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

×
We (still) want to hear from you!

We recently asked you guys for feedback based on some potential games that we may be able to sign in the future. The results were pretty clear--and we will be sharing them with you all soon--but we did want to ask you a single follow-up question with an actual real-world game example. One of the games that we would like to add to our catalog is Planetary Annihilation. This is an RTS with many modern gaming features, and we figured we'd use it as our test example.

<iframe width="590" height="332" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Xpze54xgqtg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Planetary Annihilation is distinctive for the following:

- Multiplayer and skirmish focused gameplay; there is no story-based single-player campaign, but AI skirmish matches provide a great single player experience.
- Optional persistent online features such as scoreboards, social features, achievements, and the online multiplayer campaign - a persistent galaxy-wide war; an account with the developer's online service is required in order to use these features.
- No activation, unique codes, or third-party accounts are required for single-player play or, LAN/direct connection multiplayer.
- A unique key is required for Internet multiplayer, and an account with the developer's service is only required for the persistent online features.

Now, that you know about the game's specifics, here's our question:
Post edited April 15, 2013 by G-Doc
avatar
StingingVelvet: I think something you need to understand is that your established customers don't necessarily care if you grow. The people who have been here so far likely come here for re-releases of old games and go elsewhere for other stuff. Your search for even greater profitability is largely irrelevant to your consumers.
avatar
HypersomniacLive: How can one even expect that GOG.com will be around re-releasing more and more old games without them growing?
Isn't it self-explanatory that If they don't grow/ be more profitable the resources of securing more (old) games will be limited, i.e. they'll have no reason maintaining this business?
It could be just me, but I don't think that anyone starts a business with a long-term goal of just staying afloat.
So you're saying that their previous focus on re-released games was not profitable or incapable of growth? By adding more classic titles they would be unable to grow?

I guess I don't subscribe to the idea that new titles are the only way to grow a business. I think they are actually more of a distraction from what attracted me here in the first place (Good OLD Games).
avatar
HypersomniacLive: How can one even expect that GOG.com will be around re-releasing more and more old games without them growing?
Isn't it self-explanatory that If they don't grow/ be more profitable the resources of securing more (old) games will be limited, i.e. they'll have no reason maintaining this business?
It could be just me, but I don't think that anyone starts a business with a long-term goal of just staying afloat.
avatar
slave138: So you're saying that their previous focus on re-released games was not profitable or incapable of growth? By adding more classic titles they would be unable to grow?

I guess I don't subscribe to the idea that new titles are the only way to grow a business. I think they are actually more of a distraction from what attracted me here in the first place (Good OLD Games).
No, I'm not saying that at all. I was asking StingingVelvet an honest question in regard to his suggestion that the customer base doesn't care (at all) if GOG.com will grow or not - independently of new or old games.

And I'm also not suggesting that new titles are their only way to grow, but they certainly can be (and probably already are) an additional and effective way. As long as these newer titles comply with GOG.com's core principles (in letter & spirit), I see no reason why they should turn them down if they have or can build a target-market for them.

Is it so unreasonable that they'd want to grow bigger and faster?
Steam sells Knights of the Old Republic, Monkey Island, and other LucasArts games; GOG doesn't. This could be because LucasArts (Disney now, I guess) was terrified of having their decades-old games pirated, but I would guess that it has nothing to do with DRM, and is simply because Steam is a behemoth and GOG, isn't.

The bigger GOG grows, the more customers they have, the more leverage they have as a result. I would suggest that even people who are completely indifferent to newer games ought to be glad if GOG can break into that market.
Post edited April 18, 2013 by BadDecissions
avatar
HypersomniacLive: How can one even expect that GOG.com will be around re-releasing more and more old games without them growing?
Isn't it self-explanatory that If they don't grow/ be more profitable the resources of securing more (old) games will be limited, i.e. they'll have no reason maintaining this business?
It could be just me, but I don't think that anyone starts a business with a long-term goal of just staying afloat.
And yet how many times have businesses over-extended going after the "big money" and ended up losing it all? In gaming specifically how many times have developers or publishers shunned their original audience to try and get more mainstream dollars only to gain very little and lose a lot?

You call it "staying afloat" but I would call it "steady, reliable profit." They set up a go-to website for selling old games for cheap to everyone in the world and made a profit on it. Anything they do from this point on risks that reliable setup. And if you read my post nowhere do I say they should NOT do this, I just said none of us really care about their profit margins or their desires for a bigger role. We come here for old games sold cheap and promise nothing beyond that, nor to stick around of they deviate from that.

