Gameplay videos, not really my bag :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLHQ8FRhRIw&list=PLnW4UBUfXiNzREnVDdlySFnAfIcbucT5U

As one of those that asked about the episodic nature of the game and was explicitly told that it's not, I'm quite disappointed now because if the game doesn't get closure I can't see myself playing it with it ending abruptly and sort of pushing the second (and last?) episode.
If the the second part doesn't get made for whatever reason, we're left with a terrible cliffhanger while told it's a complete experience.


It's one thing a dev wanting and continuing a series (i.e. pick up where the first game actually ends) and a completely different one what we have here with Montague’s Mount. I assume that someone at GOG played it - I don't think that you just took the devs word that the game works on "Windows (XP, Vista, 7, 8) and Mac OS X (10.7 or newer)" as stated on the gamecard - but maybe didn't play it to the end? In which case the info about it being "a full standalone" game must have come from the dev? Because I can't believe that whoever at GOG played it passed it as a "full standalone" game after finishing it. Would it be fair to say that the dev misrepresented the game to you and as a result you to us?

It's actually quite sad that a promising release turned into this rather messy situation.
In any case this needs to be sorted out, in part because it already reflects negatively on GOG as you can see in this thread and the Release one.

If it's like that, the dev will never hear the end of it.

I too am very disappointed that I purchased such a buggy and incomplete game, it's been a long time since something like this happened. I've learned my lesson, no purchase until I see some reviews.

Hopefully internal discussions are happening at GOG to decide how to manage this issue. As of this writing the game card has not been updated to reflect the episodic nature of this game, which concerns me that sales may be continuing to add customers to the misled and ultimately dissatisfied queue.

Myself, I would withdraw the game from sale temporarily and flag all purchasers up to that point as being eligible to receive the second half of the game for free when released. Then repost the game giving accurate information for people who still wish to buy it knowing it is only the first half of the full game. Either that or withdraw it entirely until such time as it is complete, a la Cognition.

I suppose they want to hear the developer's comment on this before they alter the game description in a way that he could perceive as negative. At least that's what I'd do if I were in GOG's shoes.

I do think that the game description should be changed - it's rather weird that the game description raises several potentially interesting questions, of which the games answers none, but instead tells you that you need to buy the sequel to get the answers. (And currently we can't be sure that there will even be a sequel.) But I don't think that this will happen before the weekend - I'd be majorly impressed if it did.

In the meantime, I wrote a user review which (among other things, I find "WARNING!!!" oneliners a bit silly and thought I'd rather write a proper review) points out that the game does not provide closure to the story arcs it starts. But it hasn't been published yet. I have no experience with reviews on GOG, how long does it usually take until they are accepted? I sent it 23 hours ago, and it has to have registered in the system, since I don't see the option to add a review any more.

I was hoping you would do so, in order to warn buyers before the system is properly updated to reflect the game content. I do not know what the turnaround is for reviews, as I've only written one or two in my time here. It may be that they are holding it pending while discussions unfold about how to best handle this game. Clearly this is a dicey situation for GOG and they would want to think through all their possible approaches before acting.

IMHO, it's a serious matter in case there was indeed any sort of misleading from the dev's side - after all, a contract was signed, wasn't there?

And that's probably the worst part about the whole situation after the revelation of the game's episodic nature and completely GOG's responsibility.

That sounds more or less in-line with how GOG usually rectifies bad situations.
I still think it's necessary for the dev to take his share of responsibility. The complete lack of any mention of the game's episodic nature on his site indicates that he's no innocent party; in this light it wouldn't be entirely fair for GOG to take all responsibility upon them - unless the dev was honest with them but they still managed to somehow screw up the release.

That, but I am not interested in getting episode 2, also, who knows if the dev is planning an episode 3 *kaching*

It would be better if all purchasers are eligible to receive some other game as free instead.

Odd - I now see a link "See all reviews (6)" on the product page, but when I click it, I only see the two reviews that are already shown on the main page, and then I get an empty list when I click on "Next". Is anyone able to access all 6 reviews?

There was a thread fairly recently about that bug affecting another gamecard, but I've forgotten which one.

Possibly their back-end code counts all the reviews submitted and not rejected, rather than the lesser count of those vetted and displayed. An easy oversight to make in programming, particularly in a data-driven application.

That would be easy to test though. Submit a review for a game and see if the number goes up. :)

Another possibility is that the system for retrieving and displaying the reviews chokes on my mine, which was pretty close to the 1500 character limit IIRC.

In any case, it's rather unfortunate. Whatever the reason is, I don't expect it to be addressed on a weekend.

Good solution, and valid point. Hopefully they'll sort out their response to this farrago over the weekend, which would be the optimal outcome. :)

Adokat also submitted a review, and it hasn't been posted yet.