In other words, you have no idea. I'm sorry, but by now, you just come off as a guy who has opted to not use Steam and is willing to shun any project on the mere basis of having different opinion, yet without much understanding of deeper issues at play here (otherwise you would understand that what you said was about a third of what I was asking, and even then the answer wasn't entirely accurate.) If you want me to take your opinion over that of both corporations with millions of employees and small studios with just a few alike, both of which depend on success of their titles with their very existence, you'd better be prepared to back up your arguments properly. You're not. All you're doing is saying 'well it's like that because I said so'. End of discussion.

In other words, those who solve such problems can solve them without Steam. Those who claim that it's not possible, have no idea indeed. Your assumption that Steam is such absolute must for network gaming, modding and the rest that it's too hard to do anything without it is easily disproved by games which don't use it. The same kind of arguments come from developers who say that bothering about Linux users is pointless, since they are not their target audience and etc. Do you think it's professional on their part? I don't.

Maybe by extending the customer base to non Steam plattforms they could increase their profits which is the aim of all economic activity. I don't know if potentially not maximizing the profits could be called unprofessional. At least it could be called: lacking a sportive/competitve spirit. Lazy bones they are. :)

I never argue about that :). They don't cater to my tastes but I view them as a known bakery from a different district. They have a lot of faithful customers, steady income and are satisfied with their income, so why should they start wanting to be second Unilever and go for whole city first and then the rest of world? I either want to take a trip to another district or not and look for another bakery, maybe not so good but closer.

Sure, these small nice shops still exist, mostly not on main street but in side streets. Nevertheless the most share of the business is now conducted by the big chains which started as small shops once but decided to expand. In my town unfortunately most/all of the small bakeries died out and four local chains have taken over the business. But I will always say that it's the decision of the businessowner.

Good, now you start putting words into my mouth. I have never said it's impossible. I have never even said that anyone ever claimed it's not possible.

This is a topic about requesting Linux support on GOG. Might I suggest taking your Steam discussion to a more appropriate place, like private messages, or even a topic about steam.

You pictured it being so hard, that it's practically not feasible. I disagree.

On the steam side topic: I have to say that I tend to agree with many points & questions Fenixp had raised... the question of a platform API which make the support and the work burden for the devlopers smaller is what made Windows successful in first place (How Microsoft Lost the API War) and I would argue is traditional the weak side of the fragmented linux ecosystem (to answer Daerandin, this Steam side discussion has some linux connection).

Give the developers a way of lowering their work burden (by shifting some work aspects to a platform provider, in this case steam) and they will love to use it. That the same functionality is in manual way technical possible too is a irrelevant quality. Therefore I agree, GOG needs to provide more developer convenience functionality... direct update pushed by developers (no time consuming GOG review), direct beta support, statistics and many more... I don't think that this would interfers per se with the GOG policies.

Back on topic, maybe we are looking from the wrong site on this "support another platform problem" ...newest data indicate that DOS support might be the key to success for GOG. Remember, freeDos is open source too :)

PS: I created infact a wish for it: Add DOS as supported platform ;)

Any solution from some provider which is not portable and locks developers into that provider is unacceptable. Convenience is a good thing, lock in - not at all.

DOS support is covered by DosBox ;)

Natural Selection 2 Native Linux Gameplay got posted 2 days ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwyMgsKpWjk

In other news:
GOG continues to ignore Linux. LOL.

Is it going to be sold DRM free, or it's some other Steam-only clone?

I have no idea. I only care for actual Linux ports one way or another.

Well, as was discussed right above, when some game is tied to Steam by using some lock-in features from there, it's really not up to GOG. I.e. even if GOG have been supporting Linux, such kind of games wouldn't have appeared here. That's why I asked, whether it's Steam only or not in that sense :)

Did I understand you right that you would interprete every platform approach as lock-in already? Even if it would be an open platform (not a steam/apple walled garden)? That I have to say is a extreme interpretation for my taste, as I believe that developer convenience is compatible with user freedom and the GOG qualities.