But you can say that about any title that get released here after the fact. Does GoG think Cities in Motion is going to be a great seller, despite the fact it's been out for some time, been in a few bundles and there are newer games in that series (although Skylines isn't really a sequel).

Games like Machinarium, SpaceChem and Trine say otherwise. They were previously available DRM-free, discounted often, bundled often and still sold well here.

Cities in Motion Collection isn't currently available in a Steamless form at any other store (it was removed from GamersGate, along with the whole Paradox catalog some weeks ago) and Tropico 4 had its DRM-Free debut on GOG, unlike the aforementioned indies that have been DRM-Free for a while.

GOG was founded on releasing games long, long, long after the fact. If they can release a 30 year old game they can release a game 2 - 5 year after the fact. Indeed HAVE already done so many times.

Wasn't Samorost2 recently released here? That game originally came out December 8, 2005 and has been discounted and bundled countless times. That gives me hope.

FTFY.
Amanita was already here, so it might be part of the contract. And how is Samorost2 selling?

GOG gains: more product to sell, meeting obvious clear needs, while not diluting their main storefront.
Indie devs: they're ALREADY releasing on Desura, talk about second-class...

Thanks for compiling the data. Looking at it I would actually say there is no clear correlation between Day 1 and the Rank. I mean it's sorted by Rank but the Yes' and Nos are still kind of randomly distributed.

Would it mean that GOG can make lots of money with Indies even after release?

If it makes them money. For sure they would not be happy, after all everyone wants to be in first class, but as in a plane you must be special to come into first class and the number of seats are restricted. Still airlines have second and third class too to make money out of it. Sometimes the question is simply to fly economy or not to fly at all. In this situation quite a lot of people decide that a small seat is better than no seat at all.

I know just analogies but nevertheless...

Why does GOG needs to be so harsh? They may overlook a good game. GOG could give much more chances if only it would be more selective about how to spent it's expensive treatment.

So instead of the all or nothing decision, find something in between and then at least the devs cannot complain that they do not get any chance at all and GOG can profit from hidden pearls that if they surface can be polished by GOG.

How well was it expected to sell? It's still early yet. Clearly GOG thought it would sell enough to be worth releasing. Although we can see how indie games rank in relation to one another we don't know the amount of copies sold or how that relates to the cost of releasing them (which I would wager is less costly on average than you'd think). The sales figures so far may very well be in line with GOG's expectations/projections.

Because we talked about the GOG wishlist as indicator I took the liberty of checking it against the list of Indies that GOG sells.

Lowest ranking:

Eschalong: Book I - 186
Expeditions Conquistador - 43
Dust: An Elysian Tail - 236
Avadon- 56
Defender's Quest - 0
Waking Mars - 31
Zafehouse:Diaries - 10

Highest ranking :

FTL - 58
Legend of Grimrock - 31
King Of Dragon Pass - 333 (not an Indie)
Deponia - 60 (not an Indie I would say)
To the Moon - 135
Hotline Miami - 4
Resonance - 7

Frankly speaking, the number of votes in the wishlist for the Indie games that GOG actually sells are pathetic (and do not correlate with selling rank). I wonder if GOG sells any significant amounts of Indie games at all.

As a comparison. Wasteland - 9475

Sure I believe you :D

I can understand complaints about what it was in GOG and is not longer here, since games that disappear from the catalog or features, (The same way the people that defend anything that disappear is totally non sense)

I can understand people wishlist things not available in the catalog, and suggesting new ideas (But I cannot understand the stupid people pushing games out, like that wishlist for saying NO to Hatred, the same way I cannot understand who cries in desperation for not see the same game here),

And definitively I cannot understand people pissed off for things, not yet, in the website, instead of pushing the wishlist or suggest them here.

The GOG curated system is not perfect, it cannot be, is criteria, is circumstances, is business deals, is capacity of the website/platform, is money, is time ...GOG should put more emphasis on the WISHLIST feature, instead of bury it, like they did with other nice features. Maybe we will no need to talk in this thread if more people would be using it.

Once I wrote like what you just did and got flamed 'you just wanted cheap games'.

....

Talk about logic.

If I want cheap games, there are bunch of Steam bundles out there that are bloody cheap already.

But eh, I agree. GOG bundles will increase the popularity of this platform. Put it in Humble Bundle that's already popular.
Steam without a doubt.

One example:
http://hitboxteam.com/dustforce-sales-figures

Another for Witcher: [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Witcher_2:_Assassins_of_Kings#Sales]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Witcher_2:_Assassins_of_Kings#Sales[/url]

Even if you have bigger chance to die because of lack of exposure or Steam userbase's being unforgiving, it still gives the best chance for Developer to earn money.

The first and that's why GOG may be doing it wrong. They don't get all good Indies and if they are here they don't sell well. They don't get AAA games either. They only get the classics which Steam partly gets too. GOG doesn't look too good if you compare it to Steam this way.

Jonathan Blow, the godfather of the modern indie era:

"I finally read the contract GoG sent me and it is predictably lame. They aren't bad compared to XBLA's contracts in the 2010-ish era, but they are just written presuming that the developer is desperate and really wants to be on GoG -- which for successful developers is not the case. The general tactic of any game publisher is that they offer you a contract full of stuff you have to argue with them for a long time to take out -- IF you even have the bargaining power to push them, which most indies don't. At this point my tactic is to go meta and say look, fuck you, this process is insulting and wastes my time, you know which terms I am going to argue about, so just change those before you send me anything. I only bother arguing with the few big channels that I really *need* to be on. The thing about this tactic is it usually ends the conversation -- I think it tends to be too weird for publisher peoples' egos to actually deal with a statement like that ... so then they just don't get the game. It is fine though, we will ensure there is a DRM-free download somewhere."