vicklemos: edit: for a game that (the cat said to me) won't hit our shores the website surely mentions gog a lot. Same thing for the trailer. And all the other games the dev has worked on are here, so... maybe Galaxy integration or something.. always online.. crap, dunno where to start.
Grargar: They possibly thought that the Galaxy client was required to play GOG games (a perception that some people got with the release of the physical version of Witcher 3), which is why they might have wrongly put GOG as a place where the game will be released. As can be seen from this thread:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/369990/discussions/0/412449508278477740/ , their excuse for wanting always-online is because the game is supposedly multiplayer-only, a claim that I don't particularly buy, as you could always play such a game by LAN. Also, someone else asked them about GOG. Let's see what's their response.
Edit: His answer:
"We won't! GOG does not allow releases of games like ours, that require server-client connection for every session. To me this sounds like a loss for GOG's audience. But it's their platform and their policy. I know that we, like other indies, have only 5 pairs of hands, that we will rather use to add more kick-♥♥♥ features to the existing game, than to create a parallel AI/game mechanic logic in order to allow a part of the game (single-player challenges) to be playable offline. My bet would be that in 2016 or 2017, we'll see games like Gremlins, Inc. being released on GOG "as is", since we offer the gameplay that GOG's audience will love (Alexey Bokulev's original Eador has 450+ positive reviews there) and there's simply no reason except for superstition, to keep these games from that audience. Yup. The only reason we don't want always-online games is because of superstition. You heard it right here folks. :D
Wow, OK. That's pretty insulting all the way around.
How unreasonable of us to actually care about the long term viability of a game, to even care more about it than the creator apparently. But then it just superstitious nonsense this idea that putting game logic unnecessarily on the server has down sides. Bad internet connections are a myth after all, and it's not like that sort of thing killed a game 11 days ago or anything.
And we should be more considerate of their limited resources before suggesting they write less complicated code. Wouldn't want that to get in the way of all of those "kick-ass" features or anything. That's just weird. He somehow managed to turn it into a victim scenario.
How about he just takes our logo down? The second he gets his game in here "as is" is the second GoG makes itself an irrelevant platform. The only significant reason for us to exist is that we don't accept terminally ill games. That's a pretty good reason beyond superstition to tell him to go take a hike all by itself.
