Bullshit, The legal issue were only announced on launch day and the game was announced way in advance and was already said to be refused. Like I said before are you really that stupid to think Xseed would launch a game when they knew about the legal issues? are you really that stupid? Not to mention then GOG could have just made a statement in advance about its rejection but hey didn't they did the common thing when they reject a game keep silent. All those other rejected games must have also had Legal issues then? dear god you guys are a bunch of Shills over here. YOu don't even demand an actual answer from a Storefront and make up shit for them.

Do I have to bring more articles, or will one suffice to bandage your butthurt?

Dude, you and I don't know the details so all you are saying is speculation and conjecture(on this game, I mean...not others)......there's likely not always some sort of shady reason for every rejection/bad gog decision.

If gog rejected it for some reason then that's fine....show us where they did and we could discuss that(in the proper thread I mean).....but without proof, little info from Gog on the matter, and XSeed's official answer for why it didn't come here conflicting with what you stated your words (this time....not all others necessarily) lack "weight" or backing.

Maybe they just don't want to accuse people of things without any proof and give Gog the benefit of the doubt unless proven wrong?

You either very stupid or you can't read. I said it happened on launch date moron but STEAM still had it on their store while GOG already rejected it way in advance. Gotta love the dumbass notion that GOG suddenly has access to Xseed legal department let alone it's Japanese branch. Funny how GOG didn't have it on upcoming games but just outright rejected it? seeing as STEAM did have it on their page. Gotta love you shills throwing an article and thinking they won an argument. GOG could have said that from the start but kept their mouth shut wouldn't be a pretty smart PR move it your assumption was true which makes it more bullshit.

Moron posting an article about the legal issue doesn't negate they rejected the game way beforehand while STEAM did carry it on their store and the legal issue only showed up on launch date. Even more moronic is your delusion that GOG somehow had access to Xseed legal department or else they wouldn't have known in advance.

But you'll brush all of that aside by just posting the fact they had a legal issue on launch date cause you're most likely one of those sony fanboys types that brush any criticism to brand aside. Kinda like those morons that defend STEAM when they do shady censorship.

Neither odes that moron. but it's kinda retarded to have the notion that GOG suddenly knew Xseed whole legal issue beforehand when STEAM just had it up on their store while GOG rejected it and didn't even have it on their upcoming games list. Simply pushing an article on legal issues and expect that to be it isn't the truth either and is just wishful thinking for some people here. Funny how GOG clarifies nothing, let alone could have stopped the speculation by stating the legal issue but they didn't.

Here is your proof. Gotta love how One Angry Gamer never shills for company's and just tells it like it is.
https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2019/05/wizardry-labyrinth-of-the-soul-denied-release-on-gog-com/84434/
Their reply for any morons who won't believe it.

Xseed
''We were interested in putting Wizardry on GOG but it is a curated platform and Wizardry did not meet store requirements. You can pick it up on Steam or the Humble Store''

No, the main problem people are a bunch of morons and they always marry brands for some retarded reason instead of being objective and thinking what's best for their interest.

i only played wizardry 8 and watching the trailer it look and feel is nothing like wizardry to me, not even 3d enemies? This game just has the label wizardry so people bother to check it at least once instead of oh just another generic jap dungeon crawler .... could have been made for psp only.....

This just reminds me of the fiasco with sacred 3

#NotMyWizardry

I wouldn't be surprised to see you given a "timeout" for your attitude and rudeness.

Wouldn't mind to be honest, People just keep replying towards me so I just reply back it's not like I wanna talk to most of them, the Biggest problem is people are just so easy to offend people these days. I could care less about how people call me but it triggers some people when you use certain words.

I keep planning to leave it at the last point the Mod came in but they keep dragging me back.

Well, actually there were 7 games in the series before Wizardry 8, and 8 is the outlier. This game is styled after Wiz 1-5 and there are many fans who prefer this style to the later Wizardrys (6-8). Everyone has their own preference, but Wizardry 8 is not what this game is trying to follow.

