It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Pretty deadly little thing.

Captain, I have some new information regarding "The Aristocrats". No, they're still laying low after their last heist, so low that we haven't seen Don or Freddie since the meeting with "The Boss". Someone might've hid them underground but we won't know for sure just now. Anyway, there's a new girl that was seen with Rick Fermione. She from outta town, don know exactly where. Seems a member of the borguise. It's bourgeoisie? Don't know sir, some fancy stuff I don't get--pearls, caviars, and champagnes, sir. Yes, one of my boys is following her. Yes, I know this is very delicate matter. Oh, the mayor... no, of course, no, I mean I'll talk to... Yes sir. No one seen. The report, yes. The last thing, sir--and this is a little bit unexpected--it looks like "The Aristocrats" are planning to move to a new district, any moment now. Can't tell for sure, but my bet is Connecticut Ave. We'll see. Will do, sir. Goodbye.

Omerta: City of Gangsters, an organized crime simulation you have been playing for the last couple of weeks just got bigger with The Con Artist DLC. There's a new henchman to recruit, new weapon, and a new district up for grabs. Experience "the greatest con of all time" in this action-packed expansion for only $4.99 on GOG.com.

Requires the base game Omerta: City of Gangsters on GOG in order to play.
avatar
Crosmando: What will happen now if these Omerta guys (or others) start churning out DLC after DLC, forcing you guys to clog up the new releases and overshadow other new games?
That's my only real concern about separate DLC now being on GOG as well. Other than that, it doesn't really bother me as long as it doesn't become a constant thing here.
Post edited March 08, 2013 by haydenaurion
What a horrible precedent to set. I, like some others apparently, am concerned about what this is going to mean about future expansion packs and DLC. Will EA decide that since GOG now supports DLC that expansion packs for games like Syndicate should be an additional cost? GOG doesn't have a leg to stand on to say no anymore...
low rated
avatar
DCT: yeah because Forge of Virtue for Ultima 7 was SO worth the 20 bucks.. oh and hellfire for Diablo, look even Expansion packs were not really worth it, there is no real good solution to new content as there will always be stuff that isn't worth the asking price be it DLC or Expansion packs.
avatar
Mnemon: You are confusing my arguments. First part is what I'd like GOG to do, second part is about the industry. Yes, there were bad expansions, just as there were and are bad games [btw - I liked Hellfire for Diablo; it did change a lot of substantial aspects of the game - including making aspects of the gameplay less clunky]. But there's no comparison in what DLC's do in "maximising profit" (or rather going for gullible' peoples money in a way I dislike; much as the free-to-play-but-pay-for-advantages model). I'd REALLY rather the industry took all those ideas for DLC and rolled them together in a single expansion - and dislike where all this is going on an ethical level.
While I would like to see the DLC rolled up in a one size fits all expansion but honestly it won't happen. even though it would cost them less in the long run, sorta since they don't get charged the 1,000 dollar Q&A fee from Sony and Microsoft every time they release a DLC not to mention in most cases the additional Q&A fee cost for the patch to ready the game for the DLC

avatar
yyahoo: What a horrible precedent to set. I, like some others apparently, am concerned about what this is going to mean about future expansion packs and DLC. Will EA decide that since GOG now supports DLC that expansion packs for games like Syndicate should be an additional cost? GOG doesn't have a leg to stand on to say no anymore...
Right because allowing for DLC for a new game is the same as allowing a company to charge extra for a 15 year old expansion pack, get real.
Post edited March 08, 2013 by DCT
I don't really appreciate DLC being sold on GOG, I value GOG for striving to provide "complete" packages.

Now, just a while ago GOG gave us the missing expansions for SMAC and some other EA games for free. I think that's strong evidence that they _do_ try to provide complete packages, and I understand that that might not be possible for newer games.

However, in turn, this now makes me less likely to buy newer games on GOG, since I simply don't want to have to worry about DLCs for the games I buy here. It's bad enough that I have to worry about this stuff for games bought elsewhere.

I also believe that offering DLC for Omerta, of all games, was a particularly ill-conceived way to try and break the ice.
avatar
Starmaker: Crow has been served.

To everyone else, I apologize for the offtopic.
avatar
Roman5: Well worth every cent of Fucking 150$K, right guys?

