Considering the sheer volume of Indie games around, of various quality, I'm not surprised though.
It's also a different consumer group I would argue. GOG is not a "super-Indie" site like ich.io, Humble and IndeDB.

Look gog releases mostly games that sell well here or the games curator likes (which explains a lot of silly releases). That's how it is. Steam releases everything and you have to scroll through hundred pages to find a good game. So its your choice which system you like. I still prefer gogs system even if it denies 90% of games I would like to buy.

Steam = they let anything and everything in (like google play store... 90% of the games are either clones or games are pretty shite)
GOG = GOG has some mysterious criteria for letting games be sold here --- games are handpicked ( we get some weird and very niche games here, but you wont find 10000 tower defense clones).... One of the above guys summed it up... quality over quantity = GOGs approach. Steams is opposite.

Where did the OP go?

Working maybe?

It is still working time here in Europe....;)

Depending on the game, it depends on who you ask. ;)

But seriously, I think that part of the issue here isn't necessarily with GOG, but with our own expectations of what they should/shouldn't be doing. 140 is a good example of this; it's gotten a considerable amount of positive attention (at least, if its press coverage and Steam reviews are anything to go by), and some people do legitimately enjoy this game (at least if the comments on its release thread here are anything to go by). However its superficially derivative genre and extremely simplistic graphics have led others to cry foul over this game's acceptance vs. other titles.

What I suppose I'm trying to say is that at the end of the day, we all have our pet games that we'd like to see here, and no matter what GOG will do/is doing, they're going to piss people off simply because they didn't accept "their" game. And that's just something we'll have to accept. In my case, I'd love to see Starward Rogue here, but given Arcen's status as a "niche" indie developer, and the divisive reactions that many of its games get, I know it'll never come to GOG, and that's fine with me -- I can get a DRM-free version elsewhere. I'm not saying that we shouldn't criticize GOG on their acceptance policy, but rather, if GOG doesn't get the specific game you're championing, then buying it from the developer or from Humble is the way to go.

And it isn't like GOG doesn't change its mind on refusals either; The Cat Lady is a great example of this.

What tinyE said.

There was an idiotic amount of complaints from people wanting more AAA games, so rather than being able to spend say, 10,000 USD for a large handful of indie games, GOG is now paying that just to get in the metaphorical door, I'd have to presume.

That's no excuse, I'm working right now too.

Oh absolutely, that's a given of course. Just look at No Man's Sky for example... :)

I couldn't agree with you more, that really hits the nail on the head. The larger the number of games that are out there, and the larger the number of customers, as long as there is any form of filtering going on in terms of curation or other dynamics - by definition there are going to be customers that want a given game merely by statistical process, and the curation process is going to filter out more games than it accepts likely, so by definition there will be games that do not make the cut that at least one person out there wants and may get their snot in a knot about if it isn't available here.

That reminds me of how some people keep asking GOG to disclose the more or less private behind the scenes processes they use for choosing games and to detail exactly what the reasons were behind a given decision to reject a given game from the store. It makes me laugh because there's no way in hell that GOG or any sane company would ever disclose that kind of private business information. Why would they? What could they possibly gain from doing so in terms of the "gain" being something they personally value or that benefits their company in a positive manner? Absolutely nothing. LOL The reason people want to know why a given game was rejected is for one reason alone - so they can argue about it, use it as fuel for their fire to attack the decision and disagree with virtually every single point that might be disclosed showing how each was a "bad decision" and just to generally all around debate and argue about it until they get their way or whatever. GOG would stand to gain nothing from it, and in fact would most likely harm their business buy handing people a bunch of information that would only make them more angry out of disagreement. GOG isn't going to ever do that, not to mention any NDAs that are likely in place behind the process, nor should they do it either. Next thing we know everyone would demand to read all GOG employees private email and make it a matter of public record or something. LOL

No, GOG is a growing business with their own unique business model that is proving to be quite successful to their growing business as evidenced by the fact that it is growing. That alone means that they are doing something right. It is impossible for them or anyone to run a business like this and make 100% of their customers agree with 100% of their decisions 100% of the time. It's just a fact of life that as individual customers we will agree with some of their choices and not with others and life goes on. They may or may not share the details behind the decisions they make and while we would welcome learning more about it all they're under no obligation to tell us.

I think the system works quite well here overall as-is. If anything I'd prefer them to not bring as many indie games here as they do already, or to put up filter systems that let us hide things we don't want to see from showing up on the site (similar to how Steam has done this for a few years now). But bringing trailer truckloads of more pixelated 2 hour long indie games here? Pfft, no thanks. Enough already make it through the process at a reasonable enough balance with the rest of what the store has to offer IMHO.

There are some good indie games out there, but as Steam has clearly shown, the majority of them are garbage pixel-filler barely worthy of being called video games. I hate the phrase "less is more", I really do... but this is a case where I have to bite my tongue and say "yeah... less is more". :)

Gog uses the Magic 8-Ball approach to accepting games here.

Yes, I know.....That's a least what you claim, but browsing the web and surfing..... GOG.... I don't know ;)

Bear With Me only has four votes on the community wishlist. If more people voted for it, it would probably be more likely to get a GOG release.

Plain and simple: Both games are episodic.

Bertram Fiddle's second episode will come to Steam in november 2016 - I'd say: wait for it, maybe the devs won't announce a third episode, so GOG might reconsider a release of the (then complete?) game.

Bear with me is also bearing (pun intended) the "episode one" appendage - no clue (that I have seen) on when the second (third, fourth...?) episode(s) will follow.

I know a lot of people like to throw temper tantrums here and accuse GOG of "hating money" and "being arbitrary" and "stupid" (and toss around overused memes in a desperate attempt to look intelligent) whenever it turns out that a game has been rejected for sale here, but it remains the case that there are very likely other factors in play beyond a game just being "good" or "bad".

For one, certain independent developers might not want to release outside of Steam. They do exist.

Of those willing to publish on GOG, there may be any number of reasons why a game doesn't make it here.

The developer may be demanding ridiculous terms and then publicly blaming GOG for rejecting them.

GOG may be imposing update/patch requirements on developers in the distribution contract, and the developer doesn't want to be bound by them (this isn't implausible - note that devs have been much better on the whole with updates of late).

GOG may want full Galaxy integration for online features, the developer may just want to dump a barebones DRM-free build on the site (see Anomaly 2).

The game may have been on Steam for ages, and the developer sees GOG as nothing more as a dumping ground to squeeze out a few remaining sales out of what the developer considers to be "Steam refuseniks".

The game may have been in PWYW indie bundles so often that GOG doesn't see any revenue opportunity in the game.

There could be any number of factors in play.

deleted