality of submitted versions.

Hello! If I dual boot windows and linux. Can I use the same install folder for both versions of a game?

It's not officially supported, but you can make it work in certain circumstances if you're a power user.

If the Windows and Linux versions can share data files, it's pure luck (developers generally don't aim to ensure that works) but it will sometimes work if you install them so that one copy's data files overwrite the other's.

(And you do sometimes find games where, when not offered via GOG installers, the developers simplify their hosting by offering a single zip containing one copy of the data and one copy of each available binary. A common example of that would be Ren'Py-based games like Long Live the Queen.)

If you want to run the Windows version on Linux inside Wine, then it's all up to Wine. If it works in Wine, you can get Windows and Wine sharing the same install.

(You just install into both and let one install overwrite the other. The only reason you need to install it twice is because Windows and Wine can't share the registry and many installers need to add some registry entries.)

I do it all the time with old games that can run on both the Windows 3.11 and Windows 98SE sides of my retro-gaming PC. (Though, technically, it's configuration files rather than the registry that can't be shared there. The Registry was invented after Windows 3.11)

However, if you want to share save files between the two desktops, you may have to muck about with symlinks because many games are new enough that they store their saves in your user profile rather than the game's install folder and I'd be wary of having Wine and Windows share the entire user profile, even if they store the registry under different names.

About the only games you could do that with are the Ren'py based ones like Long Live the Queen.

Not necessarily.

As an experiment (since it runs fine in Wine), I managed to build an "everything works except music and cutscenes" version of Railroad Tycoon 2 for Linux using a UK CD-ROM for Windows and a manually-unpacked copy of the Loki Games updater which would normally require you to insert a Linux RT2 CD.

That proves that, at most, the only thing that Loki changed about the data files during the Linux port was the music and cutscenes. More modern games are more likely to be using open-source, royalty-free codecs like Ogg Vorbis anyway (or the codecs they license are available on multiple platforms), which may increase the chances of pulling it off.

Please port GOG galaxy to linux (preferably mint :P). I think you guys would make a killing! Just do what steam does and use WINE as a wrapper and slightly modify your windows client.

Not really a good idea. Better make an open source client to begin with.