Also: Comments and ratings disabled, take a wild guess why
Question - did you back this project?
avatar
DCT:
But making some noise did get us Adventure Gamer's Game of the Year 2012, no?
Dear GOG,

Until now there were only two types of GOG games for me:
(a) games I had already bought or given for free on GOG (today's count: 498)
(b) games I was eventually planning to buy on GOG (yesterday's count: 33; today's count: 32)

Now there is a third category:
(c) games I will not buy until they are merged into one package (yesterday's count: 0; today's count: 2)

In order to allow me to keep track of this new category (as I do through "My Games" for (a), and "My Wishlist" for (b)), would you be so kind as to add a new feature to the website (recommended name: "My Boycottlist"), together with an "add to boycottlist to avoid buying it later" link on the gamecard page. It would be extra nice of you if you could warn me should I ever try to buy a game on my boycottlist by mistake.

Thank you for diversifying my GOG experience and helping me fight my "completionist" problem.

Best Regards,
Mrkgnao
Post edited March 08, 2013 by mrkgnao
avatar
Mnemon: Mhm.

Don't like that either - but then, the moment GOG started releasing new games this problem had to crop up, eventually. You can't offer complete packages for games that are still in active development and receiving extensions [let's call it that - I am not in favour of DLC but alas - liked expansions].

The crux is what will happen down the line. If GOG can convince the publishers to roll all those extensions in a single package, eventually, as is the case with many of the older games released here - then, fair enough. I still won't pick up a DLC heavy title unless it comes as a 'Gold' / 'Complete' release [independently from where it is relased]. I'd very much hope that GOG fights for value for money packages and establishes a principle here to go alongside allowing newer games in.

That they charge $5.00 for this, given the quality of full games available here, shows just how ridiculous the DLC concept is. Honestly - rather then incremental updates I REALLY want the industry to go back to full expansions.
I completely agree. Selling new games is very different from selling old(er) games.

Buying Omerta for $40 simply won't happen, but I'd be more on-board with this whole DLC financial strategy crap if DLCs were automatically added as bonus content to the main game one year after their release. That'd be possible at GOG and most other digital stores, I'd assume. That way the value of an ageing game would diminish slower, probably resulting in more sales overall.
Oh boy...

I just changed my mind about Settlers 7 on GOG.
The alternatives here are thus:

1) Omerta on GOG does not get DLC support, becoming an inferior version and lacking expansion content.

2) Omerta was never sold on GOG at all because GOG does not support DLC. Most newer games never come here because GOG does not support modern features like added content post-sale.

Which do you angry people want? Honest question.
avatar
DCT:
avatar
lowyhong: But making some noise did get us Adventure Gamer's Game of the Year 2012, no?
Well there is a diffrence between trying to get a game on here or in my case getting Larry 6 SVGA is one thing. Take Larry 6 SVGA there was no real excuse for that it ran under dosbox just fine but wasn't orginally included in the release probably because it didn't work with ScummVM as for Cat Lady that showed that there was a intrest in the game. In those cases the "complaints" were for something sensible

But what does bitching about new games or DLC accomplish? nothing, GOG can not live on selling old games like it or not there going to reach a point where all the games they can release are released because like it or not old games are a pain in the ass there are liscening issues, there are compatiblity issues and very little workarounds to fix them, and to sell newer games GOG needs to have to man up and sell DLC you may not have to like it but they do.

Sure you can say "oh but they can just go sell complete editions after awhile" yeah and guess what people would be posting here saying "oh that's great yet another game GOG is late to the party selling. Seriously why should I buy this here when I already got it on Steam or GamersGate or whatever" Which is true they could make more money by selling the newer games sooner and to do that they need to be open to selling DLC plus there having a hard enough time getting newer games here with their no DRM policey and not pandering to the steamkey crowd and when push comes to shove I rather have GOG bend on DLC then the no DRM and Steamkey one.

avatar
StingingVelvet: The alternatives here are thus:

1) Omerta on GOG does not get DLC support, becoming an inferior version and lacking expansion content.

2) Omerta was never sold on GOG at all because GOG does not support DLC. Most newer games never come here because GOG does not support modern features like added content post-sale.

