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

×
avatar
rjbuffchix: Would be curious to know your thoughts on the game Opus Magnum. Which iirc has fewer wishlist entries, and was rejected initially for being too niche. Cheers.
Personally, Opus Magnum reminds me heavily of SpaceChem, which I went into open-minded and ended up hating
SapceChem passionately.

Something about the game-play of SpaceChem boiling down to solving series of increasingly difficult interconnected workflow issue "puzzles" being too similar to my IRL job, but with no "fun-factor" to distract me from the tediousness of SpaceChem's "gameplay".
avatar
rjbuffchix: Would be curious to know your thoughts on the game Opus Magnum. Which iirc has fewer wishlist entries, and was rejected initially for being too niche. Cheers.
Opus Magnum
Released Dec 7, 2017
(Early Access Oct 19, 2017)
1,753 reviews
Overwhelmingly Positive
97% favorable
Owners: 50,000-100,000
Followers: 27,059
Peak players yesterday: 50

Grimoire : Heralds of the Winged Exemplar (V2)
Released Aug 4, 2017
397 Reviews
Mixed
67% favorable
Owners: 0-20,000
Followers: 5,342
Peak players yesterday: 3

Pick one...which one might belong on GoG of these "borderline titles"
avatar
babark: a vocal minority raising a ruckus for political reasons
look-everyone-im-projecting.jpg

lol, the only person from the "No Grimwah on gog, EVAR!"-crowd that doesn't seem to post here entirely because of their own political bias is RWarehall.

He seems more motivated by a misguided "gog can do no wrong"-defense meachanism more than anything else. But unlike the rest of you, he at least TRIES to make some valid points.

avatar
RWarehall: Opus Magnum
Released Dec 7, 2017
(Early Access Oct 19, 2017)
1,753 reviews
Overwhelmingly Positive
97% favorable
Owners: 50,000-100,000
Followers: 27,059
Peak players yesterday: 50

Grimoire : Heralds of the Winged Exemplar (V2)
Released Aug 4, 2017
397 Reviews
Mixed
67% favorable
Owners: 0-20,000
Followers: 5,342
Peak players yesterday: 3

Pick one...which one might belong on GoG of these "borderline titles"
[GOGCURATOR]Refuse both! Refuse both under the flimsiest of pretenses! Release a lot of visual novels instead![/GOGCURATOR]




* Moded. Please refrain from using vulgarisms.
Post edited June 19, 2019 by chandra
avatar
rjbuffchix: You can say I am failing to justify my claim but I feel that is colored by flawed criteria. I don't think looking at the reviews in that way tells the real story. To me it is saying correlation=causation, which is not necessarily the case.
I wasn't really talking about reviews (or at least not JUST reviews), I was talking about sale and ownership stats.

avatar
rjbuffchix: Political reasons? Far from it. My reasons for wanting this game here: I love the genre, want more games like this, and want GOG to get more games like this so I will support even though I already purchased the game DRM-free elsewhere.

Also. Not every game that GOG sells is going to be the next Diablo or Cyberpunk that rockets up the sales charts. That is okay. Me and others demanding this game are not s-posting, there is genuine desire for this particular niche game.
I'm sorry. I didn't mean to claim you wanted it here for political reasons, I wasn't referring to you. You haven't really been "raising a ruckus" either, and you definitely aren't a troll (at least as far as I've noticed :D), which is why I was engaging with you.

Games don't have to rocket up in the sales charts, but they should make some amount of money to be worth it. And when the dev is known to be unpredictable and prone to problematic behaviour that could affect sales, you'd probably want an even bigger buffer just in case.
Fez by Phil Fish is a good example again in this case. The dev became known as a problematic personality, but the game is really good, and I'm pretty sure gog made up more than enough over their initial time and investment with the game before it was dropped from their store.

avatar
rjbuffchix: Would be curious to know your thoughts on the game Opus Magnum. Which iirc has fewer wishlist entries, and was rejected initially for being too niche. Cheers.
RWarehall gives a good reply to that. As sad as it may be for consumers, in this case, this is purely a numbers game.
Damn, GOG would be the LAST place I thought I'd see the "Steam users don't like it much, and sales were low, so it's bad" argument. Seems that some fragile little manbabies can't get over Cleve's trolling history and separate that from the game he made. Grimoire actually is a really nice hardcore blobber, yeah it's obtuse and hard to the point of cruelty, but then again so is Elminage Gothic and Wizardry 7 for that matter, ie the genre is known to being brutal on the player. It also has a charming, colorful art style with beautiful sprites and some excellent dungeon design, not to mention a well in-depth character system.

