Sure, but it's easily discredited. There are new games being released on GOG all the time, and they do not all have special Galaxy features included in them mandatory. Even Steam has no mandatory requirements on developers to use any of the Steam APIs, they merely provide the APIs as a convenience both to developers and users. That's even true for DRM on Steam, they provide a DRM mechanism but it's up to developers as to whether or not they want to use Steamworks CEG DRM and/or some other form of DRM or no DRM at all.

There's no good solid reason for anyone to believe that GOG has any agenda trying to force developers to use their Galaxy API, and unless someone down the line can provide solid proof of it, such as a developer straight out saying that GOG demanded this then it holds no water at all in my eyes and can be completely ignored as unfounded conspiracy theory. Such conspiracy theorists might say "You can't prove that they don't do it!" as is a common tactic conspiracy theorists use as a form of "proof" that their theory is right also. It's not proof of anything of course, but there's no rational convincing of those who go out of their way to seek out irrational conspiratorial answers to unknowns.

Vague statements like needing to implement an SDK before launching on GOG don't help with that rumor either.

Without scrolling the whole thread, can anyone tell me of any plans for unavailable 90s/00s adventures?

I think it really boils down to whether one has made pre-baked assumptions in one's mind and is looking towards any new information they can find to put a spin of confirmation bias on their already made up assumptions, or whether one is looking at things from a point of pure objectivity and rational explanation.

When I read the linked to statement, what my mind sees is that this is a new game coming out and as is the common case with new games coming out whether by indie developer or AAA studio, they tend to use pre-made tried and true APIs for various purposes in their games rather than unnecessarily implementing all of those things with their own standalone code themselves and increasing development time. Naturally such a game planning to release itself on Steam for example would most likely use the Steam APIs for things such as multiplayer matchmaking and achievements, or other such functionality that the optional Steam API provides to developers if they decide to take advantage of using it at their own option. Likewise, GOG now provides the Galaxy API to developers which implements a subset of similar functionalities to developers who wish to use them rather than writing their own code completely from scratch.

Now, if you're a developer who purposefully chose to use the Steam API to do multiplayer/achievements/etc. then you probably did that because you don't want to write it yourself, and that means you probably don't want to write that code yourself if you release your game somewhere else either, including GOG. Naturally, by extension of that, if a game developer wants to have as much feature parity with Steam as possible and they use the Steam APIs (a reasonable assumption for practically any game being developed these days), it is not a stretch of the imagination to assume that they will decide also at their own option to use the Galaxy APIs to publish their game on GOG. They would of course be free to not use Galaxy APIs, and to develop all of that code themselves, but that's a lot of additional work to do to release on a platform that you might get only 0.1% to 10% or so of your market. They'd be free to release on GOG and just not provide those features also, but then you end up with a neutered GOG version like that game from last month that labelled itself "DRM-Free" edition - not something too wise for a developer to do either.

So, while nobody can know for sure what the details of said statement actually are without asking the developer to clarify it, it isn't difficult to push bias aside and make reasonable assumptions about what they might mean by it without resorting to things that have potentially highly negative connotations.

Truth be told, companies like Valve and GOG don't even remotely need to try to force developers to use their APIs any more than they need to force them to use their storefronts at all. Developers choose to use the APIs and storefronts because they are extremely convenient, save them tonnes of development time, manpower and monetary resources, and are the best way to get their games to market and provide a variety of highly desirable conveniences to customers.

The storefronts and their APIs completely sell themselves - without any handcuffs.

New companies in the catalog:

Knuist & Perzik for Wuppo (release tomorrow, Thursday, 2016-09-29) SOEDESCO Publishing also for Wuppo

So we got Wuppo and Hybrid Wars tomorrow. >_>

i think hybrid wars looks pretty cool to be honest. and wuppo, while i'm not a huge fan of the art style, looks like it could be a fun metroidvania.

it reminds me of super panda adventures.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/311190/

I only said that it was a vague statement. I apparently failed to convey that I could see why someone looking for Galaxy to blame would read it that way. I personally have little interest in what engine or APIs cause the magic to happen, as long as the combination works well and the game is playable as a result.

I imagine that the delay is about feature parity and providing the most polished and feature-rich product they can (and are using Galaxy API to do just that). The delay also allows them time to process the problems found during the Steam launch and build a good base for their eventual console release.

Of course, what do I know. :)

Yep, that's more or less my own conclusion on that one also. I know if I was an active game developer designing a game I would be targeting the Windows platform first via Steam, and if I thought my game fit into the GOG store I would target for that as well. Oddly, I would do all of my development on Linux but using portable APIs to target Windows+Linux+Mac even though I'd be primarily targetting the Windows platform. :) When it came to APIs like Steam/GOG Galaxy though, I would focus on Steam development first because quite frankly on PC gaming that is where the majority of the money is at. I would certainly want as close as possible to feature parity across platforms though so I would definitely want to take advantage of GOG's Galaxy APIs as well. I think any developer not considering doing so is either foolish, super low on resources, or mismanaging their business decisions. :)

(Intentionally left consoles/mobile out of my above speculations. :)

One question: Can someone update the OP? Looks like it's kinda old info in there.

StraBound at least being already released here. Thanks

Last update 2015; doubt its high prio. In threads like this are mostly the last 3 pages interesting to follow for the latest news.

Guess I'll follow the thread for last 3-5 pages of news.

I hear ya, and hope you're right. I was mainly referring to the developer statements ZaineH brought up again. :|

I really can't say anything definite about GOG's contracts, the only thing I've actually heard were from Jonathan Blow's twitter (and that's been a while). I did hear more about Valve's way of handling things (where contractors are unlikely to contest or ask to change parts of the contract as possibly opposed to GOG's business clients), but let's not go there for the moment.

I do think GOG is pushing their client beta on CUSTOMERS too much though. We've had "free" game offers to be retrieved only via Galaxy, twice even to my knowledge. I found that sketchy! But you're right to say that there's no indication they're pushing their client on developers much.

New company in the catalog: Art in Heart for GoNNER

Well that ticks almost every box in the list of generic, overused indie game tropes.