Which make it more or less a no-brainer on what distro is top pick. But I wouldn't say 100% compatible in every way. ATI drivers are jacked up for 12.04 and mint 14, but Unity craps out where as KDE (in my case) does not. This is a desktop environment issue and not the guts, but if GOG were to pick one thing to support it may mean the whole package. Because no matter how much two things are supposed to be the exact same, they never quite are.

Heh. BTW, I would like to clear a point: even though I consider non-feasible a Linux-plus gaming world on the PC, I hope some important milestones will be achieved in that regard anyway: since Microsoft decided to put "personal computing" down the shit pit the Windows 8 "app store" is, I'm looking forward to viable, non-remote controlled alternatives to play and do stuff on my computer.

GOG was originally called Good Old Games. But they since then dropped the exclusive focus on Old, and focus on Good (call it GOod Games if you want to). See many recent games additions. I don't think there is any reason for GOG to ignore modern games if they are available for GOG to distribute.

Yes. Pretty basic. On Linux we have mount and fuseiso pretty much easily available. On Windows - nothing out of the box, until you fiddle with daemontools.

Why are you guys beating the dead horse all this time? There are good and working installers around which support many modern distros. What's the point in reinventing the wheel? Did you test Torchlight? It has a very decent installer, which adapts to DEB or RPM backend (I didn't test others) and creates native package and then installs it. Very decently done and works completely through the GUI (probably it has CLI fallback also).

Let me repeat it again - packaging and distribution (writing a client or what not) doesn't bother GOG. They can do it. As far as I understood what supposedly bothers GOG is supporting games functionally on various distros (i.e. running them as gooberking said above). I.e. when it comes to users relying on PulseAudio, Alsa, OSS4, Nvidia drivers or not Nvidia drivers and etc. etc. That's where things start requiring adjustments. Experienced users overcome them, novices are puzzled by them. GOG thinks that all novices would flood them with support requests. That's what I think is their main concern, and not some subject of how to package their releases.

The point which GOG misses, is that the vast majority of Linux gamers are experienced Linux users. GOG should take that in consideration, instead of being too paranoid. Nothing prevents them from experimenting with few releases, and checking out how well they work out (call it alpha Linux support and get feedback, instead of being super perfectionist and do nothing until it'll be ideal).

GOG should not adopt this kind of logic...

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/31850746.jpg

Windows key + Print Screen key => saves the screenshot as PNG in My Pictures.
I just double click and it mounts the files? daemoncrapwhat?

Try doing it on Windows XP with one click. Isn't GOG supporting it? Or if they not, why they worry about supporting "many, many and scary" Linux distros?

How can you compare a today's Linux distribution release with a Windows release that was released back in 2001? It is more than 10 freaking years old.

By what you're saying, GOG should also support Linux distros that were released in 2001? Oh, what horror that would be. :)

I don't say what they should. I said what they do - they support Windows XP still. So they cope with it, aren't they? It was a point for the argument about some fears concerning usability.

Your post befuddles me. But, that artwork from Witcher easily makes me ignore all that. :D

Anyways... I am for a Linux release, don't know how they'll pull it together though, tired and going to beeeeeeeed...

Actually windows 8 allows you to mount images right out of the box.

Shh, didn't you get the memo? The popular attitude is to hate Windows 8 as a complete waste of time that can't possibly have any features justifying its existence! If you keep this up you will have to sit at the nerd table at lunch.

So does that mean that Windows 8 is the new EA?

Yes, it's the EA of operating systems. EA remains the EA of video gaming.

OK, for me basic means something that is used by a large number of people, I think that's where the disagreement comes from.

By my definition of basic, image mounting is and never will be a basic function, as the number of users who do that is insignificant compared to the total number of users for that platform.

Also, as the others pointed out, native mounting for ISO and VHD has been implemented in Windows 8.