Given that MacOS is due to axe support for anything soon, I'd be thinking they'll have plenty of free resources soon.

I'd do it the same way I do it today: without the client. I don't *want* a client.

I also don't particularly want a native Linux client *but* I do want native Linux releases. Unfortunately, due to lack of native client, many developers are simply not releasing Linux versions on GOG at all (because they would be crippled versions lacking features that are available on other platforms). The missing releases are a big issue even if you don't want a client & client-specific features.

That said, there is a way to couple native clients & wine games: Games shouldn't need to run *through* Galaxy. Games can communicate with Galaxy, even if they live in a prefix. The wonders of IPC/RPC. I haven't used Galaxy but I've heard Galaxy 2 made big noise about being able to launch non-GOG games too, or something like that.. this should be a no brainer then.

It'd certainly be better if focus were directed at just Linux and Windows.

No, that's not the case, and GOG never had a lot of the older Mac games anyway. The point is that the 64-bit cutoff didn't affect the number of Mac games on GOG by that much. So the idea that GOG would become a Windows store was based on a false premise. (I realize nightcraw1er.488 was not being entirely serious, but let's keep the facts straight here if that's not too much to ask. ;) )

That is the plan but as we know, plans are not always turned into reality exactly as planned. There is more than a year until then, if it turns out true.

I'm clearly no computer scientist, but are you saying you could get all the features of the Galaxy client and be able to wine a specific game? I don't think so - you could wine a specific game, by bypassing the Galaxy client altogether though.

But what exactly would be the point of a native client then? If you bypass the client to run the game through wine?

A native linux Galaxy client would then just act as a glorified downloader, and you would miss out on all its features like achievements, gameplay tracking, auto updates and...I struggle to think of anything else.

My point is that a native Linux Galaxy client is often requested (biggest galaxy wishlish by far) and is considered a sign from GOG that they support Linux, whereas in my view it would only complicate things and I would deem it largely pointless. Sorry for pointing out the elephant in the room guys, that's just my two cents.

However, I completely understand people who think linux native games on GOG could use some extra work and better support. That's the other half of GOG linux support, of course, the support for native games.

Well, was it 2006 when Apple started using the Intel processors? Games for Macs older than that would not be compatible anyway.

You could indeed!

I agree it's not worth it. I don't care about achievements.

I just want the native Linux releases of games to be here, and as long as the lack of a Linux native Galaxy holds them back, I think GOG should do their job and release the client already. I don't need it to run Wine games, I need it so that I don't *need* Wine because we can start running native games.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PearPC

GOG sells some emulated games, but I don't know how the copyright of that stuff works. Isn't the OS or part of it included in those games (e.g. the Amiga games)?

Anyway, maybe we're getting a bit off topic here.

PearPC (also Basilisk II, vMac, SheepShaver, and QEmu emulating a PowerPC Mac) requires a copy of Macintosh System/Mac OS of that era, and Apple isn't likely to allow that despite the OS being of no real value today. Wine does not, and most Amiga games don't run under an operating system, but require a ROM, which may very well be licensed from whoever owns it nowadays (or someone may have created a working clone) - then again, it may very well be the case that GOG's Amiga games are run through ScummVM, in which case the ROM case is moot.

everything is in danger on GOG :( but you can back up your games so that even if GOG dies you can still play them :D

Yes, but I was referring to older x86 games like Flatout 2 (which ironically does have a Linux version here.)

I heard about this and think it stinks....not everyone has support for such.That said I refuse to think this will happen(windows only) atm.

============================

And there in lies the rub somewhat.....if they sell the games(linux versions) but cut some features it'll upset some(especially those who want the game versions to match as much as possible the versions on other stores/sites), and if they don't sell them then some will also be upset.

==================================

And I am guessing most will wait until then to complain about such(for whatever reasons, good or bad) like with everything else(that is not me making digs at them but just musing on how some put off such things until the last minute, which I find unwise).

Linux support everywhere is in danger because it's less than 1% of the market according to the Steam surveys. It's practically irrelevant. Sucks, but it is what it is.

Well at least it isn't OS/2 Warp or TempleOS....I hear their user base makes Linux look like Mac in comparison.