Just off the top of my head, I know the daily challenges in Spelunky are not available in the GOG version, and I know for a fact that more games are missing such features, though I'm too lazy/tired to look them up. :P Games that released on Steam in the years prior to Galaxy going into open beta are the ones most likely to have such features missing from GOG, though.

Ugh.

This is the same game they've always sold, just with the addition of a (bizarrely redundant) descriptor; the URL to the game page wasn't even changed. This is kind of a shitty decision by the devs, and a bizarre attempt by GOG to spin it as a positive, but it would be a poor business decision to pull a game from the store that's already been sold here for a year, for no other reason than the dev./pub. choosing to not make the optional additional content available for the GOG version. (If GOG dropped this game for that reason, they'd also have to pull probably 20% of the catalog, 'cause there are a lot of other games missing updates/patches, DLC/expansions, foreign language versions, non-Windows versions, soundtracks, etc. ;) )

It's kind of interesting that they bothered to announce this at all; I have to at least give League of Geeks credit for being up-front about their plans to cut the GOG version off from future content expansions for the game; most other devs just silently stop supporting the GOG version (or put plans to update it so far back on their back burner that they can't see it without binoculars).
People complain when there's no news about this sort of thing; people complain now, when there's bad news spun (unsuccessfully) as good news; but the only other alternative would be for GOG to make a news post casting a game developer/publisher in a bad light, which is a giant no-no in business...at least until you're big enough that even other big companies that hate you have to work with you. GOG is nowhere near that big or powerful. If they pulled a game from the store because of something like this, or tried to publicly cast the dev./pub. as the bad guys, they could essentially be sending a message that any devs/publishers that didn't want to -- or who found themselves unable to -- maintain parity between the GOG version and other platforms' versions of their game could take a hike. Being that Steam is still the store everyone wants to have their game in, many small companies would just shrug and say, "Okay. Guess we'll just stick to Steam."

I do agree with that. I appreciate GOG being up-front with us. It's not GOG's fault that the devs are so stupid that they need someone to aim their dicks so that they don't piss all over themselves. Ya got one word right.

Did it myself: https://www.gog.com/wishlist/games/remove_armello_drm_free_edition_from_the_catalog_please

EDIT: Nay. PD

I've had this game on watch for a long while too; but right now I see no reason to get it on GOG at all. Are the developers trying to challenge the "power" of DRM free by denying those DRM free users content and thus expecting to see steam sales go up and GOG sales go down and then argue that clearly DRM free isn't as important as content and thus there's no need for DRM Free or something?

I to cannot understand why the DLC can't be released on GOG. If there are elements that make use of steam inventory or such surely they could be removed if they are linked to the multiplayer side of the game so that players could get the singelplayer DLC content. This isn't something new for the developers; they knew that their game was here on GOG so it is very strange that they'd release a version that is basically saying that it will forever be crippled compared to their Steam version - or rather not crippled just significantly lacking in future releases and updates.


IT also seems very odd business wise because it means they are basically throwing away income that would otherwise have come to them through DLC purchase on GOG. I can't imagine many would rebuy at fullprice right now to get the DLC so chances are they might see some sales on Steam which are a repurchase - but not until the game and DLC are bundled up for a coupled of £ in a mega steam sale (ergo basically well past the core profit period for the game

Redacted all-caps rant full of swear words, threats and imprecations? =P

I'll let HunchBluntley be more eloquent than I'd be:

Went through the trouble of signing up for their forums and this is what I got: A search for said topic by me was unsuccessful. So either the topic got deleted, it''s in the backer only forum or it's in an obscure location.

+1. Voted.


They probably think they've gotten the bulk of the money they will see from GOG. Add to that their dependence on third-party software to do the development heavy lifting for them and you get a team that is both incapable and unmotivated when it comes to supporting a proper DRM-free product. As others have pointed it, they are not alone (witness the many games here which have not received patches that other platforms have). These devs buy into the idea that DRM-free is a kind of ghetto, and then provide inferior service so that it becomes a self-fulfilling cycle.

What a load of bull. All right, so can appreciate that it's at least specified that the version is inferior and will not be compatible with future developments, but should at the very least be specified as a problem, not as a new release to be celebrated. Though personally all for removing the game and the developer over this sort of treatment and barring further entries from them until and unless they change these policies.
Dangerous precedent otherwise. And bad for GOG too, accepting it so openly and even promoting the fact that they're treated as lower class by a small indie dev even! Then again, fits their general stance for the past 2.5 years, doesn't it, turning over and taking it just to add games to the count here.

Thanks for going through the trouble. Kind of weird GOG is linking to... nothing. (though it might be a taste of what we'll get for this game for the future. How fitting!)

As you said, you have to look before Galaxy before we can find some real examples. I also think 20% is really high. Not many games are listed on the shame list so I feel like any game worthy of this would probably be listed there.

If GOG isn't willing to get this shit written out in a contract before release (DLC, patches, etc) we will continue to get shafted. At which point GOG becomes irrelevant. People should just used Steam.

Thanks for this.

So basically GOG's link to the full version of the statement is bogus. *sigh*

/edit: Link seems to have been corrected. However, the GOG post above contains the entire section concerning the "DRM free version".

From just a few days ago on their forums:

Developer: "The reason we're not sure how to manage DLC on GOG is because of the nature of DRM free platforms."

Forum Poster: "There are plenty of games on GOG with DLC. If you're having trouble with it you could probably ask the GOG folks themselves. For example, The Escapists."

Developer: "As experienced developers, rest-assured we're looking into every avenue of DRM free DLC, but appreciate the suggestion!"

So, not only has it been pointed out to them that DLC is something that can exist (and already does exist) on GoG, but just last week they said they were "looking into every avenue." They didn't look very hard, did they? :P

http://leagueofgeeks.com/forums/index.php?topic=2604.0