It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
The damage control by the Discord channel of the dev continues. Now we reached the point where Steam is great because Gabe Newell supposedly responded an inquiry. LOL.

Totally sus.
avatar
timppu: It would help if that developer explained why he hates GOG so much.
avatar
HKayn: I actually had the opportunity to chat with the developer in private, so I might be able to lend some insight.
None of which justifies hateful comments like "GOG shouldn't even exist" (or whatever his phrasing was). If I go set up a table at my local community market to sell stuff, and no one stops by my table to buy my product, it would be illogical for me to say "well then the whole community market shouldn't even exist!!1". There is clearly something missing from your/his explanation to connect his bad experience with his utter distaste for the store altogether. But anyway.

avatar
HKayn: * He views GOG as a terrible platform for newer games as it's missing many features that would be useful for those. One prominent example would be a game-specific news channel/news page like Steam has. On GOG web as well as Galaxy, there's no way for you to see why your game was updated just now, unless the developer goes through the effort of updating their store listing. And keep in mind, they can't do that in self-service.
False as to my knowledge the dev does not have to update their store listing. Did he spend a grand total of 30 seconds on this platform?

Off the top of my head, here are two ways the dev can update customers:

Every game here has a game specific forum. Several devs post in their respective game specific forum in order to note updates. It is literally as simple as posting a forum comment (devs can request a special color for their posts too so it is obvious the post is from a dev).

When using the browser to access the offline installers, they have a tab for "Changelog". I do not know exactly what the process is of a developer posting their changes in this space, but I assume it does not require modifying the game description on the store page.

avatar
HKayn: * Supporting multiple storefronts is difficult, as you have to package your game and set build settings for each storefront individually. The developer didn't get many sales on GOG to the point where they weren't even able to cash it out, so there way no payoff for the additional build step.
Seems to me that devs like this want to eat their cake and have it too...they want all the client lock-in features offered by Scheme, but don't want to work to undo such designs to put the game on other stores. But perhaps I'm overgeneralizing.

avatar
HKayn: * From a developer's perspective, GOG offers nothing special that makes all this worth it. It has no unique standout features for a developer, and all the features it shares with Steam are generally worse implemented.
Once upon a time, developers were just gamers rather than the present where they aspire to be these wannabe sellout rockstars maximizing profit. I'm not saying the dev has to give his game away for free; rather, just lamenting that gaming used to be more of a "for gamers, by gamers" sort of dynamic before gaming went mainstream.

The fact that none of these points in your conversation with the dev mentions the customer's experience leads me to believe my intuition is correct and that the dev doesn't care one iota about the customers or what is best for the customers. So no great loss for us GOGers if you ask me.

avatar
HKayn: You really can't blame this developer for backing off from an endeavor that literally had no positive outcome for him.
You really can't tell me what to do. I don't blame him for pulling his game; I blame him for his over the top comment about wanting GOG to not exist as a platform. For nearly a decade and a half, I left PC gaming because I was so disgusted at how Scheme took over everything. I view someone saying a DRM-free store shouldn't exist as equivalent to them robbing me of the possibility of engaging in gaming.. Perhaps in addition to us considering the dev's perspective, he should consider that of me and others in similar situations...
avatar
rjbuffchix: None of which justifies hateful comments like "GOG shouldn't even exist"
he clarified by saying that GOG should have never pivoted to modern games, and stayed with "Good Old Games" only. And frankly, I agree.

GOG's feature set has not adapted to modern games that get regular updates, nor has it to the target audiences of those. Newer generations of gamers don't use classic forum formats like this one anymore (or at least not as their primary channel). They don't download their games in their offline backup form, they instead use Galaxy, and I don't see Galaxy making any effort to implement things like the aforementioned news channels.