Unfortunately Elminage Gothic's PC port got the same treatment. It's interesting that many gamers profess to like "hard" games and cite Dark Souls as an example (even though DS actually isn't particularly challenging), but when you give them true cruelty in game design they spit the dummy, Age of Decadence got the same treatment too.

In short, y'all a bunch of filthy casuals.
Post edited June 19, 2019 by Crosmando
avatar
Crosmando: Damn, GOG would be the LAST place I thought I'd see the "Steam users don't like it much, and sales were low, so it's bad" argument. Seems that some fragile little manbabies can't get over Cleve's trolling history and separate that from the game he made. Grimoire actually is a really nice hardcore blobber, yeah it's obtuse and hard to the point of cruelty, but then again so is Elminage Gothic and Wizardry 7 for that matter, ie the genre is known to being brutal on the player. It also has a charming, colorful art style with beautiful sprites and some excellent dungeon design, not to mention a well in-depth character system.

Unfortunately Elminage Gothic's PC port got the same treatment. It's interesting that many gamers profess to like "hard" games and cite Dark Souls as an example (even though DS actually isn't particularly challenging), but when you give them true cruelty in game design they spit the dummy, Age of Decadence got the same treatment too.

In short, y'all a bunch of filthy casuals.
I repeatedly tried to get dgnfly to talk about the actual game-play in Grimoire....but instead they just went off on rants trying to get this thread closed.

Wizardry 7 was definitely a classic, however it actually had a manual that covered the game/character builds/skills in detail. Grimoire currently has a half-assed HTML-only game manual hosted on the internet that may or may not actually cover the version of Grimoire being sold, and is definitely skimpy on game details.

Dark Souls series games are real-time action games, not turned based cRPGs like Grimoire/Wizardry/Wizardry game clones, so that kind of doesn't make for a strong argument. On the other hand, Elminage Gothic + Paper Sorcerer suffered from having updated looking graphics but god-awful cobbled together menus for almost everything outside of combat so there was always an disconnect from the fun battles to the tedium of doing everything else to recoup + reach the next battle (at least this was how I experienced Elminage Gothic + Paper Sorcerer).

Own but haven't played Age of Decadence yet. Halfway through the Geneforge series currently, debating whether to play the original Spiderweb Exile games or the 1st reboot Exile games next.
avatar
RWarehall: Pick one...which one might belong on GoG of these "borderline titles"
Again, please explain what the Steam stats have to do with GOG. Could just as easily reframe it this way: Game A in many ways resembles a mobile game (not talking bad about the game, just saying) and Game B resembles an old-school dungeon crawler. Which is a better fit for a dedicated part of GOG's audience? One could actually argue both belong under that criteria. However, imo one couldn't convincingly argue that the better fit is "the one resembling a mobile game, but not the old-school dungeon crawler".

avatar
babark: I didn't mean to claim you wanted it here for political reasons, I wasn't referring to you. You haven't really been "raising a ruckus" either, and you definitely aren't a troll (at least as far as I've noticed :D), which is why I was engaging with you.

Games don't have to rocket up in the sales charts, but they should make some amount of money to be worth it. And when the dev is known to be unpredictable and prone to problematic behaviour that could affect sales, you'd probably want an even bigger buffer just in case.
All good, I've enjoyed the exchange. I do think Grimoire would make money. The rebuttal is that Steam sales show it may not (not "that it won't"). I say it would likely make money at this point given the continued interest and demand here, particularly given there is a DRM-free version available elsewhere (along similar lines, consider that Bioshock 1 was available DRM-free on Humble Bundle prior to it coming here, yet people still wanted it here). A neutral observer could point out that neither of the positions can be proven.

avatar
babark: RWarehall gives a good reply to that. As sad as it may be for consumers, in this case, this is purely a numbers game.
I must have missed the good reply because all I've seen so far is a singleminded insistence that GOG users = Steam users. Anyway, even if GOG accepted Grimoire and only sold 2 copies, no business should be looking solely at numbers since there are other factors that determine customer satisfaction and trust. In other words, it is often a prudent business move to accept a short-term loss for a longer-term gain. I posted earlier about how it can be argued to accept Grimoire as a goodwill gesture to fans, even if it is not profitable in the short term. Look at this topic and many others, and you will find vast numbers of complaints about GOG's curation system.

