Will Star Wars KOTOR 2 get the Aspyr update anytime soon, or will GOG have to make their own Mac and Linux updates for both games like they did when GOG Galaxy gave both KOTORs cloud saves?

Hah! Talk about the visibility of stickies (and hence their utility). I didn't spot this one until now.

Nothing else to say, other than thanks to linuxvangog and the rest of the UNIX team for their work and willingness to communicate with us! :)

You're not sure how many? What, do your overlords keep half the team locked in a windowless [no pun intended] room in the basement, separate from the rest? =P
EDIT: Oh, I get it...someone's about to be fired, huh? Well, the secret's safe with me. [winks]

So awesome to hear that / see more fruition regarding Linux ports (and Mac, too).

Hope the best for y'all out there!!!

(...)

(I know it's beyond technical stuff but more wacky ports such as that Flatout release would be kickass) ;P

Hello!
Firs of all I'd like to say that you are doind great job! Thanks.

However, sometimes there are unfortunate mistakes. For example, "Pillars of Eternity: Deafire Pack" DLC for Linux is now just a dummy: it has only 2 legal files and one zero-byte "game resources" file and that's it. It seems that package was not tested at all. :(

Please, can you see to this issue?

I don’t think there is any issue here.

It’s not the only game with a "dummy" DLC installer, it usually means one of two things:
_the base game already provides the DLC, the DLC installer has no real use
_the DLC is included in the base game, and is unlocked if a specific file (empty or not depending on the game) is present

Hello,

considering most (99% like) of the linux installers AND games work for me (KDE neon distro, which is based on Ubuntu 16.04 LTS), I have to thank you for your work a lot.

It would be a bit less annoying to have "not possible" (by whatever undisclosed reasons) linux support marked directly on the game card, so one can know when you already tried and failed to provide the linux binary (I mean especially with games, which do have linux versions elsewhere), just by checking the game page in store. Also marking in-dev support for games where binary is expected. But I understand this is probably a lot to ask, so I don't expect it to happen, just would be nice. Or at least some forum thread with list of games where there's no expectation of linux binary in near future.

About the linux client for galaxy... not that I'm really in a need of one, but one open-sourced-highly-modular-low-resources-hog, which would work as background downloader/updater, providing also cloud saves and similar simple to program things would be nice. And I don't think there's too much of work needed from GOG, if you would let community on it, by providing detailed specifications and API and some git server, then you would probably get some pull requests of reasonable code over few months/years. Maybe eventually written in portable-enough way, that you would be able to reuse that even in windows client. There are already people here who know your current API inside-out as much as the sparse info (and/or RE) allowed them. There are certainly people here who can write portable efficient C++. Possible problem is, that it would take to see serious dedication on GOG side to invest a spare time into contributing for commercial subject. But first the business decision to take such route would be needed.

About Witcher 3 linux port - while you are not directly responsible, this shame (both the result, and the communication fiasco) falls also on both, as the pre-order communication was almost a fraud.

I can see how in the start and end this problem originates at players side - would they buy only games with linux binaries provided, without using wine/PlayOnLinux/etc in every other case, the market numbers would be less skewed toward windows platform. Also it would be easier to see how minor the linux really is (probably too minor, so in the end we get treated by the way what we pay for or even extra over it, as a group). I just hope it will be more diverse over time. But sometimes this business way of silence is not good, even stating the obvious "we can't disclose details" is better than total silence.

Just wanted to give a heads up about a general perspective of the Mac version of Galaxy because I think it'll be important whenever the Linux version is ever developed. (In general, I hope the Linux version is Galaxy is never developed if the plans for it are to be like the current Mac version.)

When searching for "mac") in the wishlist for Galaxy, I think these are the most important considerations for both the Mac version and any future Linux version of Galaxy:
• Mac - Don't use an installer
• Mac - Use default folders for support files (not /Users/Shared...)
• Mac: Allow other users sessions to be running

The detailed considerations described within those wishes are key factors for making a Mac easy to start using and with less maintenance, making backup and recovery simple, and making a multi-user computer convenient. I believe such factors would also provide a similar comfortable experience for GNU/Linux versions of Galaxy, too.

(It also seems to me it would lead to less maintenance when developing Galaxy, and maybe that it would be easier and more cross-platform friendly (at least along the UNIX spectrum). But that particular point is idle speculation.)

I checked, and it does not seem that the Windows installer contains anything more than the Linux one.

The difference in size is mostly due to packaging differences. Notably the Windows installers all come with a collection of pictures to be displayed during installation, while the Linux installers don’t.

Hmm… Interesting.

First, I checked by installing that "DLC" on top of v3.0.2 I had installed at that time and did not see any immediate effects.
Now, I'm playing v3.0.7 and it is hard to see whether the "DLC" works or not. So far I did not find any outfits/hats, and on top of it, capes didn't work on Linux/Mac versions of the game at launch. Well, there are about ten new custom portraits, but that could be added somewhere down the "3.0.2 to 3.0.7" road.

If the "DLC" is "working", then in reality this "Deadfire Pack" is nothing more than a single empty file… (-_-)

For me the DLC is working, as the merchant is there https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/94328-pillars-of-eternity-patch-307-the-deadfire-pack-is-now-live/
How it works technically I cannot say.