I ask that instead of overgeneralizing, you at least consider the validity of the points this developer makes, as they are echoed by many others who have made indie games for GOG.

avatar
rjbuffchix: The fact that none of these points in your conversation with the dev mentions the customer's experience leads me to believe my intuition is correct and that the dev doesn't care one iota about the customers or what is best for the customers. So no great loss for us GOGers if you ask me.
Which points about customer experience should I have raised in your opinion? What does GOG have going for it in terms of customer experience, besides its DRM-free nature?
avatar
foad01: The damage control by the Discord channel of the dev continues. Now we reached the point where Steam is great because Gabe Newell supposedly responded an inquiry. LOL.
Are you referring to me as the damage control actor? Feel free to check my profile, I'm an active GOG customer just like you likely are.

Let's take Gabe out of the equation then. Developer got sales help from Valve, but not from GOG. Is their point now valid?
Post edited February 18, 2023 by HKayn
high rated
avatar
HKayn: Are you referring to me as the damage control actor? Feel free to check my profile, I'm an active GOG customer just like you likely are.

Let's take Gabe out of the equation then. Developer got sales help from Valve, but not from GOG. Is their point now valid?
No. They disliked the GOG platform before they released the game here. They removed the game because they dislike this platform. And now everyone who is interested in this game here on GOG should go to Steam because Steam is supposedly so much better.

There are devs who actually want to release their game on GOG. The developer of Selaco tried several times to get their game on GOG. They actively asked here in this forum for support and it seems GOG finally accepted the game. People should give their support to developers like them. It is quite the opposite of saying a reason to remove the game is because they wanted to have the Steam community.

PS:
Support Selaco on the wishlist here:
https://www.gog.com/wishlist/games/selaco
Post edited February 18, 2023 by foad01
GOG games are at a high risk of negligence by developers and even GOG itself (offline installers not updated when Galaxy is). This why I don't buy newly-released games, let alone games that are stuck in early access/in-development stage.

The dev's attitude towards GOG was as self-fulfilling prophecy as far I'm concerned.
Post edited February 19, 2023 by SpaceMadness
avatar
rjbuffchix: None of which justifies hateful comments like "GOG shouldn't even exist"
avatar
HKayn: he clarified by saying that GOG should have never pivoted to modern games, and stayed with "Good Old Games" only. And frankly, I agree.

...
Please, tell me where else I can get new games DRM-free. For all GOG's flaws, and they are many, I don't see anyone doing a better job than them in the DRM-free market.
high rated
avatar
HKayn: You really can't blame this developer for backing off from an endeavor that literally had no positive outcome for him.
I don't blame any developer for not selling their game on GOG. Better that way than keeping an unsupported game in the store.

It is probably true GOG, as a platform, doesn't offer any real perks to the developer compared to Steam. However, it does for the customers (those who care for DRM-free), so his comment that GOG has no reason to exist is false, and from my point of view even obnoxious. He says it only from his own narrow developer's view, as if a platform exists only for developers' needs, and not also for the customers' needs.

However, if the GOG version sold poorly, I guess that alone is good enough reason not to continue keeping the game on the store. Fair enough. I don't think I've even heard of this game (on GOG or elsewhere) before seeing this thread. Admittedly the same goes to some of those earlier similar cases. I guess I missed or just didn't care enough for their announcement threads, if such existed. I pay more attention when something like Skyrim or Dishonored gets released here.

I don't demand nor expect that all indie games should be released on GOG.
avatar
rjbuffchix: None of which justifies hateful comments like "GOG shouldn't even exist"
avatar
HKayn: he clarified by saying that GOG should have never pivoted to modern games, and stayed with "Good Old Games" only. And frankly, I agree.
I can't agree, since I came to GOG for DRM-free The Witcher 1-2 (TW2 was a brand-new game back then), not so much to buy (again) some MS-DOS era games, even if I've bought those too. And yes, for me the ability to download the single-player part of the game as a DRM-free offline installer is very important, regardless of the game's age. That is the very reason I consider it important that GOG exists, as e.g. Steam does not offer such a service.