Which do you angry people want? Honest question.
Don't waste your "breath"(so to speak), I know I'm no longer going too. It's as Mark Twain said "never bother to argue with a idiot, they will only bring you down to their level and then beat you with experience" these guys are going to try and argue their points or lack their off no matter what is said to them it's better to just sit back,relax and let them wear themselves out with their needless complaining they eventually either run out of steam or find something new to complain about.
Post edited March 08, 2013 by DCT
This DLC approach is a serious blow to my favorable impression of GOG. When I discovered GOG a couple years ago and started buying games from them, I finally realized that DRM-Free, complete games were very important to me. I pretty quickly stopped buying from Steam entirely (even though I have ~200 games from them). I only recently bought Portal 2 since it will never be available any other way. :)

But back to this DLC nonsense: One of the reasons I'm willing to pay more for games through GOG (or simply not buy games that aren't available) is that I don't have to worry about ever buying more parts to that game.

Until today, I always felt confident that my more expensive purchase of a game from GOG at least meant I wouldn't have all that nickel and diming DLC crap to worry about in the future -- the game would be patched and updated to include all content as it was released (or licenses were acquired for the old games like Alpha Centauri). I understand that may not have been ever plainly stated by GOG as a policy, but I'm pretty sure it's how it had been. That all changed today.

I feel that GOG should be arranging with publishers before ever selling a game that any future patches, updates, DLC will be included with the original purchase. The exception to that would be for actual, true expansions (as we all remember them) -- when a large delivery of new content was released a long time down the road. I realize drawing that line might be tough, but today's DLC release is clearly not in that category.

GOG does have some power in this situation. I know it's much less that what Valve/Steam has, but it is not zero -- they can negotiate before hand and, in the case of this Omerta game, they could have simply said "No thanks -- we will not sell your game if you're going to pull this DLC nonsense."

Some of you said "They need to do this to compete with Steam!" Why? I no longer buy from Steam because of these types of policies. By selling puny, ought-to-be-free DLCs, GOG is sure acting more like Steam (and that might be more appealing to some of you), but it's LESS appealing to others (and I suspect that's the larger group of current GOG customers.)

Thanks,
Justin
avatar
jcookeusa: Some of you said "They need to do this to compete with Steam!" Why?
It's more "they need to do this to sell new release games."
Why I shouldn't be able to buy DLC to the game that I've bought on GOG? If you don't want DLC then don't buy it, but don't force same thing on other people, otherwise next time people will be forced to buy game on Steam just to have option to buy DLCs.
avatar
Roman5: GOG was always about delivering value to Gamers, if we get more of this nonsense in the future then the core values of this site can start to break apart piece by piece
avatar
MDyzzle: GOG.com was build upon a foundation of delivering the best value to gamers. We know gamers are not stupid, and we know they won't buy anything we serve just because it's there. Of course we'd like to include all the DLCs, extra materials, soundtracks for free, but that's not always possible. For some of the games, it's possible to bundle all the expansions (or DLCs) in one package, for some it ain't. I can understand that you might be afraid that we're losing our values, but we're not. All we want is DELIVER the games. At the end, it's always YOU who decide--buy or skip. And we'd rather give you that choice now.
There are two problems with that.

1. Omerta was received so badly that "delivering the best value" really doesn't work as an argument here. Really, there seems to be a consensus in the community that this game was disappointing, mediocre, and overpriced already for the content that it had to offer. And you choose _this_ game to do away with the former practice of _not_ releasing games piecemeal, and give "best value" as a reason? I'm sorry, I do not understand.

2. You're actually devaluating every other new game that you're selling. So far, I really didn't have to worry about DLC when I bought games at GOG. I could be certain that the game would either be complete already, or that GOG would strive hard to _make_ it complete (see: EA expansions). I could be reasonably sure that I would not have to spend additional money to receive a complete product. Now, with this change in your release practice, this has changed. Now, when I'm seeing a new game released on GOG, I will start to worry whether there's a hidden chain of money-grabbing DLC attached to it. Again, I don't understand why you deem it a good idea to give users that feeling.

To give you an example: I actually went to GOG to buy "Eador: Genesis" from the current promo. It's cheap now, and I just received some money. But now I don't - now I'm worried that the cheap price might just be a teaser to later sell piecemeal DLC to me. So I'm making a mental note to first check the age of the game, and the likelihood of the devs to release DLC. I may still buy it, but I really don't like the feeling of having to check these things now, and I may not even have the time to do these checks thoroughly before the promo runs out.

Also, I'm sorry, the way how you say that "All we want is DELIVER the games" makes me indeed worry a bit. I actually like to think that GOG is about more than that, and that GOG does _not_ just serve random mediocre stuff and lets the users decide if they want to bite. :(
Post edited March 08, 2013 by Psyringe