Many, many, many of these complaints were spawned from the rejection of this particular game. Many, many, many others were spawned from the rejection of new Wizardry. GOG users, even some more casual ones, are baffled why GOG won't accept these blobber games. To accept them is to relieve a lot of anxiety and confusion over curation, which, incidentally, continues to be touted as an advantageous feature of this store. It makes sense to relieve customers' anxiety and confusion by not bizarrely rejecting games that are in line with customers' tastes and which pair nicely with existing old-school games already on the store (accepted pre-current curation).

avatar
Crosmando: It's interesting that many gamers profess to like "hard" games and cite Dark Souls as an example (even though DS actually isn't particularly challenging), but when you give them true cruelty in game design they spit the dummy, Age of Decadence got the same treatment too.
Well-put, and I've noticed this too (I loveeeee me some Age of Decadence, one of the best pure role-playing games I've ever experienced). I do think that the issue is mitigated a bit with the games designed for the old-school audience...like, we were used to difficult dungeon-crawlers, re-rolling characters, etc, so less likely to complain about that stuff in new releases.
avatar
RWarehall: Pick one...which one might belong on GoG of these "borderline titles"
avatar
rjbuffchix: Again, please explain what the Steam stats have to do with GOG. Could just as easily reframe it this way: Game A in many ways resembles a mobile game (not talking bad about the game, just saying) and Game B resembles an old-school dungeon crawler. Which is a better fit for a dedicated part of GOG's audience? One could actually argue both belong under that criteria. However, imo one couldn't convincingly argue that the better fit is "the one resembling a mobile game, but not the old-school dungeon crawler".

avatar
babark: I didn't mean to claim you wanted it here for political reasons, I wasn't referring to you. You haven't really been "raising a ruckus" either, and you definitely aren't a troll (at least as far as I've noticed :D), which is why I was engaging with you.

Games don't have to rocket up in the sales charts, but they should make some amount of money to be worth it. And when the dev is known to be unpredictable and prone to problematic behaviour that could affect sales, you'd probably want an even bigger buffer just in case.
avatar
rjbuffchix: All good, I've enjoyed the exchange. I do think Grimoire would make money. The rebuttal is that Steam sales show it may not (not "that it won't"). I say it would likely make money at this point given the continued interest and demand here, particularly given there is a DRM-free version available elsewhere (along similar lines, consider that Bioshock 1 was available DRM-free on Humble Bundle prior to it coming here, yet people still wanted it here). A neutral observer could point out that neither of the positions can be proven.

avatar
babark: RWarehall gives a good reply to that. As sad as it may be for consumers, in this case, this is purely a numbers game.
avatar
rjbuffchix: I must have missed the good reply because all I've seen so far is a singleminded insistence that GOG users = Steam users. Anyway, even if GOG accepted Grimoire and only sold 2 copies, no business should be looking solely at numbers since there are other factors that determine customer satisfaction and trust. In other words, it is often a prudent business move to accept a short-term loss for a longer-term gain. I posted earlier about how it can be argued to accept Grimoire as a goodwill gesture to fans, even if it is not profitable in the short term. Look at this topic and many others, and you will find vast numbers of complaints about GOG's curation system.

