First off, it bears repeating: WINE – and this includes all of its offshoots, including Play on Linux/Mac, Cedega, Cider, Wineskin, Darwine, and CrossOver – is not emulation (WINE is basically a "backroynm" which means "WINE Is Not an Emulator"). It's basically a binary translation layer that translates application calls to Windows APIs into calls to Linux/OS X APIs. It doesn't work like VMWare, or Parallels. Of course, you still obviously will expect a performance hit to some degree. But in my testing of the several hundred games I have in my library (so far!) most of the limitations in performance that I've experienced are more because of my hardware (the 64 MB GMA 950 in my MacBook) than because I'm not natively running the app in Windows. And compared to the performance drops I've seen associated with native ports in the past, even on Intel Macs, the drop in performance isn't really a huge problem. If you have a recent-enough Mac with decent graphics hardware, it's really not a big deal.

Most of the problems I've come across run the gamut from crashes to desktop, screen corruption, screen tearing, improperly drawn textures, or general wonkiness, but again, a lot of it is either because (a) my graphics hardware is simply too old, or (b) because there were bugs in the game that couldn't be fully fixed by the GOG staff. Yes, some games remain a major sticking point for me (I'm looking at you, Descent 3), but those have been the outliers.

That being said, I've done very, very very well for myself on GOG, even on a seven year old Mac using 10 year old graphics hardware. The only main problem is the time and effort it takes to get games to work; 60% of the time, a game will need some special attention, either in the form of WINE tweaks, or fan patches, or other steps, to work at their best. If you're willing to put the time and effort into it, any regular Mac user can enjoy the embarrassment of gaming riches offered by the GOG catalog.
I'm trying not to be elitist, but a lot of people would likely say that the quality of the forums took a major dive with each successive leap that GOG took into the mainstream. Will it happen when GOG offers Mac compatibility? I don't know, but my gut is telling me to prepare for the worst.

And even if the Mac users don't lead to even more pollution on the forums, I just know that places like General Discussion are going to get cluttered with flame threads with platform fanboys (on both sides) who still think that it's 1995.

Well to be fair WINE originally stood for WINdows Emulator, but I stand corrected. I remember reading up on WINE and I really should have remembered that it isn't an emulator. Oh well, my mistake, well that's good to hear that it's mostly pretty smooth operations minus when tweaks are needed.

For me, that sort of thing really doesn't bother me so long as the end result is it working. I have been tempted to try running GOG titles in WINE on Linux, but I was unsure if it would be overly problematic. My hardware is relatively new (3 years and under), so it sounds like my problems would be significantly less. Either way, thanks for the info, that puts my mind at ease.

My personal theory is that they'll just offer Mac compatibility for their indie releases where native ports already exist for the games in question, in a Steamworks-like fashion. For this, GOG need only negotiate a deal with the developers themselves, as opposed to a situation where they'd be stuck wrangling with a publisher.

I don't know how to tweak wine or do anything that's mildly complicated.

I find if I try one of the following the game will work:

1. plain install using wine;
2. install using crossover;
3. use one of the thingies from this website: http://www.paulthetall.com/

That's what I thought as well. But then I thought there was some mention of a new OS for their classic games.... but maybe I was dreaming. I would be happy if they just had mac versions of the indie releases where the developers had them.

FYI, I've posted a set of tutorials for Wineskin, CrossOver, and DOSBox here: http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/gog_games_on_mac_os_x_a_how_to/page1 - I've also got a GOGmix with a list of games I've tested here: http://www.gog.com/en/mix/mac_friendly_gog_games_4

Sadly, the GOGmix feature is broken, so I haven't fixed or fully updated it yet. I've also got a comprehensive step-by-step how-to for Divine Divinity here: http://www.gog.com/en/forum/divine_divinity_series/divine_divinity_on_mac_os_x_installation_instructions

I also wrote a semi-regular series for Inside Mac Games called "Crossing Over", which covered some of my favorite games that I've been running and playing in WINE (using CrossOver); IIRC, my first write up was on XIII. The only major caveat is that a change in the display model used in Lion seriously broke fullscreen in a lot of games; the people at Codeweavers are working on it, but for now, you'll either have to play in a virtual desktop, or set ddr=gdi in the Windows registry using either regedit or winetricks (some games may be fine though, so it's heavily on a case-by-case basis). In any case, if you want a recommendation, I just picked up Ghost Recon during the UbiSoft sale, and it runs great on my Mac.