It's just business, as they say.
HELL YES!

I'm all for this GoG.
avatar
hucklebarry: As for losing the key, Since my very first PC game with a CD key I wrote them down in a book I keep near my PC. It does not matter what game I want to play, I just open the book and type in the code. Even better is to do this electronically. Keep it in a Word doc and just copy/paste (but I kept losing that file in formatting/crashes, so I started writing it down physically ;)

You are certainly free to whatever lines you need to draw for yourself, I'm just offering my view. If it were up to me, we wouldn't have CD keys either, but when the key doesn't need the internet and doesn't leave my local PC... I can't complain personally. I can still install, play, backup, and do anything I want when I want... which is what DRM prevents.
My primary line is based on the context of convenience. Anything I feel inconveniences the end-user for the sake of protecting copyright is a form of DRM. While a CD-key is the smallest inconvenience you could really make, in the long list of possible DRM inconveniences I've ever seen, I still consider it the least of DRM that exists. It's all about degrees. A CD-key with checksum verification is more tolerable than online CD-key verification, which is more tolerable than always-online DRM... but it's still DRM like it's more advanced and inconvenient brethren.
Bottom line: a key is a form of DRM and gog is supposed to be DRM-free.

First it's a key and then before you know it we have games with limited activations.
avatar
graspee: First it's a key and then before you know it we have games with limited activations.
...and soon after GOG will include additional point in their license agreements and force us to donate a kidney to them before we can play any GOG game.
: )))
I'm not going to buy this game, I'm not going to donate my kidneys, I'm not going to buy DLCs for Omerta. But I don't want to stop anybody from doing so if it brings money to GOG and joy to some GOGers.
Post edited April 19, 2013 by Novotnus
avatar
graspee: Bottom line: a key is a form of DRM and gog is supposed to be DRM-free.

First it's a key and then before you know it we have games with limited activations.
There are games that require unique cd-keys here from before any of the users signed up. Not to mention the fact that the key isn't required to play, it's only required to play in the official servers, you can play on LAN or single player without problems.

But no, all doom and gloom by everyone...
avatar
graspee: Bottom line: a key is a form of DRM and gog is supposed to be DRM-free.

First it's a key and then before you know it we have games with limited activations.
avatar
JMich: There are games that require unique cd-keys here from before any of the users signed up. Not to mention the fact that the key isn't required to play, it's only required to play in the official servers, you can play on LAN or single player without problems.

But no, all doom and gloom by everyone...
It sounds like the single play is just like these kind of bot practice matches you get in games, not the real content. LAN is nice but not many people can do that. In the end, I stand by my point.
avatar
graspee: It sounds like the single play is just like these kind of bot practice matches you get in games, not the real content.
What do you mean by "real content"? Because the galaxy meta-game is also available in single player. So the only difference is that you play against AI instead of other players.
If I misunderstood you, please clarify the "real content".
avatar
graspee: It sounds like the single play is just like these kind of bot practice matches you get in games, not the real content.
avatar
JMich: What do you mean by "real content"? Because the galaxy meta-game is also available in single player. So the only difference is that you play against AI instead of other players.
If I misunderstood you, please clarify the "real content".
I'm just going by the description. I haven't played it.

"- Multiplayer and skirmish focused gameplay; there is no story-based single-player campaign, but AI skirmish matches provide a great single player experience. "

Sounds like a mainly multiplayer game from that.
avatar
graspee: I'm just going by the description. I haven't played it.

"- Multiplayer and skirmish focused gameplay; there is no story-based single-player campaign, but AI skirmish matches provide a great single player experience. "

Sounds like a mainly multiplayer game from that.
No worries, and noone has played it yet, since it isn't out. But the description does miss the fact that the galaxy meta-game has been confirmed to exist in single player as well.

And btw, Master of Magic, Civilization, Master of Orion and most other 4x games don't have a story-based single-player campaign either. That doesn't make them any less awesome.
avatar
TheSpartan: That's ludicrous; who would ever buy game X from steam or origin when the same game is available on gog DRM free, non-region locked, and typically for less money with extras that one would have to pay for on the former?
The not-on-steam-means-no-buy crowd?

No, I don't care about them either, but they exist.
I can't answer the question, as presented.

My question is:

When the publisher goes out of business, permanently, or if my internet fails for 4 months, will i have an unmarred, complete gaming experience?

I think the answer is no, but I can't quite tell from the description.

---

I should amend that. It must also be complete and unmarred, permanently if GOG.com goes permanently out of business.
Post edited April 19, 2013 by jsjrodman