Many, many, many of these complaints were spawned from the rejection of this particular game. Many, many, many others were spawned from the rejection of new Wizardry. GOG users, even some more casual ones, are baffled why GOG won't accept these blobber games. To accept them is to relieve a lot of anxiety and confusion over curation, which, incidentally, continues to be touted as an advantageous feature of this store. It makes sense to relieve customers' anxiety and confusion by not bizarrely rejecting games that are in line with customers' tastes and which pair nicely with existing old-school games already on the store (accepted pre-current curation).
Wizardry: Labyrinth of Lost Souls?
The PC release of it seems to still be in limbo, something about licensing rights.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/948640/discussions/0/1644290549124007462/
https://kotaku.com/the-wizardry-series-return-to-america-has-hit-another-1835245618

Not sure if GOG picked up on that as their primary reason for rejecting Wizardry: LoLS, like the Grimoire rejection nobody knows exactly why the GOG rejection happened. Hoping LoLLS's licensing issues get worked out, and that it eventually gets added to the GOG catalog.
avatar
fronzelneekburm: lol, the only person from the "No Grimwah on gog, EVAR!"-crowd that doesn't seem to post here entirely because of their own political bias is RWarehall.
And if I said to you that because of biological differences there are vastly more men with engineering degree than women, you would also draw the "that's political biased"-card, right?

*facepalm*

You also complain that the so-called "no"-crowd doesn't have any points - yet you yourself fail to deliver an objective fact...

avatar
fronzelneekburm: * Moded. Please refrain from using vulgarisms.
Yes, please refrain from acting like an immature child. :P
avatar
rjbuffchix: Again, please explain what the Steam stats have to do with GOG. Could just as easily reframe it this way: Game A in many ways resembles a mobile game (not talking bad about the game, just saying) and Game B resembles an old-school dungeon crawler. Which is a better fit for a dedicated part of GOG's audience? One could actually argue both belong under that criteria. However, imo one couldn't convincingly argue that the better fit is "the one resembling a mobile game, but not the old-school dungeon crawler".
How dense can you be?

Highly rated games on GoG also tend to be highly rated games on Steam. There is a strong correlation. Furthermore, popular games on GoG also seem to be popular games on Steam, selling more copies on both platforms. This isn't rocket science. Appearances in bundles can throw the metrics way off, but that isn't a problem here.

The only people who would have been spending $40 on Grimoire at release would be very die hard old school RPG fans. If they are panning it, doesn't matter if it's on Steam, it a poorly received game, even for its target audience.

Your argument doesn't hold water.

Some genres may do better here, true. But not by a factor of 10. There was a period of time when a number of devs were releasing sales tidbits, depending on the game and genre GoG sales were between 5-20% of the sales on Steam. The lower end seemed to be titles also released on console. But most games were consistently between 10-15% of Steam sales. They track very well.
Post edited June 19, 2019 by RWarehall
low rated
avatar
fronzelneekburm: lol, the only person from the "No Grimwah on gog, EVAR!"-crowd that doesn't seem to post here entirely because of their own political bias is RWarehall.
avatar
sanscript: And if I said to you that because of biological differences there are vastly more men with engineering degree than women, you would also draw the "that's political biased"-card, right?

*facepalm*

You also complain that the so-called "no"-crowd doesn't have any points - yet you yourself fail to deliver an objective fact...
Ok, here's an objective fact: Due to your complete lack lack of compelling arguments, you have to put strawman arguments into other peoples' mouths that are so fucking dumb and irrelevant that you theatrically facepalm yourself for them.

Bravo! Amazing job, kiddo!

Also, seeing your post dated May 1st on the wishlist, I'll have to conclude that you just have a giant chip on your shoulder about this game.

It's all going to be okay, sanscript! Show me on the doll where the neanderthal hurt you. Don't be scared, the time to heal is now!

avatar
fronzelneekburm: * Moded. Please refrain from using vulgarisms.
avatar
sanscript: Yes, please refrain from acting like an immature child. :P
Considering that gogmods only get active if you come whining to them, the obvious conclusion is that some scared little rat must have tried to get me busted. Naturally, this cowardly vermin doesn't have the spine to stand up for themselves (not even in a silly internet argument), so they have to resort to underhanded tactics like this.


