I think there will be no more GOG-release for now: Do we find here some Bethesda-games at all? Perhabs "Daggerfall" or "Arena" or even some of the "Terminator"-games? Nothing for now and it would surprise if this company give GOG the possibility to release some of this. But okay: STEAM got priority as always more DRM. Thanks Bethesda, thanks for nothing. Shame on you!

Daggerfall is available absolutely free from Bethesda itself: http://www.elderscrolls.com/daggerfall/

I know, but this one doesn't make the behavior better. Why don't release this one here as free download like some others? Perhabs with some goodies like the soundtrack? "Arena" can also be downloaded for free and the rest? "Morrowind" for example?

Don't link that version, it's bugged:
[url=http://theelderscrolls.wiwiland.net/?title=Daggerfall_:_DaggerfallSetup_EN]http://theelderscrolls.wiwiland.net/?title=Daggerfall_:_DaggerfallSetup_EN[/url]

CarrionCrow:

"Total tangent here for a moment, but have to get it out. What is the point of making kids unkillable in the current games? Does noone see how moronic this approach is?"

Remember that the original titles came out in a time period when PC gaming was still a very niche entertainment market, and most PC gamers people who didn't tend to openly discuss their hobbies. The media wasn't interested in PC gaming back then, so things like killable children would have received little to no scrutiny from anyone with a loud voice and wide audience.

Move ahead to the 3D generation and you see games coming out for widely-popular and widely-scrutinized consoles in addition to PC. Having killable children would have brought the very heavens themselves down upon the designers and publishers. They were left with a choice: create yet another gaming world mysteriously devoid of children or add them in for flavour but remove the ability to have them harmed. Aside from the few psychopaths who shot/stabbed the first child they saw and became angry that they didn't die, nobody was harmed by this decision.

Just the integrity of it got nailed on that one. Kill a child, kill an adult, they're all people.
Really, to me anyway, the entire premise of so many games goes right out the window under the assumption that children are sacred while adults are nothing but disposable cardboard cutouts for players to ventilate with glee. It brings everything into sharper focus in the way of, "Wait, maybe it's a little screwed up to be shooting/blowing up/knifing/filleting/firebombing/running down people in general." Either all matter or none do.
It's more a testament to cowardice that such censorship is A-okay. "We can't put THAT in there, the media will be all over us!" Pretty sure there are other examples in media of children dying violently. But the games industry is willing to run away from it all together out of fear?
To me it smacks of people feeling the need to overcompensate. The feeling that they have to bend over backwards so the larger group doesn't view them as bloodthirsty maniacs getting off at the thought of turning a child into coleslaw. Course, the hypocrisy of murdering adults is still in play.
Or, looking at it another way, there's the idea of a game company thinking, "We can't allow our players that level of freedom, those savages'll make us look bad with 100,000 Youtube videos of people laughing while little Timmy gets shoved through the wood chipper! We can't have that! The media'll be all over us!"
As if the media doesn't look for scapegoats already, regardless of what the game people do or don't include. People with no clue and no answers will look to point the finger at anything. It's easier for them than living scared with the unknown.

Edit - Might as well also include the hypocrisy of people bitching about game violence when they can't get enough of it in other forms of media, ESPECIALLY newspeople. "What, 400 people in a trailer park got nailed by a tornado, a plane crashed and there's body parts in the trees, a (typically white and blonde, go fucking figure) little girl got kidnapped and killed? Oh. How terrible. Now let's film the everloving crap out of it. Ratings, you know."

The last part of your comment is extremely racist. Just saying.

Guys.....I think Bethesda's priority is putting the fallout games on steam first,no words about GOG,according to Kotaku

"So, when can we purchase the first three Fallouts again? Soon, according to Bethesda Softworks, who recently announced on Twitter that they're already working on bringing the games back to Steam—though when asked about GOG, the company maintained that their "current priority is to return the games to Steam," neither confirming nor denying whether the games would be back on GOG. Hopefully, they'll get right on that as soon as possible"

The link to the post,and also tell me if i misunderstood the text

http://kotaku.com/classic-fallout-games-pulled-from-online-stores-will-r-1493767847?utm_campaign=Socialflow_Kotaku_Facebook&utm_source=Kotaku_Facebook&utm_medium=Socialflow

That's promising news...somewhat

I'm glad I already have them, maybe that is why gog offered them a freebies, because they knew they were about to be pulled.

I, probably like most have a few steam games but, the only reason I have them, apart from Brutal Legend which I kept missing in the insomnia sale, is because they are not available on GOG.

My problem with steam is that at least one game I have does not seem to be able to run without steam being logged on, if it's turned off the game turns it on secondly, many games still install their own drm such as securom through steam and lastly I can save gog games to DVD and play them anywhere without needing internet access or passwords.

My post started out accounting for the possibility of your unawareness, but I removed that part when I couldn't find a way to explain the implicit meaning that didn't seem painfully obvious. I'm glad to find it was not in fact as obvious to you as me.

While we are at it... if I only would play Fallout 3 OR New Vegas ever... which of the two would it be?

Try NV.
fo3 is just trashes from shit of Fallout.

New Vegas is a lot closer in tone and setting to the original Fallouts. The side quests are pretty dull and repetative, though. Fallout 3 is worth playing for the Tenpenny Tower quest and for the novelty of wandering through a bombed out National Mall.

I don't think you'll ever get a good answer to that one as opinions on them can be quite divisive.

I actually prefer Fallout 3. After so many people raving about NV, I finally gave it a run through this summer and I give it a big MEH. For something that's supposedly well-written I found the plot/dialog pretty damn bland. Frankly, I found the character plots and interaction in FO3 a lot more entertaining. Sure, that ending may have been a bit blase, but overall I found it to be a superior experience.