I'm using a older version (~6months) wich probably don't have the fixes. Not dificult to deal with, but a bigger warning would work for me. I did read somewhere the "some software may not work unless run from the prefix" warning, the issue is that is not "some" nor "may", if the software is a simple .exe then fine, otherwise inside the prefix must go.
Thanks. Bottles have indeed a option to use Gamescope but never got it to work correcty despite a few tries. Not sure if is because I'm using the Cinammon desktop with x11, because Linux Mint, the laptop dual graphics setup (wich suuuucks) or my inate inability.
In the same vein, never got mangohud to work either, wich seems to have some bugs on Debian based distros.

Don't get me wrong, I like flatpaks since it solve the "dependecy hell" not only for games. But is weird very simple programs need a awfull lot of space for flatpaks when they work just fine installed from the distro repository.


Since we are on topic, one thing I really like to have implemented on Bottles is the ability to run the "bottle" offline (or even by program). A simple button would be great. Shouldn't be very hard to implement since each "bottle" is self contained anyway.
Well, praying and shouting to the air usually won't solve the issue on hand so begging a feature on the foruns seems like the way to go :)

At this point, I am more in the mindset that Linux needs to be able to run Windows games, rather than that developers "should" provide native Linux-builds of their games.

The ability to run Windows apps on Linux will allow more users to migrate to Linux in case they get fed up with Windows or Microsoft for any reason or just want to see what Linux is all about (without losing the ability to use their Windows applications), and when that number becomes high enough, then we can expect developers to directly support Linux more and more. I guess.

So yeah, at this point I am fine with the idea that in Linux I try to get Windows games to run on it.

Not sure about the gaming clients though, can I expect their Windows versions run reliably on Linux with Wine, or "should" gaming stores offer Linux builds of their clients? At this point, Steam is apparently the only main store gaming client which offers a Linux version, while GOG, EA, Epic, UPlay etc. don't, AFAIK.

Then again, what good is a Linux version of a client, if the games themselves don't necessarily work on Linux? Steam at least tries to make it so that you can actually run your games on Linux. Not all of them, but at least many of them.

The constant crashing is something I experienced as well before trying other configurations. All I can really advise is to try older versions if you have not already since both EverNightX and I are on a version of 8 and it is functioning (poorly for me). Sometimes the later ones do break things.

That's the point.

Better they pay for a Linux guru than a live-in consultant.

Addendum/snarky note: What I mean to say is, if they feel the need to hire a customer retention expert, that means someone's ego is getting in the way. All they have to do is drop their pride and just ask us.

Been using Heroic for maybe 2 months now, and it seems to work fine.

It gets a bit boring to see you repeating this lie ad nauseam, despite being proven wrong multiple times already.

What benefit do you get from it?

Mate, if you can prove me wrong, then do so, as I'm all ears.

I have nothing to gain from what I said, and I certainly don't believe I am wrong.

Just because you keep refuting what I say, doesn't make it true. Facts make it true.

Some folk believe if you bash someone over the head sufficiently with something, they will finally give in and believe. Religion is a bit like that.

So no, you haven't proved anything ... or I would agree with you.

My claim is made up from what I have read by GOG and others.

If you believe that GOG does support Linux in any real meaningful way, give us some examples, to counter what I have read and said.

P.S> What you have said in the past, as I recall it, is just a play on the word 'Support', and certainly doesn't match my definition.

What? Timboli defending his opinion on a video gaming forum with his astounding logic?

But that never happens around here.

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/gogcom_now_supports_linux/page1
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/ubuntu_1604_now_supported_on_gogcom_57624/page1
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/ubuntu_1804_official_support_and_things_that_are_nice_to_know/page1

I haven't seen any news posts regarding more recent Ubuntu releases, but I can find games with Ubuntu 22.04 (the current Ubuntu LTS release) listed as being officially supported. That being said the level of support on GOG has certainly declined considerably in recent years, but that's not the same thing as not officially supporting it.

Providing a game for a version of Linux, is not the support I have been referring to.
How is that different than all the other Linux versions provided with games at GOG?

Providing a game is one thing, support as I know it, is another.

I have a few hundred Linux versions of games from GOG. I don't see them as support for Linux, except in the most basic sense.

So as I said, just a play on the word, which can obviously be used in different ways.

Does GOG have staff that are well versed in Linux, that help with all Linux game issues, like they have for Windows game variants?

Does Galaxy support Linux? Using Wine etc aside.

And every Linux version is in addition to the Windows version, no Linux versions without a Windows version.

GOG provide a Linux version of a game here and there, but there is no concerted effort by them to push Linux, certainly not like Steam for instance.

And as many of us know, many of the games here at GOG, have a Linux version NOT here at GOG. Now no doubt that is likely down to the game provider, but how much are GOG encouraging them to provide it?

I've actually never had to contact GOG for support with any of the Linux games I have here; any problems I've had I've either resolved myself or found the solution already posted by others.

I do know that they used to have a Linux team though, to the extent that they were wrapping games with DOSBox and Wine themselves, as evidenced by the post they made introducing the addition of Linux support.

Members of their Linux team also used to post here regularly, along with other GOG staff members, however posts ceased around the time of those fiascos on Twitter/social media a while back. GOG became a lot more insular after that and it looks a lot like they put a ban on most GOG staff interacting with the community, although AFAIK they haven't said anything about it officially - but the fact that all GOG staffers went silent around the same time suggests that this is the case.

Clearly GOG's Linux support has also declined since then as they've focused on pushing Galaxy and normalising DRM within GOG games, but that's not the same thing as them not supporting it at all.

Plus from what I've read even GOG's Windows support isn't exactly stellar anyway, with "just use Galaxy" seemingly being used as a panacea to whatever issue you have (that is, once you get past the automation/chatbots)... an argument could be made that all of GOG's standalone installers regardless of OS are merely "unsupported bonuses" at this point, and that only Galaxy users are really supported by GOG.

Galaxy not being on Linux can actually in some ways be seen as kind of a good thing given the shitshow it is on Windows and seeing how it's increasingly being used to compromise GOG's last remaining so-called "core principle" of being 100% DRM-free...

To me, it raises the question on where GOG is applying its investments. Streaming? Epic store support? Cloud saves? Passwords in offline installers? Even the big unbundling and the movies were not, in my view, positive investments.
To me, I recall only two positive investments: Linux support (now calcifying) and the current game filters. Tags are OK but I preferred the GOG lists.

At the moment, I consider that Steam is doing much more for Linux gaming. Would GOG do something similar if they had similar profit? Somehow I doubt it.

Yep, I agree 100% with that.