@chandra: I think the word you're looking for is modded.
avatar
rjbuffchix: [snip]
avatar
morrowslant: Wizardry: Labyrinth of Lost Souls?
The PC release of it seems to still be in limbo, something about licensing rights.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/948640/discussions/0/1644290549124007462/
https://kotaku.com/the-wizardry-series-return-to-america-has-hit-another-1835245618

Not sure if GOG picked up on that as their primary reason for rejecting Wizardry: LoLS, like the Grimoire rejection nobody knows exactly why the GOG rejection happened. Hoping LoLLS's licensing issues get worked out, and that it eventually gets added to the GOG catalog.
Yes, I appreciate the clarification. I should've said something about the situation in my post but didn't. The complaints for it apparently not coming here came before that news, but to my knowledge, GOG didn't comment on it and there isn't much hope among us complainers that it will be accepted. That said, a little more transparency regardless would've been nice. Here's hoping it still comes here.

avatar
RWarehall: The only people who would have been spending $40 on Grimoire at release would be very die hard old school RPG fans. If they are panning it, doesn't matter if it's on Steam, it a poorly received game, even for its target audience.
Sling whatever namecalling you like elsewhere in your comments, but please, please, PLEASE stop repeating this $40 lie. That it was the original price at release is irrelevant because the game would NOT be coming here for a $40 pricetag at this point. It was more recently released DRM-free on itch for $9.99.

Plenty of RPG players here would take a chance on it, seeing the style and gameplay. Reviews don't matter and as I have pointed out in the past are an especially questionable (likely to be unreliable) metric of a game by a controversial developer (even if the "controversy" isn't directly discussed in the reviews).

Contrary to popular belief, Steam users are not the only PC gamers. There are many old-school RPG players in particular who wouldn't be caught dead supporting Steam, a monopoly store that ruined the PC gaming market. To imply that the reviews on Steam are the voice of all old-school RPG fans, is dishonest.

Also, please feel free to address my "goodwill" argument. You'll notice it cuts out non sequiturs like Steam lust, in order to recognize the fact that GOG users want the game here, on GOG.
avatar
fronzelneekburm:
As I wrote earlier in this thread that GOG can take in the game for all I care, but you're the one getting personal and demeaning, and thus attacking people.

Some gives you objective facts, I ask questions, and all you do is trying to hammer people...

Good job of having a civil discussion there. I would personally look at my own behaviour and "tactics" if I were you ;)
avatar
rjbuffchix: Sling whatever namecalling you like elsewhere in your comments, but please, please, PLEASE stop repeating this $40 lie. That it was the original price at release is irrelevant because the game would NOT be coming here for a $40 pricetag at this point. It was more recently released DRM-free on itch for $9.99.

Plenty of RPG players here would take a chance on it, seeing the style and gameplay. Reviews don't matter and as I have pointed out in the past are an especially questionable (likely to be unreliable) metric of a game by a controversial developer (even if the "controversy" isn't directly discussed in the reviews).

Contrary to popular belief, Steam users are not the only PC gamers. There are many old-school RPG players in particular who wouldn't be caught dead supporting Steam, a monopoly store that ruined the PC gaming market. To imply that the reviews on Steam are the voice of all old-school RPG fans, is dishonest.

Also, please feel free to address my "goodwill" argument. You'll notice it cuts out non sequiturs like Steam lust, in order to recognize the fact that GOG users want the game here, on GOG.
Again, are you dense? Do you even read what anyone else writes?

If you had, you would see that my point is even those who spent $40 for this game on Steam when it released, who are clearly great fans of the genre to spend so much for this niche game, panned it. Only 56% of the 170 reviews it received in the first 3 months were positive. Even now with the V2 update, it is still getting similarly panned.

The only period where the positive reviews seemed to pick up, was the period of time after the developer begged for positive reviews which received 85% positive reviews in the week up until the V2 release. Even more curious is the fact that for the two weeks prior to begging, the game received just 1 review, but after begging, received 28. Meaning the game's 67% positive has been manipulated up...

I deliberately excluded the reviews immediately after the V2 release because it might be hard to differentiate between begging induced reviews and a genuine appreciation for the update, but if one tries to do that...

In the month following the V2 update, there were 21 reviews that are 95% positive, but remember this is just one week after the developer begged for positive reviews.

But if we contrast that to the reviews since, there are 17 reviews with an underwhelming 70% positives. So clearly Cleve and his called for review bombing raised the score.

So if we exclude this period of positive review spike called for by Cleve which resulted in a composite 88% positives...
That lowers the positives to just 65% which is not good at all.
Post edited June 19, 2019 by RWarehall
Let me get this straight. You are trying to determine the quality of this game based on STEAM REVIEWS? Are you fucking serious?