WeirdoGeek: I'm still baffled at why they used the term "many gamers"
I think it's pretty funny tho.
Because GOG doesn't even try to imply those "many gamers" are GOG's customers.
So in a way GOG failed in lying quite miserably. Like, literally, they made such a bogus claim that has such high satire potential.
WeirdoGeek: Pretty much the only acceptable excuse at this point is if these "messages" were actually serious death threats that included the GOG team's personal information and the threat included to lie about what really happened if they didn't want to get hurt.
Ah, yes, "they didn't want to get hurt so they didn't tell ANYBODY that someone is sending them life threats".
Come on.
You know, interpol exists, they have cybercrime division that would get pretty interested in something like this if that would be real.
If GOG would be receiving such "mass threats" then the right move about it would be to go public about it.
What better cover-your-a** would be than making public know and subsequently pay attention to your every step?
In such situation any potential perpetrator would have to get through quite an ordeal to make do without ANY evidence.
If you receive these types of threats being silent about it is one of the worst things you can do.
If GOG would be in such situation and they would inform public, then if something would happen to them the whole thing just couldn't stay hidden from outsiders. The whole idea would blow into perpetrators faces.
It would lieterally be international scandal that would bring a lot of attention to all parties involved.
And if by any chance any of them would have any ties to any governmental agencies then it could potentially sparkle international tension or even conflict.
I don't buy whole "they have been receiving d threats" idea.
An offshore country caving into such demands based on d threats would only encourage original source of the whole ordeal to go even further.
What is most likely is that GOG either signed something in the lines of "give us money and we will do anything" (ergo EGS deal having some hidden agenda public doesn't know about) or they care more about MONEY from a bunch of far-far-away POTENTIAL future customers than their entire estabilished userbase.
WeirdoGeek: God, this thing's reaching 9k and STILL GOG buries their head in the sand...
Don't say before this happens. After initial boom a chart of new votes is pretty much logarithmic.
Time4Tea: Yes, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on the subject of cosmetic pre-order rewards.
WeirdoGeek: NON-cosmetic pre-order and backer exclusives can piss right off and die in a filthy hole, however.
I think a good strategy if developer wants to give lucrative-at-first-sight incentive for some people to pre-order is to add TIMED pre-order exclusive items (which would be free with pre-orders and later buyable some time after release for others).
Of course in case of GOG it would have to be fully offline installable.
That's just my opinion tho. Please, nobody bash me for voicing it.
Magnitus: Lack of awareness that given the above, it made a whole lot of sense not to drop China in favor of a relatively obscure indie game
It's very concerning if a company decides to internationally ban game Z on a premise that SOME actually PAST content (currently cut)
may offend
some people from
one country.
Such move in the age of geoblocking technical possibilities, with all neccesary merits already in place on the related platform, is truly unacceptable.
It's hard not to call this enticement of censorship.
Magnitus: Downplaying how much of a faux pas publicly calling a leader "a moron" is (especially when you represent an entity that is bigger than yourself as an individual) and being astonished that there might be economic consequences coming from the camp that follows such a leader
Honestly?
Perhaps developers acknowledged that china isn't the only country in the world?
And it doesn't matter if some minority in ONE country gets offended because the game is intended for international market that is SUPPOSED to have free speech based on fundamental human rights from international conventions?
Captainchicken84: Oh, another china apologist, seems you're ok with their human rights violations.
Magnitus: I'm not. I'm just not as polarised as you on the issue. Condemning some of the things done by the Chinese Government is not the same thing as attacking the core identity of ~1 billion people or forgetting world history (if you think China has a monopoly on doing horrible sh*t to people, you are sorely deluded).
It really doesn't matter how many entities have done some horrible thing in world history, it remains a horrible thing and entities still doing it are rightfully called out.
Just because some others might have done it or actively do it now does not mean the fact of some entity doing it can be casually brushed off.
