I do understand your view. But it seems that those titles are considered "still selling"? Otherwise, they'd be here and not just on Steam.

OK a few things.

The whole sister site idea is just a bad idea. Some of you guys are worried about resources being used on these "new games", how much resources and money do you think would be spent on a entirely new site for games that are really not that new and more like middle aged games.

another thing about the community of how you're saying that these new games are going to bring a scourge of new gamers ruining this forum that is so much different than any other community. GoG just made this announcement and now we have all these people freaking out, blowing things way out of proportion and saying we don't want to welcome whatever evil people come here because of these new games coming. HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT TO ANY OTHER COMMUNITY. I've seen trolls here, i've seen flaming here, i've seen incredibly stupid arguments, and i've seen people freak the fuck out over nothing. Yes I have seen generous people gift games to people and a helpful community that help people dealing with problems like compatibility and I know that is good and important but we have a lot of the bad stuff as well. I just don't see how having games a couple years old at a higher price is going to lead to a catastrophic end to the gog forum.

I completely understand the worry of the possible decline of classic games flowing through gog but I think they know what they are doing and they listen to us. Hell they are mostly doing this because of the recent survey, a lot of us including me asked for this in fact most of us.

to those of you thinking this is the end of gog, gog is not dieing just because they don't cater only to you.

think of GOG.com as Great Outstanding Games now

and as representative of developer/publisher with titles on GOG
we are happy this might mean that more our 'recent' title appears there :)

but take it with bit of salt :) until it's there it's all pure myth ;)

I wouldn't mind at all seeing games the age (and quality!) of the ones you mentioned. I just wish the focus stayed on the old games, just like it has been - because if new games get a lot of attention, it means the release pace of old games slows down. And we DON'T NEED THAT.

That’s great! There are lots of games I did not purchase because of the DAMN drm (too disrespectful to be upper case).

Even if the price is much higher than GOG average, here I would buy Dragon Age, Assassins Creed and Skyrim! A miss them :D

I hope smaller developer / publisher such as Kerberos, Microids, Double Fine, Bohemia Interactive, Stardock or Paradox will take advantage of this GOG initiative.

I think that's actually a pretty decent idea. There are a few indie games (that are rather recent) that I'd gladly see on GOG (such as Aquaria (what a great game) or the Penumbra series).

And GOG staff: "So don't think about us as "Good Old Games"; think of us as "GOG.com"" Sorry, but that's ridiculous.

Why did you name your site Good Old Games in the first place if old games haven't been a "core value" for you - it's not like you couldn't have focused on newer games instead if you had wanted.

I'm a bit wary of this new course, because I love so much what you've been doing so far. I hope you'll at least gain more market influence through the inclusion of newer games.

I don't care if you release a game from 2011 or 1981 as long as the price is fair, no copy protection is used and so on. The core values as you said. Good Old Games, they're not disappearing, you just add more new games, that's it. I can't see anything to complain about here. You already have newer games like Fahrenheit and does anyone really care in a negative way? No, because it is great to have a platform where you can get oldies and new titles in the classical way of trading. You are working for us, for the consumer and that makes GOG great, that makes CD Projekt great.

Maybe some day GOG is a real competitor to Steam. I would love to see it. Because those platforms are working for the money alone. They force me to install them, they force me to start them if I want to play. But GOG doesn't force me to anything. I buy, I leave, I come back. Not because you force me, but because you win me over.

QFT

"Good Old Games" was already irrelevant the moment they put Lionheart in the catalog. And by "the moment", I mean in 2008 when they started the whole thing. Adding Master of Orion 3 and Empire Earth 3 is only furthering that irrelevancy.

That's a good point. However, developing new games takes lots of effort and money, while re-releasing existing old games doesn't (besides the work that e.g. GoG is doing, trying to make them compatible with modern systems). So it may well be that getting $10 from a sale of an old game is more profitable than getting $50 for a new game.

I guess that is also why (AFAIK) you can buy lots of old Nintendo (SNES) and Playstation/PS2 titles online for the newer consoles from PSN etc.

Still, it may be that many publishers are looking beyond that. They only have a limited number of old titles they can keep re-releasing, so they are thinking that if people become too comfortable buying games for $1-10 (be it either older PC (GoG) games, indie games or games for IPads and Android tablets), will they refuse to buy new console and PC games for $50-60 in the future, and rather just keep buying games which are a few years older?

I've been in this mode for which seems like forever, and I must admit nowadays shelling out 50€ for ANY game (especially the simplistic QTE console crap that they are selling these days, and removed the ability to sell the game after you've completed it so the 50€ loss is permanent) seems mindless, with all these interesting older games that I already have and can buy. I might pay that kind of price for e.g. some heavy duty flight combat simulator that I'd expect to be playing for the next few years, Falcon 6.0 or something. It is just what you get accustomed to. It is not as much that I don't think no new game would be worth the money, but it makes no sense because of the cheaper options.

So, selling older back catalogue cheaper may be quite profitable, but at the same time the publishers may feel they are shooting themselves in the foot with it. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Yay, celebrity!
I'm pretty sure new games won't take that much attention.

And as GOG team love old games as much as we do, they will use their new possibilities to get even more old games onboard.

GOG needs to make another site for newer games but allows you to connect accounts between each other so that way the community won't be split either.

I've been waiting for this for a while and now it's coming true. Great.

However, I do agree that it would be best if GOG found a subtle way to separate oldish releases from newer titles with a subtitle eg. "GOG Something". Not a separate website but just a new flavour categorisation to easily separate the two from buyers / GOG members perspective while essentially keeping the two at the same place.