Welp, that's good to know it's pretty straight forward. :P

That very much annoys me.. :(

Well, there are currently four major Mac products with very standard configurations and hardware, which makes them even easier to test for than Windows. But what I was referring to is OS, of which there is essentially only one. You really can't downplay how much more work it would be for Linux, even if you stick to the Debian kernels you've still got a lot of variation. A release works fine in Ubuntu but crashes in Mint? That's twice as much testing and a delayed release. Then you have all the people complaining that GOG isn't supporting Arch properly or something, and it becomes even more work.

It's not new but it's pretty significant. Why would CDP's subsidy studio port a game that their subsidy store cannot sell? Common business sense

Well, it may seem that way but it isn't. It's a very specific parody, particularly the line about "how do I make this even better", one of Apple's notorious catchphrases.

Well, my second paragraph wasn't directed at you specifically, so I'm sorry you took it that way. However, I'm not trying to insult anyone. It's just that there are very clear indications that GOG is going to support Mac, not the least of which is Obsidian outright confirming it, so it seems bizarre to me that people are still predicting it's Linux. I totally understand the disappointment, and I sympathize, but there's a few people (not you, others) exhibiting outright denial that are going to be really mad tomorrow.

Granted, however not everyone is running the latest Mac hardware OR OS necessarily either so you do have to account for those too, or you will have an equal number of angry customers. I know it's unlikely that anyone is going to run THAT old of stuff but certainly not impossible. I do realize that you can run into issues with different distros, but that can happen with any OS really; I do realize there are benefits to having a standardized set up as with Macs, but personally a bit stifling as well.

While it is significant, I am honestly more interested in hearing about projects (other than the Witcher 2), such as Cyberpunk. I'm not so much saying they should port it to something they won't be able to sell, however, there are plenty of Linux users more than willing to fork over cash for a good game (such as The Witcher 1 and 2).

I must have missed that bit, I guess I'm rather becoming slowly oblivious to Mac advertisements (to the point I'm considering next upgrade switching my phone to an Android). If I missed that part I stand corrected.

Oh, LOL I wasn't really meaning it was directed to me, so much as a general view point on how it seemed. No worries about it, I was more or less just stating that's how it seemed rather than trying to accuse you of intending it that way. If GOG chooses to go the Mac route that is their right, but to quote my old professor "believe half of what you read, and none of what you hear". I personally till it is stated tomorrow - it is a Shrodinger's Cat scenerio.

Perhaps there are people who will "go nuclear" if tomorrow's announcement isn't for Linux, but keep in mind those are the same people who would likely do that over anything they didn't like. Personally, I would be happy if they so much as announced they were "looking into" providing Linux support (even if it wasn't going to be right away), if not saying Linux would be supported.

To be honest, I was actually concerned a little that at some point my views would end up causing a flame war. The level of civility of the GOG forums never ceases to impress me, it's so nice to convey differences without resulting to petty shit flinging.

Yeah it's really a parody of the Apple release videos. (maybe homage, but kind of a parody)

I suspect rampancy is right that it is only the new releases which have native mac apps will be put on here, but we'll see what's announced.

Even if it is MacOS X support that is announced, this is still good news for Linux users since GOG going multi-OS opens the door for eventual support for them too.

I really hope you're right Dave, and GOG going multi-os would be fantastic news. Though, I would still like even a vague promise of AT LEAST looking into Linux support. It wouldn't bother me if it wasn't going to be for a while, just the fact they'd look into it would definitely brighten my spirits. :P

hey thanks. you are one of the most helpful people i have ever met. and grats on 500 rep.