If by "modern games" he meant unfinished in-development games, then maybe. I have no idea what kind of process it is to release e.g. daily updates to an in-dev game, GOG vs Steam.
avatar
foad01: No. They disliked the GOG platform before they released the game here. They removed the game because they dislike this platform.
And I have listed the reasons as for why they dislike this platform. If you continue to refuse to consider them valid feedback, then I suppose it can't be helped.

avatar
my name is catte: Please, tell me where else I can get new games DRM-free. For all GOG's flaws, and they are many, I don't see anyone doing a better job than them in the DRM-free market.
I'm with you. Even though GOG is a terrible storefront in many aspects, it's the best choice we currently have. It's why I keep shopping here too. The next best choices we have are itch.io and Zoom Platform, but seeing the games I want on there is rare.

I imagine it must be very hard to set up a competing storefront nowadays, seeing as even Epic Games is struggling, despite their questionable tactics.
Post edited February 19, 2023 by HKayn
avatar
HKayn: What does GOG have going for it in terms of customer experience, besides its DRM-free nature?
Does GOG need any other reason? That is an important service GOG is offering, that e.g. Steam is not offering.

I'd rather question e.g. Epic Game Store's or EA Origin's reason to exist. From my, customer's, point of view, they offer nothing over Steam (like GOG does), so why would I buy a game on those storefronts? Unless it is offered for free (EGS), or is exclusive to that storefront (like new EA games at least at some point were to Origin)?

EDIT: Well, I am actually glad if EGS can offer some competition to Steam: that "forces" developers to think how to make mods etc. without relying only to Steam Workshop. Since this developer complained as one of GOG's drawbacks that GOG doesn't support the Steam modding tools, I presume the same applies to EGS.

Yes, I would definitely prefer developers would make their games as "storefront agnostic" as possible, but I guess it is just easier to rely on e.g. Valve's tools primarily, which pretty much locks their game to Steam only.
Post edited February 19, 2023 by timppu
Steam is perfect for the owning nothing and being happy people.
avatar
HKayn: The next best choices we have are itch.io and Zoom Platform, but seeing the games I want on there is rare.
There's also Fireflower Games, for story-based (generally adventure) games.
avatar
rjbuffchix: None of which justifies hateful comments like "GOG shouldn't even exist"
avatar
HKayn: he clarified by saying that GOG should have never pivoted to modern games, and stayed with "Good Old Games" only. And frankly, I agree.
I had a detailed response for you that was "eaten" by the forum but I will still try to respond, albeit much more briefly. I see other users have made some points in response to this, which are similar to concerns I'd riase, so I don't want to be too repetitive or make it feel like you're being overwhelmed by several people all posting back at you at once.

As for the clarification, fair enough I guess, but I still find the original to be irresponsible.

avatar
HKayn: GOG's feature set has not adapted to modern games that get regular updates, nor has it to the target audiences of those. Newer generations of gamers don't use classic forum formats like this one anymore (or at least not as their primary channel). They don't download their games in their offline backup form, they instead use Galaxy, and I don't see Galaxy making any effort to implement things like the aforementioned news channels.
I don't have access to GOG/CDPR financial data, obviously. But please consider there are users on this site with 2000+, 3000+, even one instance I believe of a 4000+ game library on GOG. These "whales" are imo what keep GOG afloat, and by the numbers they have to be buying at least some indie games.

I don't know if there is an equivalent "changelog" tab in Galaxy but I am just pointing out the idea a dev has to update the store listing seems demonstrably false as there are at least two examples I gave of how they can post updates about their games so users know what is new.

avatar
HKayn: I ask that instead of overgeneralizing, you at least consider the validity of the points this developer makes, as they are echoed by many others who have made indie games for GOG.
I don't find his points to be as valid as he believes them to be, nor do I see what relevance there is in invoking other indie devs. There are indie devs with positive feelings towards GOG and indie devs with negative feelings towards GOG...I don't really see the point of pitting "my team of indie devs against your team of indie devs" in a game of popular consensus. Maybe the other indie devs echoing his points are biased towards Scheme as well, so I'd find their reasoning equally lacking.

avatar
rjbuffchix: The fact that none of these points in your conversation with the dev mentions the customer's experience leads me to believe my intuition is correct and that the dev doesn't care one iota about the customers or what is best for the customers. So no great loss for us GOGers if you ask me.
avatar
HKayn: Which points about customer experience should I have raised in your opinion? What does GOG have going for it in terms of customer experience, besides its DRM-free nature?
Loaded question much? GOG selling offline installers of DRM-free big releases is its unique selling point. There are other DRM-free stores, but none with Skyrim, Shadow of Mordor, Alien Isolation, Fallout 3 & New Vegas, Dragon Age Origins, etc available.

