GOG seems to be considering paid membership option
-
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.
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.
-
- 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.
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.
-
Oh shit, really? Do you have a source for that?
https://github.com/Heroic-Games-Launcher/HeroicGamesLauncher/releases/tag/v2.13.0
We also started a partnership with GOG and now every game you buy from the GOG store inside Heroic will give us a commission, so it is another way of supporting the project.
The link is also available at https://heroicgameslauncher.com/donate if you prefer to purchase games in your web browser.
-
I wouldn't mind supporting them if they could provide a Linux tool that let me download my library in bulk.
The best you'll get is Heroic Games Launcher. It's got most of the features I'd want at this point.
-
I backup my own saves, don't really trust someone elses computer to do as good of a job as I can myself. Wrote a script to automate it.
And you just ignored the rest of the reasons, and to add to those: automatic updates.
-
Do you not have to update that script every time you play a new game? Cloud saves are pretty automatic, and regardless of platform, they've been pretty reliable too. It also fits that use case that you go to a friend's place and want to show them something in your save file on a whim.
Typing
backup "Game" "/path/to/files"is pretty simple though. I wouldn't complain about cloud saves existing, but I won't rely on them and absolutely wouldn't pay for them. -
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.
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.
-
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.
here's the survey if anyone wants to answer: https://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/MURG4B
-
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.
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?
-
I'd love a gog galaxy client for Linux with proton support. I also agree though, that it probably wouldn't help them become more profitable.
You do know Heroic exists, right? It works perfectly fine.
And I prefer an open source solution integrating multiple platforms to a single closed solution per platform.
-
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?
Select a game from a catered library to be granted lifetime ownership? Like rent to own perhaps?
-
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.
-
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?
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
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".
-
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.
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
-
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.
Memberships are fine as long as they add perks and don't take anything away from what non-members have access to now.
-
It's on par with Steam, I think. You get like 200 megs per product. I know because my Witcher 3 install is above that and it's annoying. That wouldn't be a dealbreaker as a subscription benefit, I don't think.
With the rest I do agree.
I can tell they're struggling and have been for a while. It isn't easy to compete with Steam, and the thing that would have done it (having DRM'd new games in the service) was voted down in a similar survey some time ago.
I would not be against some Patreon-like crowdsourced solution for behind the scenes stuff and prioritization rights. GOG, or something like it MUST exist. Steam is bad enough with their current dominant position, it can't be the sole remaining option in this market.
I would much prefer to be able to give them more money in exchange for more games, though. I am constantly frustrated by how often some indie game is only available on Steam, and I've started buying things full price on GOG but waiting for sales on Steam as a matter of policy.
It's on par with Steam, I think.
IIRC Steam lets developers code how much storage to use, with a 5GB cap per game
-
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
