[EspadaV9]

No. Please don't. Contribute to something like Heroic Launcher instead. Don't create something new just for GOG. Help make the existing tools better. It'll mean GOG has to do less work, and the programs people are already using will get better. Or even just sponsor Heroic so they can send more time we can working on it themselves.

[tmtvl]

GNU/Linux gamers are always decrying GOG, saying they won't buy stuff from them because Galaxy doesn't run on GNU/Linux, now we're getting people saying GOG porting Galaxy to GNU/Linux is bad!? By Taranis, GOG just can't get a break, can they?

[paride5745]

Yep, luckily they represent a very small, albeit loud, minority of Linux users.

The vast majority of Linux users are very happy to get an official GOG Galaxy for Linux. I hope they will plug into Proton and collaborate with Valve, but we really need official tools and brands on Linux for common users to feel comfortable enough to come over.

[zombot]

How is GNU/Linux different from Linux?

[justonceokay]

GOG needs to contribute 0-day fixes to the kernel, otherwise they’re not committed to Linux /s

[gamesieve]

They're not creating something new. They're taking their existing tool (which - for all its flaws - is still far ahead of Heroic in many ways), improving it further, and changing it to also work on Linux.

If they then go add additional features like wine integration to that tool to make it overlap more with Heroic is something we're all assuming, but not actually a given.

[indolering]

They could at least use Flatpak and containers instead of choosing a given distro or package manager.

[bravetraveler]

A lot of words for "yes they will insist on fragmentation"

[MaulingMonkey]

> It'll mean GOG has to do less work

[citation needed]

GOG's launcher team is presumably already familiar with their codebase, already has a checkout, already has a codebase that's missing 0 features, has a user interface that already matches their customer's muscle memory, and presumably already has semi-decent platform abstraction layer, considering they have binaries for both Windows and OS X. Unless they've utterly botched their PAL and buried it under several mountains of technical debt, porting is probably going to be relatively straightforward.

I'm not giving Linux gaming a second shot merely because of a bunch of ancedata about proton and wine improvements - I'm giving it a second shot because Steam themselves have staked enough of their brand and reputation on the experience, and put enough skin in the game with official linux support in their launcher. While I don't have enough of a GOG library for GOG's launcher to move the needle on that front for me personally, what it might do is get me looking at the GOG storefront again - in a way that some third party launcher simply wouldn't. Epic? I do have Satisfactory there, Heroic Launcher might be enough to avoid repurchasing it on Steam just for Linux, but it's not enough to make me want to stop avoiding Epic for future purchases on account of poor Linux support.

[zombot]

Phase Alternating Line? What's "PAL" here?

[gr4vityWall]

Alternatively, work on developing protocols for game launchers instead. Get the Heroic Launcher devs and devs from other launchers to work on a common interface.

[WorldMaker]

This comment and some of the other nearby ones have me confused if many people have actually tried GOG Galaxy?

This is one of the areas where GOG Galaxy has tried to stand out. It supports integrations with other launchers in Python: https://github.com/gogcom/galaxy-integrations-python-api

It's intended for the other direction of other launchers (or third party integrations with other launchers) feeding data to GOG Galaxy, but it's still one of the more interesting attempts in the wild of a launcher trying to be a little bit more than just a walled garden.

I don't know if in an Official Linux port of Galaxy if they'll try to find more ways to integrate beyond what they've already done with their Python API and how much they would be willing work with other launchers, especially Heroic, but of the big game stores, GOG seems one of the few that actually wants to try. Maybe they will. It would be nice to see. It's interesting seeing so many comments assume the worst of them, as someone who has played around with that Python API a little bit. (I was toying with a third-party Itch.io integration. Didn't get very far, but it was neat what seemed possible.)

[vbezhenar]

You don't need launchers. Game is a simple application like any other. Just double click it...

[muvlon]

I'm a happy Heroic user but I don't mind them porting GOG Galaxy. Makes for a smoother migration for people coming from Windows, for example.

[AdmiralAsshat]

Had various issues with Heroic and whatever the other popular one was (Lutris, maybe). I personally don't need official support for a single launcher that tries to integrate every gaming platform ala Steam, GOG, Blizzard, Epic, Amazon. A single-platform launcher with native Linux support would be good enough for me.

[high_na_euv]

Why they shouldnt develop version over which they have full control?

[jagermo]

If its open, heroic can include their code or solutions, as they do with proton. Rising tide lifts all boats.

[account42]

Agreed, I don't want yet another launcher.

And as the underdog it even makes sense for GOG to fully embrace cross-store launchers.

[surgical_fire]

Meh, I use Lutris instead of Heroic.

I am happy that GoG will finally make its launcher available to Linux.