Just did a GOG survey that focused on the idea of a paid membership option on GOG. Seems they’re determining what people would be willing to pay extra for. Some of the options were

  • a tool for backing up offline installers
  • ability to install previous versions of a game
  • extra insight into the preservation work they’re doing.
  • voting rights on games to bring into the preservation program.

And others that I can’t remember.

  • WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago
    • a tool for backing up offline installers

    This really should be something they offer for free, and there are already some FOSS options that do this, although they aren’t as good as I’d like.

    • ability to install previous versions of a game

    This is a feature they already have for free and there would (or at least should) be backlash if they were to lock that behind a subscription

    • extra insight into the preservation work they’re doing.

    Sure, neat.

    • voting rights on games to bring into the preservation program.

    Sure but said votes better have an actual impact.

    • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      7 days ago

      The previous versions of a game thing is something they took away, IIRC. They only keep the latest version and a patch to get up to it available for download, and you can only roll back to previous versions that you had already installed over time, or something like that. This is them seeing if you want to pay money to get a feature back that they used to offer, which is kinda lousy.

        • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 days ago

          I’m not sure, but years ago, at least. Likely to save on server hosting fees. If you go to download the installer now, you only see the latest version, but you used to see every version.

  • Aielman15@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    A subscription seems like the exact opposite of what GoG stands for. I buy a game, I own it forever. How does a subscription improve that?

    • alehel@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      I got the impression they’re aiming more for a “fan club” kind of thing where you get access to articles/videos/Q&A/voting rights, etc. So more a kind of Patreon like many creators have. I didn’t get the impression that this would in any way change the business model of the store.

      • Elvith Ma'for@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        7 days ago

        I also got this survey and I had the same feeling. It felt more like a patron for their game preservation program with possible features like a members-only-community, interviews or documentation about the preserved games, their publishers/studios and the efforts to keep them running or some kind of loyalty rewards/discount coupons. Maybe even ‘special builds’ like ‘experience the OG version 1.0 of $game’.

        There was one option, that I interpreted like ‘maybe we will put future compatibility updates after purchase (e.g. supporting Windows 12 or whatever) behind the membership’ - but that’s purely my interpretation of a single bullet point style line in that whole several page long survey

      • daggermoon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        If that’s the case, I may be interested. I’d still like Galaxy on Linux before I give them additional money.

    • Th3D3k0y@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      Select a game from a catered library to be granted lifetime ownership? Like rent to own perhaps?

    • Abnorc@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      Yeah I’m not at all against the idea of throwing a few bucks at them per month for something, but I just don’t see anything that fits in the context of why I use GOG in the first place. Voting rights doesn’t seem like a bad idea. Ideas like earlier versions of games, tools that help with backup, etc should be offered for free or sold for a one-time cost IMO.

  • rbits@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    I hope they’re not seriously considering locking option 2 behind a paywall. IMO that should be a required feature for all platforms, and should be free. If I buy a game at a specific version, I should always be able to play that version.

  • bufalo1973@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    6 days ago

    Notice to everyone about GOG Galaxy not in Linux: there is MiniGalaxy. It’s not official but it works.

  • datavoid@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    7 days ago

    They need to fix their launchers on all systems before the do anything else. I’m happy to support them in their mission of game preservation, but they really don’t do a good job at providing a high quality service.

    Also, I’ve purchased things from them that were never provided, and they refused a refund (warcraft 2 battle net key). I know it was likely Blizzard’s fault, but they could have at least responded to my emails with more than “no refunds, we are working on it”.

  • Surp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    6 days ago

    Making porting gog to linux a priority which has by far the smallest market share for computer gaming is the dumbest thing anyone in this thread is saying, where is that financially a viable option to cater to the tiniest percentage of gamers for gog? I know ill get downvoted but im tired of the fanatical linux posts on lemmy at this point. Get with reality they are going to work on the client where the money is most predominantly flowing from and its not linux or mac. Haters gonna hate the truth but its the truth from a business standpoint.

    • octoblade@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 days ago

      With the Steam Deck getting more popular and more SteamOS handhelds on the way, it has never been a better time for game companies to support Linux. GOG does already sell some games that have Linux support, they just don’t have a convenient way to download and install them.

