Er, what? I am talking about games that the developers are willing to bring to GOG. Say there are three potential games submitted to curation. So in this example all are devs willing to bring games to GOG. One game is a point n' click, another is a rogue-lite, and the last one is an old-school dungeon crawler RPG. My argument is that, by and large, the latter one consistently gets rejected. I am not arguing that there are more or even an equal number of dungeon crawler games submitted compared to point 'n click or rogue or any others submitted. What I am arguing is that dungeon crawlers appear to be rejected across the board whereas other genres, even what people would call "niche" genres, are not having as much trouble getting their games here.

I would like to know where (beyond some random personal dislike) your speculation is coming from regarding your comments on the developer (which I didn't requote). Didn't he post the rejection letter, which mentioned nothing about deadlines? Why would GOG reject a game for being "too niche" rather than just be clear and say it was for missing deadlines, if that were the case? And for that matter, GOG has Project Zomboid on here which is technically still in dev half a decade later. GOG had Wolcen Lords of Mayhem for eons. For that matter there are games like Nuclear Throne which didn't get updates, though personally I do not really care about having the most up-to-date version unless it means new content.

I understand your points. But I really don't think there's a "anti-blobber bias" on GOG's part, specifically. I'd say it's more of a "blobber bias", period.
Let's face the facts. I'm not really aware of the sales records, but I have a strong suspicion that "old-school" dungeon-crawlers are perhaps the greatest niche among RPG enthusiasts. Just recently I was browsing steam's user reviews for "Might & Magic X" (which I admit I never played), which was a massive sales flop. I always imagined that the bad reviews were due to bad gameplay and game mechanics.
Nope... it seems that most people hated the game because they were expecting some sort of "Might & Magic-Skyrim". And what they got was an hommage to the old games similar to "Grimrock". It seems the vast majority of people no longer want to move in grid-like fashion.
Again, I'm not aware of the sales, but I think that Grimrock 2 was also a flop compared to the sales of 1.

It's also a question of subjective tastes. I had no problem in paying 10$ for a DRM-free copy of Grimoire. Yet I admit I wouldn't give more than 2$ for games like Amberland, 7 Mages, The Ghost Ship or Aeons of Sand.

But GOG's "curation" isn't really limited to "blobbers". As a strategy fan I'm saddened to see that a game like Stellar Monarch isn't here.

EDIT: I tried inserting links for some games, but GOG managed to break almost all links.
I guess that, instead of bringing more games here, GOG should really focus on fixing their site once and for all :P

Sure thing.
All of my speculation about the developer of Grimoire: Heralds of the Winged Exemplar comes from https://steamcommunity.com/games/650670/announcements/

Have a nice day.

I would welcome Stellar Monarch here! Also hoping for Might and Magic X (and Dark Messiah) someday...would be really nice to get more from some of these classic series even if the missing ones in question may not be considered among the best. I like to have the whole series' here.

With all due respect, my point is not really that curation is rejecting what some may deem niche genres, like dungeon crawler blobbers, or strategy. My point is that dungeon crawlers in particular as a genre, appear rejected at a higher rate than non-dungeon crawlers, even when the non-dungeon crawler happens to be a niche game too.

This is what I mean by the example of asking when the last dungeon crawler release was. If one asks "when was the last point and click release" or "when was the last visual novel release" or "when was the last strategy release", the answer in all cases is "more recently than the last dungeon crawler release".

Thanks, but I had misread. I thought you meant he missed multiple deadlines set by GOG. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

I wonder if he thought you worked for GOG? When he made that rejection thread he made the outrageous claim "four different representatives of GOG have written me once a week for over three years".

I don't think so. But it's Cleve Blakemore we're talking about... so, who knows?

GOG should have his game here just on account of Cleve being Cleve. The man would be the worthy subject of a master's degree on psychology or videogame history.

It wouldn't be the first time a developer has mistaken a GOG user for a staff member. :P

Yes. And what I meant is that I don't believe dungeon-crawlers are rejected more because of what they are. I believe GOG has been rejecting all kinds of stuff, from adventure to strategy and arcade games. While at the same time accepting things which are sometimes subjectively worse than the rejected items.

Nor I - nor probably you - have the single clue about the ammount of games which are rejected by GOG. And we only know about the rejected RPGs because of info in places like "Arkham-RPGCodex-Asylum".

There's still hope, though. This week GOG started selling an adventure game which had once been previously refused. So who knows about the future?

Hey, thanks for sharing that "Axiom Verge" stuff, man. I wasn't aware of the backstory on that.
It really makes me glad that we didn't get the game here, when it was still published by those crooks.

Then why are all the other kinds of stuff, generally speaking, seeing at least a handful of releases while dungeon crawlers don't? It seems too striking a pattern to me though I admit I am also only going off of a belief too. Other than that, I agree with your quote there above for sure. Let's hope for a better future!

The only crooks I'm aware of were Badland Publishing, who were handling the European physical release. If it had come here it would have been self-published.
It's an interesting story though.

Coming in at #22 of the RPG Codex's Top 101 PC RPGs...

https://rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=11193

#8, #12, #14 don't belong there, either, to name but a few. From the article: 361 codexers voted on 278 RPGs. Given my taste of what their forum has to offer, I wouldn't trust them to recommend me anything. My guess is that the same group of rabid fans that keeps trying to get it here pushed that game far too high on their list. It doesn't take much to tip that small a boat.

I can understand rabid fans, why your dislike though?
Sounds like you disagree with 8, 12 and 14 because they are on the periphery of the RPG label rather than their quality.

I can appreciate the skepticism though, 22 is a big claim.

I am tired of seeing Torment as #1 on RPG lists. A number one all time game has to be a complete package, and Torment just isnt. Its well written, amazing world building, a lot of choices, but the combat sucks. Most would agree its sucks, yet people claim number one status when the game is self admittedly flawed.

I replied earlier, but the reply disappeared. Hopefully it will not reappear.

I don't care about this game one way or the other. I'm sure it's fine for what it is, although I'm pretty sure it's not #22 level fine, or worthy of the "gog curation sucks" brigade it stirred up. I'm not even sure why I bothered mentioning that getting #22 on an obviously flawed list is meaningless. I want out of this thread.