Can I say that #NotMyWizardry is might stupid?
At least have some creativity and try something funnier or a bad pun, like #Weebzardry.

Personally, I totally don't care about the changes in style, whether it is Japanese or not, or anything minus the big question: is it good?
Names are just names. People are so... rabidly attached to details.

Steam does not vet games as gOg.... no curation... and as such have a very hands off approach. most of the time when there are problems, it is not due to Valve acting before the fact (as gOg can does with curation) but after, when they get complaints and have to remove / act / etc. Most problems are left to the publisher to sort out.

So if there is/are/was legal problems, gOg would take it in account before accepting, Steam after release and getting complaint (i.e. they would not know before then).

Therefor this is not comparable.

Yea I'll probably skip this one. I have Wizardry 8, and there's a solid JRPG coming later.

Can we have proof then that GOG knew beforehand about the legal issue instead of speculating that was the excuse? For the claim that they are more involved they sure seem to be short on patches for games and other content here?

And where is the statement of GOG when we speculated about it being rejected while they could have simply stated it was a legal issue? Funny how the legal issue was only known on the day of the launch but not during the approval way beforehand. Like I said a couple of times do you expect GOG to know the whole legal situation of every game published? Seeing as games are just submitted and are just rejected or approved and games that get released here are sometimes broken I see little care in which games get approved and which are being rejected.

The surge 2 is already out on STEAM yet it isn't here yet? how come that suddenly is on the upcoming list here while it could have launched already? If it like wizardry wasn't up till standards yet there would be no reason also to set it on the upcoming list. If Wizardry's so-called problem was just a legal issue and was about waiting for the licensing to expire they could have just approved and put it on the upcoming list? seeing as you seem to think GOG knew the whole Legal thing way beforehand.


Here is another funny question, What are GOG's curated standards? seeing as devs and publishers don't even know them and they seem to be made up as things go along. Games like Bio mutant are approved and on the upcoming list but Unbound worlds apart that actually look pretty good is rejected while also in development.

can we have proof for any other reason it was not accepted?

you bring the accusation - the burden of proof is on you

Correction: There were 7 games in the *Sir-Tech* Wizardry series; even back then, there were Wizardry spin-offs out there; at the very least Wizardry Gaiden 1-4 all existed back then. (I call them the Sir-Tech Wizardry games to distinguish them from all the Japanese Wizardry spin-offs.)

Also, there's the Famicom/NES adaptation of Knight of Diamonds, which is different enough from computer versions of that scenario that it could be considered a different game. (Some major differences: The dungeon has been redesigned (though parts are still obviously based off the original; even the cave floor and level 6 have about the same layout), and enemies from Wizardry 1-4 have been added, including an event where you can repeatedly fight Murphy's Ghost. With that said, boss stats are basically unchanged, except that the armor's level has been lowered in order to fit in an 8-bit integer, and the gauntlets have more HP, making that fight a bit nastier than it originally was.)

I would also remark that Wizardry 4 isn't really in the same style as the other early Wizardries (1-5), and I would actually like to see more games in *that* style, though perhaps not as difficult.

By the way, many of the Japanese Wizardry spin-offs included a summoner class, whose sole role is to summon monsters to help the party. Labyrinth of Lost Souls doesn't have one, but the sequel (available only in Japan) does. Other Wizardry games with dedicated summoners include Wizardry Summoner (note that there's a bug (?) that makes XP gains far lower than intended, and which actually ruins the game, sadly), the Wizardry Empire games, and the Elminage games (including Elminage Gothic).

https://twitter.com/XSEEDGames/status/1129463203958804480?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1129463203958804480&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.oneangrygamer.net%2F2019%2F05%2Fwizardry-labyrinth-of-the-soul-denied-release-on-gog-com%2F84434%2F


Both humble bundle and STEAM were ok to publish but GOG rejected because it didn't meet their made up requirments.
Seeing as even devs/publishers don't know the guidlines.