You should be seeing this (attached). The voting is done by clicking the vote now button, not anywhere else in a game's box.

So it isn't some kind of real contract (with or without money involved), but a "quality of life choice" I can make involving a program/software I already use (if this program/software allows it). Thank you for explaining it. (And I hope I understood correctly. I'm sorry if I didn't, I really don't understand most of these things.)


And for the topic:
I like that reviews can be filtered now. Everything else new I will probably get used to.

Huh, I see most of that, just missing the updating time (see attached). However, when I hover over _either_ the game area or the Vote Now button, the link shows {for Shadow Warrior 2 for example): https://www.gog.com/game/shadow_warrior_2 and takes me to the game page when clicked on (vote button too). Is that what you get? I assumed that I had to be logged in and would only get one vote so I doubt that I'm registering a vote just by going to the (same) link as for the game.

I can confirm 1st issue with "free" text all over the bottom section. I was focused on product page, haven't noticed that issue earlier. As for missing game titles it's the same in Chrome so I guess it's how it should look.

When you hover over the "vote" button it should turn yellow/golden. Clicking it should check it (a yellow "check sign" next to "vote"). If you already voted and click the game you voted for, it takes you to its store page. If you click a vote box for a different game it changes your vote from the first vote choice to your new vote choice. At least it does that for me. Apparantly you can change your mind as long as the timer hasn't run out. (You have to be logged in to vote, I think.)

New GOG really doesn't like browsers that aren't very "modern", so depends what you're using. Since I normally use IE11, yeah, in it I experience what you do, but then again pretty much none of the new GOG works in it. Also see simiar reported issues with older versions of FF and some with Palemoon as well. What I showed was in an apparently new enough version of FF, and also works in Vivaldi, so new enough Chrome or Chromium-based browsers. Others, no idea.

Yep :S
Sorry for you :/ Pale Moon will hopefully be updated and/or maybe it's only a temporary issue, but I hope things will get sorted, especially for people like you who can't use a new version of FF :S
Oh, as Cavalary said, it's not really a "subscription". For what I understood, word is a bit misleading. If you use FF for your RSS, this "subscription" is only meaning that FF will create a kind of "RSS bookmark" of the page who will automatically look for updates and show you them when you'll over the bookmark (or click on it depending where you put it) [see my screenshot].
And when you don't want it anymore, simply delete the "dynamic bookmark". In fact it's only a dynamic bookmark ;)
Have a nice day too :)

Because of smartphones and tablets :P
It's the usual move nowadays (unfortunately).

Thanks for the infos & explanations. RSS sounds handy... if people were still using it indeed :P
Facebook is a big issue too... that everything gets centralized this way through a private website. I don't have facebook, and sometimes it's frustrating that almost everyone goes through it (it's the same than the Steam's workshop for mods. I don't have Steam too XP).
There was a time in the 2000's where I was thinking the web would constantly improve, navigation and features would be more and more efficient, convenient and pleasant... ahah... what a young fool I was...

Lack of compatibility with "other" (or simply older versions of) browsers is becoming more and more common. I begin to have the feeling of slowly coming back to the 90's where pages were "optimized" to only IE (or Firefox at best).
For GOG... I kinda understand their choice but... here it really needs improvements when browsing on a computer if they want to go this way.
When you sell computer games, indeed, let people see easily (and conveniently) your site on their computers at least.
I wouldn't mind this kind of design if they weren't such an hassle to navigate through, to find the infos I want... Now, what a loss of time so often ! (not talking only about GOG here ;)) And I'm not even talking about the often lower performances on the browser :P (same)
I hope we'll see fixes (especially for broader browsers compatibility) and improvement. I've got good hopes : every time there was a controversial update, they tried to listen to our complaints/grips and do something about it.

Thanks for the info. (referencing your prior post:) I don't see any check marks and probably haven't registered a vote. I apparently don't have a new enough version of FF (by choice). Thinking that was potentially an issue, I tried on a Win10 box w/ Edge (although I don't use it), figuring it would be "modern" enough. Nope, same behavior.

Way to go Gog! :-) You'd think they wouldn't break their own site with too-modern requirements since they market _older_ games, mostly appreciated by more-aged folk that are notorious for not keeping up with, or tolerating constant changes.

Oh well. No vote {"soup"] for me.

+1 for the filters :)
I really hope that they'll listen to our issues and that there will be adjustments :P
In current state it's certain that I'll be less likely to want to spend time wandering through main page and gamepages because all the gripes I explained, which is sad :S

If you use FF for your RSS, you won't be able to anymore, sadly. And the discussion on the Bugzilla thread cut in no uncertain terms on Sep 11, with:
"Ok, that's enough of that.
Once again, while we realize that this is a contentious decision, it is also a decision that's been made. Alternatives have been provided, both in-product via a web-extension and externally, and we have no reason to re-litigate this decision.
Please consider this a polite reminder that this editbugs-privileged-users-only discussion is effectively resolved. Anyone who would like to continue this discussion in a way that does not meaningfully advance this bug towards that resolution will find their comments, and possibly their ability to make comments, subject to immediate moderation."

Oh, ok :S Wasn't expecting that...
Thanks for the infos again !

You didn't actually convey to me a reason for not using IE11--one that matters from my perspective, that is.

The reasons that I use IE11 are:

1. It appears to display pages correctly perhaps 99.6% of the time,

2. I haven't had any problems with it other than the occasional incorrectly-displayed page,

3. Firefox, the only other browser I have installed, has unfortunately an issue with not displaying some page elements such as countdown timers, and

4. I don't want Google involved in my life any more than it already is, so Chrome is right out.

I have no affinity for Internet Explorer whatever, but I have no problem using it as long as it gets the job done in a tolerable manner.

https://www.gog.com/upload/forum/2018/10/2a0afdbcd5bd2131af72dfb3342fafd03c7336e1.jpg

https://www.gog.com/upload/forum/2018/10/c4db343a57be98f059f8372932fa7d97f5f04831.jpg

https://img.ifcdn.com/images/2fd5120066d23af0de4f8694cb100fd62c1afa079496551de6d02edca99a5097_1.jpg

Back in the day, Microsoft was the bad guy. Now, it comes out that they never were as intrusive as other companies are nowadays.

As they and other companies are nowadays, more exactly. Their old stuff, be it Win 7 or IE11, still receives security updates and, as long as you stick to just those updates and not others they may try to bundle or slip through, remains far less problematic than the other stuff available today, be it theirs or others'.