GOG's Linux Client Lags Behind Third Parties: Developers Call Out Electron, Point Finger at AI Investor Pressure
The immediate focus remains on GOG's software architecture, with several key developers calling out the preference for Electron over native C++ applications.
Opinions split sharply on the need for GOG Galaxy itself. While some users welcome an official Linux client, others, like LodeMike, assert that third-party launchers are sufficient and that relying on the official client jeopardizes ownership integrity. The discussion also flares over the mandatory 'Active use of AI tools' requirement; 'namingthingsiseasy' suggests this mandate smells of parent company investor agendas, while 'MagicShel' defends it as necessary professional adaptation.
The community clearly favors professional software standards over corporate mandates. The strong inclination is for a genuinely native Linux solution—or, failing that, an open API allowing community tools, as 'pedka' suggests. The resistance to proprietary control is evident.
Key Points
Official Linux support for GOG Galaxy is desired.
Multiple users acknowledge the value of an official Linux client, even if they currently use Heroic Launcher.
Third-party launchers already meet functional needs.
LodeMike explicitly states that Galaxy is unnecessary for core game ownership functions.
C++ architecture is technically superior to Electron.
'pivot_root' stated that C++ is technically better than JavaScript for this application.
The requirement to use AI tools feels politically motivated.
'namingthingsiseasy' views the AI mandate as evidence of investor pressure from the LLM sector.
GOG should build an open API for community clients.
'pedka' proposed GOG release an API to enable fully featured, native third-party development.
Source Discussions (3)
This report was synthesized from the following Lemmy discussions, ranked by community score.