      GOG galaxy appears to use CEF and Qt, as well as some parts (such as plugins) that use python. All of those are cross platform. So I doubt it would be incredibly difficult to port to Linux. The fact that there is already a macOS version indicates that it can be made cross platform and can run on Unix-based systems.

    • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 days ago

      Making porting gog to linux a priority which has by far the smallest market share for computer gaming is the dumbest thing anyone in this thread is saying

      Building a bridge across the river is totally stupid, because no one crosses that river to get to where they are going.

      Building a house on that hill is dumb, because no one lives there.

      Creating that new type of device is a waste of time, because no one has ever bought one like that.

      You see the point, right? Not that I’m trying to give business advice. I’m just saying that these things aren’t necessarily as stupid as you seem to think.

    • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 days ago

      While I agree, it’s also a chicken and egg problem. How can more money flow if they don’t make it easy? Even just endorsing Heroic and providing them some APIs would work

    • Adalast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      This is a future proofing measure. With the enshittification of Windows there is a reasonably sizable share that is looking to migrate. Making an API/front end functional on the platform is just good business. I for one will be switching 95% to Linux the instant Microsoft acts on their patant for putting a mandatory advertising ticket on the screen. Literally the only thing I will use it for is programming things for work.

    • PushButton@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 days ago

      Or, you know, they could make the client portable, like so many software…

      A Linux or Mac client doesn’t need to be a different thing than a Windows client.

    • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      What if most of the people that want to pay a GOG membership are Linux gamers that would be willing to pay for official Linux support?

  • DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Wait so they’re taking away features and going to paywall them? We can already downgrade

    Shit must be dire at CDPR after that earnings report was below last year

    • alehel@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      I was quoting them from memory. Could be that I misread that specific question.

    • Sepix@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      Has been since the 2019 mass layoff i guess. Their galaxy development was questionable at best since then. Only noticeable action was marketing. I see CDPR/GOG pretty critic with their new billionaire CEO nowadays, sadly.

  • DigDoug@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    6 days ago

    I like what GOG do, but gating features, even niche ones, behind a subscription sounds like the first step towards enshittification.

    Also, I’m sure as hell not giving them extra money until they fix their platform on Linux/Steam Deck.

  • cmhe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    I really hate most subscriptions, because the prices are often too high, they rely on locking stuff behind paywalls, instead of providing a good service.

    Here is the difference, I am ok paying monthly for storage space, servers, and hosted/managed open source web services, because there is competition and standard interfaces there. They do not hold you (or your data) hostage to their service, what they provide is good on its own.

    For example, if GOG invests money into writing open source libraries, apps and APIs to efficiently and easily share save games between devices. Let people self host the open source backend, but offer up a subscription for a managed instance, with maybe some voting rights for new features or support for games/platforms to be integrated into the open source front & backend, then I would be willing to support this.

    And other stuff like this.

    Use subscriptions to offer good services, which also allow you to improve the whole ecosystem, while also not putting yourself as the gatekeeper, and locking people into their service.

  • alehel@lemmy.zipOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    7 days ago

    I think the only way they can introduce a subscription without backlash is if they make it a purely community thing with a few bonuses. Give people access to special insights into their preservation efforts, special interviews, voting rights, Q&A, occasional free game, etc. If they lock features behind this like more cloud storage, or other stuff that customers simply expect with their game purchase, the press will be all negative.

  • commander@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    7 days ago

    I’d pay for native linux support. They should provide direct support to Heroic if they don’t want to take on the cost themselves full bore. I remember some AMA they did where the cost of Linux wasn’t worth their already thin margins and they were happy with Heroic. If they were ever going to grow, I’d believe that they would need to address the handheld market and getting their storefront more visible

  • hornedfiend@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    Honestly, I would totally move to GOG, however my entire games collection is on Steam, so it would be very very difficult and it’s rather tedious to have and use 2 platforms like that.

    Oh well, I do hope they can get more people onto their platform. it’s a better Epic store for sure.

    • alehel@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 days ago

      I honestly felt the same. Then I thought, eh, let’s just try. Turns out I don’t care about my library being split. I just add desktop icons for the games I’m playing and launch them from there without thinking about what platform it’s on.