Ultimately, asking GOG to turn back and continue mining a finite resource (old PC games) instead of supporting good new games strikes me as selfish and detrimental to GOG's future prospects.
I think that is a quality summation of part of the problem.
I'm one of those old gamers that has things like floppy discs of the original Decent and Disc of Master of Orion. Many of the "old" titles people come here for I have, or have owned at some point. As one of those people I don't really see the point in getting hung up on nostalgia alone. Yes its nice to preserve those great games but a) who gets to say what "old" is, and b) how many "old" titles exists if we never move the needle up?
There are people in this world that would think Assassin's Creed 1 is an "old" game. They played it back when they were 15, and now they are 19 and far more adult. In some respects I would consider it an older title.
With all the going on about people liking old stuff, I would like for someone to try and give a rational, non-relative description of what "old" really is that everyone can agree on. If that can't be done, (and I doubt it can) then how does a company create a business plan around a purely subjective thing?
Personally I still look forward to release day. I am interested in games, not worrying about when they were made. If they are competitively priced, quality games, and DRM-free then they still have my full attention.