Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Submissions have to be related to games
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No excessive self-promotion
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here and here.
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
And others that I can't remember.
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.
That's not an official/proper feature on steam, there's nothing in the interface to select an older version, right? Just the beta system that lets developers have multiple branches available, which is often used to keep a limited number of previous versions available.
I honestly thought this was an option, but I can't see it in the client, and the offline installers only offer all patches and the latest version. Not the original version.
I agree that's daft, and hope that feature doesn't get paywalled. The more people who do the survey and stress these points, the better.
Bad move GOG, you're as of right now still inferior to steam & you want to enshitify your platform ?
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...
GOG is fucked. As soon as services like this start talking about subscriptions, it's already over.
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 just wanna be able to filter games by what goodies they have, man. I want my waw paypaws.
How about GOG Galaxy on Linux?
Memberships are fine as long as they add perks and don't take anything away from what non-members have access to now.
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".
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?
Source code access to your library?
Not sure what else they can offer
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.
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.
If that's the case, I may be interested. I'd still like Galaxy on Linux before I give them additional money.
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
Select a game from a catered library to be granted lifetime ownership? Like rent to own perhaps?
But they specifically don't appear to be talking about that
here's the survey if anyone wants to answer: https://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/MURG4B
I did it. I made sure to beg them for Galaxy on Linux.
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.
The only one that sounds good to me, perhaps, are the voting rights. I'd pay for that. Patreon artists and creators do this sort of thing, and if this is something GOG needs to do to get by, then fine by me.
Downloading offline installers/backups, however... That would be locking away a feature that exists now to everyone that has bought a game. That means locking away a feature from customers who have spent money on a product already... Likely for the explicit point of being able to get installers that don't need an online connection. If they choose to do this, they'd be desfeting their own purpose.
For context; I bought most of my games on GOG. I don't really buy games anymore, and my Steam library is low absolutely massive, however. Both of those reasons are because I've been subbed to Humble Monthly for a few years. But ultimately when I go looking to buy a game, my preference is to buy from GOG specifically because it's offline and DRM free.
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.
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.
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
Sure, neat.
Sure but said votes better have an actual impact.
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.
When did they take it away?
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.
Oh, I thought you could still download older versions under download offline installer
I'll support them once they support Linux. Until then I'll pirate if I need a DRM free game
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.
It should be like Xbox Live Gold or PlayStation Plus. Some free games and lots of extra perks that you mentioned.
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