Um, has any of this been confirmed officially by GOG, or is this all caused by a single comment on the Kickstarter page that has no context or confirmation behind it? Not calling the devs liars or anything, but as long as we only have their word on the circumstances behind this decision, as far as I am concerned, no decision has been made at all.

Even if GOG has decided not to carry this game, I would have to agree with the decision, assuming the stated motivation behind it is true. $25 is too much to ask for any indie game. If the indie market had a more reliable track record for creating content that is worth the expense, I might consider going as high as $20, but the fact is, far too many indie titles are not really worth that much, in terms of the game quality or quantity of content. A lot of them are innovative or unique, but at the same time, they are almost always "throw away" games: games that you play for a short while, but then once you've experienced it, you never go back for more. There are exceptions, of course, but those exceptions are rare enough that I would never risk $25 on an unknown title from an unknown dev.

Interesting. So you finally agree that RCT3 for $20 was a bad move then? Because you denied the same logic that you just used pretty much all through that topic.

And your personal opinion on whether or not Xenonauts is worth $25 is really not relevant to the topic. There's obviously people who would pay it despite whatever you might think of it. This thread alone proves that.

Consolidation. It's why people prefer to buy certain games on their choice platforms over other alternatives. I don't even remember what my ModDB/IndieDB/Desura password, let alone own any games there. I'm perfectly fine with a download link, but unfortunately Goldhawk won't be hosting the download. Still I'm prepared to use Desura when there are no other DRM-free alternatives. The good thing in this case is that thankfully I won't be needing the Desura client to download the game.

Yeah, I'm with you on this. Doesn't really seem to make any sense at all.

Perhaps as Lowyhong said, some people just like it when they can get a game on their platform of choice.

Personally, I don't like the idea of "Well if there is no publisher it can't be worth more than $15." A game's value should be determined by the game, not by the developer or if their is a publisher backing it or not. Seems rather stupid that if this game was going to have a EA tag on it and cost $25 people would be amazed that it wasn't going for full retail price, but same game and same price from an indie and suddenly they are greedy.

Also, not sure how much weight gog currently has or will have, but if some indie wanted to charge $20 for his game and wanted to released only on gog and Steam because of their size, but was turned down from gog because of the price it may mean that the game would only be available with DRM.

Edit: Typo.

That's why I use a password manager and route all those emails through a forwarding service. But, in practice, I rarely ever want those games if I've forgotten where I bought them.

GOG was right, selling that over $15 is a rip off right there. Maybe you should price it better, look at all the games on this site. There are old ones, not even indie, that sell under $10

Well Said!

$25? That is way too much for an indie game in my book.

There was an interesting article on RPS a few days ago on how the label "indie" has become pretty much meaningless.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/05/03/why-indie-has-become-a-bad-word/

Statements like "indie games should not cost more than X dollars" are pretty silly in my opinion. I think the price of a game should be determined by criteria like quality, age, amount of gameplay etc., and not by a pointless and not very well-defined classification as indie or non-indie.

It takes a very special game these days for me to want to pay over $20. So if this was priced at over that, I likely wouldn't buy it - until it were discounted to below 20. But if people are willing to pay a higher price and wish to pay that higher price and buy it from GOG, then I don't understand GOG's refusal to sell it solely based on price.

Oh well, so much for the "DRM free revolution" when they themselves apparently throw a spanner in the works based on a price tag alone =S.

No, turning them down would be bad business, agreeing to talk about it later would be a much more reasonable response. But, refusing the game on such an arbitrary basis isn't what I would consider a wise business move. I can only assume that something got lost in translation because it would be asinine to make decisions in that manner.

Disappointing Gog wont be getting this. But having said that, maybe the indie publisher is really asking more than the game will be really worth...

I completely agree. I can't say I have any experience in the gaming industry so what I say doesn't have much weight. I have a feeling that discussion between the store and game developer are formal, so lack ambiguous comments like "I don't like your current offer but we can talk further about changes".

I think a proposal is made and then agreed or turned down on a one by one basis. I think Xenonauts could easily make the same proposal in the future and get accepted as the game is more widely known so makes sense for GOG to sell at that price.

I think Xenonauts is being unprofessional in publishing what GOG said as it makes them seem unfair. When, really they are following basic business practise.