You know this having played the game, I assume?

As i posted in the other thread : i'm sorry if i sound so negative .

They seem to be able to keep a steady stream of interesting releases without any financial issues (that we know of).

Growing, though? I don't know that there's been any evidence of that, and I'm not even sure that's their goal. Otherwise I'd expect you'd see them going for bigger "mainstream" releases instead of what they've been doing. I mean, as a developer it irks me that they don't seem to have any interest in reaching out to small indies, but I have to admit that they've continued to cater to their niche market quite well.

What do I know, though, I don't run a distribution service. It just seems to me that their actions seem to imply a desire to remain small and niche, even with the whole "DRM-free Revolution" mantra. Which, as a customer, I'd actually much prefer to them being a Steam competitior.

but you know what there may be an actual immediate thing to be looked here in their messaging to the community. nobody likes rejection and gog, when compared to Steam, is basically like a giant rejection machine.

I think they need to reevaluate carefully their messaging to indies.

instead of whatever the fuck it is they're saying now which is building this consensus of resentment, disdain, and animosity they need to start saying things like "sorry but the [game][deal] just doesn't work on our end right now in terms slotting into place with the other things we're running and working on right now. perhaps time and luck will be more favourable next time.

sexy and french and thinking of you,

guillaume rambourg"

or something along those lines.

Sorry, I completely misread your post :P

"Consensus of animosity?" That has yet to be demonstrated.

And nobody knows what exactly they are saying when they "reject" a game.

It wouldn't help much now. They denied so many games that they already have an existing bad reputation between indies. Big publishers are a different thing though. There they can't say no.

If they open the floodgates they will be vilify by their customers for flooding the catalog with crap like steam. If they do not some games are bound to be missed and be vilify by indies and a small number of customers as show in the number of wishlist.

Dam if you do, Dam if you don't. So GoG choose the path of less damnation.

You very well know they can't do that. Ultimately cause of the way how they release their games aka support on all windows versions which means them working on every game. Already this makes opening the floodgates impossible. All they need to do is to broaden a bit a spectrum of what they release besides the usual games you can expect here when you look at Steam release schedule. Eitherway still hoping to see Arcen games (irony that its an existing gog developer) new game Starward Rogue here one day even if it was declined.

Voted and sent a message to support about the matter. I really want to try this one and would much prefer to get it here than Humble.

GOG, good old games, that build it's name and reputation on selling games long after their launches, refused game because it is old? LOL

Maybe they thought it violated one of the Gs and they just wanted to let him off easy...? *ducks*

I agree. Their phrasing as reported by rejected devs really doesn't matter much. "Too niche" and other oft-used lines are the nice way of saying "we have no interest in selling your game."

Indie devs are famously fragile, so I think the truth would probably do more harm to the gaming community than straight bullshit.

Generally speaking, I don't mind GoG making individual judgements. But I will admit to be occasionally baffled. Starward Rogue is surprising because you already have that developer here. Maybe GoG is unhappy with the sales of AI War but they were late to the party with that game.

But I do think there are two sides to the story...

For example, not mentioned often here...how many of these indie games get bundled in the $1 tier after a fixed period of time? Makes me wonder if GoG rejects some because they fear the product will get devalued while they are still stuck committed to that product's support. How many of the rejected games publishers have a history of cheap bundling?