> they really wanted to support Linux, they could easily package most of their old games with Dosbox and 90% of them would run fine this way.
This was not about DosBox games which are already playable. It was about starting support for native Linux games which is not trivial. In general I agree with you that their approach of "all or nothing" in finding a way for long term support of native games is far from perfect, but what can you do - it's their business how to do it. They listened to feedback but didn't go the iterative way.
Well the longer they wait, the more the "all or nothing" strategy will never happen because their catalog is expanding. Basically they are simply refusing people who want to give them money. It's preposterous.
Seriously the position from GOG is plain BS. If they really wanted to support Linux, they could easily package most of their old games with Dosbox and 90% of them would run fine this way. This is the large majority of their current catalog. And I have a very hard time to believe it would be difficult to support a few key distributions. Or they could take the approach "we support only Ubuntu officially" just like Valve does, and let the Community support other distributions.
So, as much as I love what GOG does, their position regarding Linux was a great disappointment. Especially coming from a developer from Eastern Europe, where Linux is clearly stronger than in other PC markets around the world. I don't see CD project porting Witcher 2 to Linux either, and they haven't made any announcement in that direction for the upcoming Witcher 3 either.
Supporting "Non-DRM" software while running on a DRM friendly environment (Windows/Mac) is a very strange place to be, honestly. I expected way more from GOG.