The game left Early Access and released on March 15 or 16, and it says I made the review on March 16. This is BS, and I know the proper date was there... It just never occurred to me exactly when it was.

I made the review a week or two ago, when the game was STILL sitting at the 1.0 version that was initially brought to GOG.This was after the second response from Team17 that said they still couldn't tell me when the game was going to be updated, and you'll find my post on the matter here: https://www.gog.com/forum/general/suggestions_wanted_for_gog_mix_games_that_treat_gog_customers_as_second_class_citizens/post615

Is this GOG's feeble attempt at trying to save face? I stated in the review that they were free to edit it when the time comes that the game gets updated.

Anyway... I told a nice person I wasn't going to participate around here for a while, but I just wanted to bring that little thing up. Hopefully this is just a once-off, and doesn't happen every time someone speaks of developer neglect in public.

Cheers, and have a lovely day/night.

seems unusually petty
not just for gog but for any business or developer thats not digital homicide

This is going to sound crazy but my Pixel Piracy review saying basically the same thing was taken back in time too. WTF is going on??

sounds more like the code monkies screwing up

The classic! :D

(sorry for not providing anything useful to your problem)

I'd accept that for PP, but I'm going to have to say 'how convenient' for Sheltered.
Given the context; I'm calling bullshit... do you have his number?

I had heard something about Sheltered being out of date for a while here, but I never realized until now that it was published by Team17. Between that and the issues The Escapists had here for a while, I really wish that Team17 weren't involved with Yooka-Laylee. I don't trust them at all.

No making up an accuse

BUT it might have to do with databases:

While it was still in early access the date function worked as you described.

Than GOG changed it to released, the database was set to use date=current release date and as your entry was prior to this date, it was replaced with date = release date.

Nobody really to blame just database functionality. Looks stupid from outside, but if you know a bit about databases and their handling, quite logical (similar with Y2k bug) ;)

And NO, no attempt to make you look stupid, just stupid software ;)

EDIT: You would not be able to display a negative number, hence normal precaution minimum = start date.

The game didn't come here during Early Access :)

*confused*

The way you described, it was sounding you made a review here on GOG, or?
*confused*

can you draw a timeline and a "placeline" pleeeease ;)

sorry... I tend to do that.

-The game was in Early Access at Steam.
-It left Early Access, and was released here on March 15(?).
-I made a 'review' here on GOG in late September/early October about lack of developer support etc.
-The game was finally updated within the last few days from 1.0 to 1.4. (Look at the what did just update forum thread to see how extensive the update was).
-my review's date changed to the day the game was released at 1.0. Other reviews look to be normal... the only difference is that mine tells people to stay away from the game, and it is the most voted so it's at the top.

So when I say 'the game didn't come here during Early Access'; I'm saying that your suggestion that switching from Early Access to release status messing with the database doesn't apply :)

OK, now you lost me, not you but you;) and what happened.

doesn't really make sense (technical speaking). Still might be a stupid bug on GOG software, but not what I assumed and what is easily overlooked ;)
Only thing which kind of could explain, setting somewhere one of those little tick boxes might have caused the same problem and they never bothered fixing it, which sounds a bit weird as your review is not even close to the facts as it is pre-release ;) But that might be explainable as this means MANUAL work ;)
And maybe if one of the blue ones will see this thread they MIGHT gonna edit your review (see before) ;)

EDIT: And thanks for clarifying it at least for me! ;)