Ok... regarding the lack of Linux version and the Feral Games situation... I tried to read a bit about what people were saying in this thread and some sources they linked...
First, i can colpletely understand people's stance and decision on not buying the game because of the lack of version for their favored platform of choice, especially when one knows said version/port exists already. I dont use linux much myself, mostly for a couple of network based uses and projects but not as a daily basis jack'of'all'trade desktop solution (yet), even though most of the applications and softwares i use daily on a desktop environement are open source stuff that also exists on linux.
I can relate about what it feels when being playing on a platform frowned upon, shunned and not considered by publishers: i spent most of my gaming youth with Amiga computers for at least 1/3rd of my gaming lifespan.
now for the whole Feral point and explanation about not releasing stuff here, there are some things that feel odd:
1) They say their hands are tied because of Publisher's consent.
Hello there ? Do you really think or believe the windows version of the game could have been sold (and discounted) on GOG here WITHOUT the publisher's consent ?
Publisher holds all the distribution, sales and IP property's rights, so if they sell one of the platform's port here, they clearly have an agreement and a deal with GOG that feels Ok enough for them.
2) the port relies on steam only librairies and such. Well, some other devs and publishers already managed to pull in linux port here despite of that (i could hear about something related to grim fandango in some linked source), plus most of said librairies are probably for features that are either not essential or that can be rewritten if not for being a lazy bunch of people relying too much on convenience of steamworks framework
Plus, GOG never seemed to shut their door and refuse to help devs who would like to implement their own galaxy counterpart of steam frameworks features (cloud save, achievements, multiplayer api etc)
3) i find it funny to see that a company that specializes in the business of porting games on linux platform may be as much pro DRM as feral game seems to be; i mean, Linux stands for the complete opposite values from whatever DRM stand for, already (open source vs closed source and proprietary stuff, user control on his own machine vs third party company wanting to get control over one's own personal machine, etc)
4) someone mentioned something about the need for Feral Games to be able to monitor or get telemetry about their own port's usage from a digital games store, which requires DRM. I fear there is some bias here, as GOG can perfectly tell if a user downloaded a game already (this info can sometimes be needed for the purpose of refunding or support requests for example) and they sure can tell how many times a given archive file of an installer (lets say "the linux installer for a said game" for example) got downloaded or not. And lets face it: i dont know anyone who would download a linux installer of a game from his library if NOT for using it (except maybe a very minor portion of facetious folks)
my call be that they just are searching excuse and that the lack of linux port here is not to be put on gog's blame, but on the port's devs only.
- Publisher already made a deal with GOG
- GOG always had helped devs regarding the implementation of their own solution's counterpart features from steam devs framework (galaxy)
- The port already exists so it's not asking the moon, they have the source,they just need to "remove" the parts of the code regarding drm and stea integration, or create a looping wrapper for it to behave as is with the native libraries
People may already know me here as someone that is quick to rant and get angered against GOG whenever they screw up, they do mistakes, they take anti consumer stance or generally are making questionable judgment calls.
But i'm also not OK about putting the blame on GOG for everything, especially things in which they may logically not have their part in, or their word about
Maybe the latest couple of years of strange decision making from GOG gave people the wrong idea that they could easily use them as scapegoat for their own shortcomings, but doing that litteraly equals taking us for idiotic fools as well..
And as far as i'm concerned, i dont want to deal with devs who take me for a fool and spit in my face (League of Geek, if you hear me... well... you can go back drinking your own puke, thank you !)
Cavalary: Just as a note, if you're in regions getting price hikes, you should be getting a fair price package and currently that doesn't seem to be happening.
Kakarot96: mmm, for me the game says 5.99 euros while it seems to be 7.39 in dollars. I don't know if that's correct or we should get a fair price package.
Anyway, great adition to GOG and to the sale, just in time!
i experienced price rise whenever i tried to buy it a second time as a gift for a friend...
i could get it at 5.99€ for myself but price got raised up to 8.09€ because of "regional pricing restrictions" (this was the message i got in the checkout page)
sounds related to your own issue, right ?
