It's just the part about unique serial keys that bothers me. Sounds an awful lot like online passes, which I think are a BAD idea.

The way I see DLC presently is that there are "good DLC" and "bad DLC". Some examples from TES IV: Oblivion:

Shivering Isles: good, adds a good amount of content, analogous to older expansion packs
Horse Armor: bad, just armor, nothing else, lame

Typically the "bad DLC" are abundant, especially by major companies (EA, Activision, etc.) "Good DLC" exist though and should not be excluded. I personally just buy GOTY or complete packs because then I save money.


Season passes: in theory, good, pay once, get all DLC; in reality, bad, tends to be chock-full of crap DLC (and maybe not even all DLC released). I tend to avoid them.


Episodes: Can be good if done right. Can be terrible if done wrong. Care should be taken. I tend to wait until they are all out though, just personal preference.


Alpha and Beta releases: Sure, the developers need some cash to finish the game, the devs need testers, why not? Again, just be careful, sometimes devs promise things they don't fulfill (still fresh in my mind is Miner Wars 2081). Care must be taken. Best Alpha I got into: Minecraft. Still like the game. Can be good, can be bad.


"Buying In": Eh, neutral. It's a good idea, ultimately being an investment, but can be fraught with problems. Be careful.


Multiplayer focused games: They typically aren't my favorites, but they can be fun, especially Red Orchestra. Simply having a unique serial key to play online is not DRM, but it is a type of limitation. Again, although accounts (I think) are better than online serial keys, it is a limitation. As for features tracked on the developers end, as long as its restricted to game-related things and published as to what they are tracking, fine. I think at present the majority of GOGers don't like heavily multiplayer focused games since the "good old games" typically had very little of this, being limited to either hotseat or LAN. I think adding it can expand the consumer base for GOG, but care should be taken (as always). I also see people possibly confusing DRM with online 3rd party accounts. They are not the same.


These are my thoughts as to the polls. This is my first post on this site, and I'm relatively new here. I really just started PC gaming a little over two years ago, and immediately found Steam (I know, it's DRM). I typically still use Steam because (A) that's where my games are, (B) chat with my friends in-game, and (C) SALES, SALES, AND SALES (I'm really cheap, I know, but I'm in college and don't make any money). Sorry for the long post.

Position of GOG now continues great and exclusive. This is the reason why I am (and most people) here. We don't need DLC releases, but I'm OK with some expansions for current games e.g. Alpha Centauri: Alien Crossfire.

I saw the poll results. And I saw most requested site feature as well. If there will be DLC/season pass/alpha build, GOG will be ordinary digital store like others.

They should focus bonus content / wishlist more then DLC. Also GOG Magazine welcomes ;)

Good stuff.

Suck it down, haters.

;)

Welcome on GOG :).

I disagree with your view on "useless" games. You can still play Battlefield even if the servers are closed (that is unlikely to happen, since servers are dedicated and not ran by EA itself) because there are bots built within the game. It's not ideal, but it's far from being "useless". WOW is actually a better of example of a game that would be completely useless without multiplayer.

Once again, it is more important how you PRESENT AND BRAND this problematic content than whether you sell it at all.

Pre-orders, alpha builds, season passes, and games requiring any kind of online access, serial keys, or authentication should be sold in a separate catalogue, under a sub-brand of GOG (such as GOG Advance, or GOG Beyond, or something), and not mixed in the regular catalogue (although they can and should enjoy time featured on the front page as normal).

But did pre-orders come at a higher price? From what I see nowadays, pre-orders come with some discount (even GOG does this) or extras.
And do all pre-orders include alpha/ beta versions?

It's a genuine question, I'm not the pre-order type.

Indeed, and GOG have made this distinction in their news posts.

DLCs are OK, but I voted against selling alphas and games like Planetary Annihilation.

This is a really good idea so that those who are looking for different things can easily find them on the same service. Well, as long as it is still possible to use those same games/content in the future without any online service. While this may seem contradictory to what I just said, as long as games remain DRM-free (can download, use, and backup) without any other service, I'd be ok with it.

Normally one pays for market research and previously you've offered some kind of incentive. While not commensurate with how much participants would normally recieve, you used to at least acknowledge that capitalising on the goodwill of the community to help make business decisions (I.E. money) is something to be treated delicately. This is GOG, so you have the benefit of the doubt, but that feeling I've been taken advantage of did cross my mind for a moment.

Bring The Elder Scrolls series to GOG and I'll forgive everything :P

"Sell games that are primarily multiplayer focused [...] which require 3rd party acounts."

That sounds like DRM to me. You tryin' to keep us on our toes, GOG?

What was the story with Miner Wars 2081? I almost got into that a while ago.