GOG seems to be considering paid membership option

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.

Anything but properly supporting the Linux community 🤡

How have they still not learned that the largest intersection of the people that care about their core value proposition (game preservation, DRM-free, etc.) are Linux users?? It's not like they have to create the compatibility layers from scratch; Valve did it for them.

If they provided a launcher for Linux users, I'd actually buy shit from them. Yes, Heroic Launcher exists, but I'm not paying GOG for the work that the Heroic dev did. I want first-party support.

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.

This is how enshitification begins, don't enable this shit.

• 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.

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

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?

GOG maybe give us an option to turn off cookies inside your app before asking us money!

I got the same survey. The ones that they definitely do not want to do, if they value their reputation, are things like "increased cloud save storage (that's still probably less than what Steam offers)" and things that they took away, like 1.0 installers. But some of the other options look to be more squarely aimed at the enthusiasts of the preservation program that this subscription is designed to financially support, as well as one or two actually good features like legal account sharing. Hopefully they go down that route instead.

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".

such a strange survey. it was all about "exclusive access" and "extra perks". i just want to support game fixes so that everyone gets access, but that wasn't part of it.

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

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.

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.

How about GOG Galaxy on Linux?

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.

Is GOG a popular store among gamers?

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.

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

How about instead of this subscription talk, GOG could:

-Remake GOG Galaxy. The client is slow with tons of bloat. Focus on your store, and make a native Linux client.
-Help fund Wine. I find it weird that the main non-DRM store is so againat Linux. I know people that would leave Steam If GOG came to Linux.
-Different version and a tool to backup games should be part of the new launcher and not part of a subscription. You guys talk about game preservations and then try to put parts of it behind a paywall.....
-A more realistic Dreamlist. Who had the idea of letting people submit any game they want? Dreamlist would work better if GOG choose a list of games and the community voted for what game for GOG to focus on. People really think that games that were console exclusive or old FIFA/NBA/Gran Turismo games will come to GOG.
-There are some games on GOG that don't work, FIX THEM! (Looking at you Kane and Lynch)

I wish they worked with opensource projects like Heroic to provide an easy and fast way to run their games on Linux like in Steam. And if they provided a donation option or something to fund that work.

What a nigjtmare.

Memberships are fine as long as they add perks and don't take anything away from what non-members have access to now.

I'll support them once they support Linux. Until then I'll pirate if I need a DRM free game

I'd consider a small fee to support the preservation program if I then received said games for free. It doesn't have to be a monthly thing but whenever they are added.

I can't think of anything else that would be worthwhile.

Ironically, I feel the community that is most apt to fall in line with their project goals, and want to support this change, is also the community they are currently outcasting. Personally I stopped using GOG when it stopped working easily on my Debian system. I shouldn't need to use a third party program to get it to work, and I swear it feels like they intentionally made it so WINE no longer works for it.

For a project that is supposedly for open use and game preservation, they don't make it easy to actually do so.

here's the survey if anyone wants to answer: https://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/MURG4B

I wouldn't mind supporting them if they could provide a Linux tool that let me download my library in bulk.

Support Linux and give me Dark Colony (which tons of people have asked for already for years) and I'll consider subscribing.

The only thing that I could think of that would make paying worth anything would be if they had GOG servers for online play from games that their servers shut down. Aka GOG's KALI

The things I would be ok paying a subscription for:

• Rotating free Games that I get to keep. Like epic but only for subscribers. The game should be mine even after I quit the subscription.
• Extra insights in preservation, or goodies
• voting rights on what games should be free next month for the sunscribers.
• discounted price on games.

Things that I feel it shouldnot be locked behind subscription and paywall:

• tool for backing up offline installers
• ability to install previous versions of game
• and definitely not voting rights on games to bring into the preservation program.

If the tooks for backing up offline installers or ability to install previous versions of game are paywalled, that is going to invite more reasons for piracy.

I have supported GoG for quite some years. I don't understand why they keep pivoting different things to do.

This may be an unpopular opinion, but I would support paying for the initial game as well as every major patch when a new OS came out. Say, they do something to make a game work on Win 11. One year later we have Win 12 so I don't mind paying a little for the patch. Then one year later we have Win 13 and I'm willing to pay again if I still play the game.

I would also support paying for online servers for games that have multiplayer components. That takes money to maintain.

As others mentioned, GoG should stop wasting time on a launcher. Hell, even the installer. Just ZIP the whole thing for me to download.

Once they added every modern Lego game to their preservation program I knew the thing was bunk. Harry Potter Lego game = worth preserving, Lego Island = never heard of it. Total BS

I told them I'd like a GOG style humble choice. If they're not willing to give actual games, I'd be interested in a subscription to help game preservation, but probably only $5 a month max.

Hahahaha. After cyberpunk was shit and still now Linux support?! Yeah fuck them. If I need DRM free games I'll pirate. They're just a leech

Wait so currently you can't install previous versions of games you only get the most up-to-date version. That's daft to expect people to pay for, that's a free feature on Steam.

I was seriously just finally starting to become interested in using them a lot more for gaming since I got some success getting it to work on my Linux install. This would make me do a full 180 though...

I filled the survey as well. It's mostly focused on "games preservation". I'm not up to pay subscription for anything they're willing to offer and even made sure to tell them that I'm willing to pay a premium for whatever useful content (games) end up exclusive to subscribers

Voting rights and extra insight are fine, but I feel a "Humble Bundle"-esque membership would work well. For $x a month you get a few games to keep.