I don't know if there is a specific point you should have raised, but I was remarking on the lack of mention of customers by the dev. His answers are all about him. He should, imo, be asked what he is providing to customers to make us want to buy his game here, or on any platform.


avatar
HKayn: Let's take Gabe out of the equation then. Developer got sales help from Valve, but not from GOG. Is their point now valid?
No, their point is not valid (even though I'm not who you responded to with this quote).

The reason it is not valid is because it is a false comparison. GOG and Scheme may both be PC game stores, and it could be argued GOG really wants to be like Scheme what with the Galaxy client being pushed so heavily, but ultimately they occupy very different spaces in the market and GOG has far less resources. As one example, consider that GOG may not have the resources to handhold a dev.

A major issue with Scheme is that they continue to reinforce their "walled garden" where devs, like this one, are seemingly seduced by the features and how easy it is. So it is not surprising Scheme continues to woo devs more than a store like GOG which doesn't share such incentive, nor does GOG have the negotiation leverage, to work so heavily towards platform lock-in.

As an aside, I am shocked that "do a flash sale" seems to be treated like some revelation that shakes the very foundation of business itself. If alternatively I email the dev with suggestions like "promote your game on social media" or "give a streamer a free copy of your game so their whole audience sees it" or "bundle your game with games from other indie devs", will he be swayed to bring the game back here?
avatar
HKayn: he clarified by saying that GOG should have never pivoted to modern games, and stayed with "Good Old Games" only. And frankly, I agree.
avatar
timppu: I can't agree, since I came to GOG for DRM-free The Witcher 1-2 (TW2 was a brand-new game back then), not so much to buy (again) some MS-DOS era games, even if I've bought those too. And yes, for me the ability to download the single-player part of the game as a DRM-free offline installer is very important, regardless of the game's age. That is the very reason I consider it important that GOG exists, as e.g. Steam does not offer such a service.

If by "modern games" he meant unfinished in-development games, then maybe. I have no idea what kind of process it is to release e.g. daily updates to an in-dev game, GOG vs Steam.
Completely agree with you. DRM free is the sole reason I buy from GoG and Steam's role in getting the public to buy in to a highly intrusive DRM system and the "Steam Workshop" (and brainwashing the wider public into thinking that they are good things) is the reason I don't buy from Steam. If I ever spend money on renting a DRM'd game, it's from Epic or Microsoft directly (and it's a very rare occurrence that I would)

Still, if the Developer doesn't want to invest the effort into maintaining a version of his game here and can't work out how to promote it on the store then he's lost at least one potential sale. Although given he also apparently said he had a publisher who forced him to release it on here, I would have thought that the marketing would be the responsibility of his publisher. So perhaps he might want to have a discussion with the publisher instead.

Anyway, the short version is it's his loss and his game neither looked good nor fun enough to warrant me breaking my rule of never giving a penny to Steam.
avatar
rjbuffchix: He should, imo, be asked what he is providing to customers to make us want to buy his game here, or on any platform.
He is providing a genuinely fun game, and he's putting himself out there for people to have a civil conversation with. That might not be enough for you, but it was for me.

GOG is sadly missing the leverage to make any developer care for it specifically. Because of that, I am grateful for every publisher/developer that chooses to release on GOG, as they could have also easily foregone that 1% of their revenue. Acting hostile towards pubs/devs that don't is not constructive and never helps your or your store's reputation.

avatar
rjbuffchix: If alternatively I email the dev with suggestions like "promote your game on social media" or "give a streamer a free copy of your game so their whole audience sees it" or "bundle your game with games from other indie devs", will he be swayed to bring the game back here?
I get the tone, but no, because it was only one of many points he raised.