Posted September 22, 2015
Gamers should be able to do more than vote on a game they want.
They should be able to PreOrder it. Not in the traditional sense. Maybe call it VoteOrder or something, as it's clearly different than PreOrdering.
Seriously.
If you want them to remake a classic bad enough, you should be able to put 10 dollars/euros/etc down on that game. At any point, you'd have the right to cancel and get your money back.
But the VoteOrder would be under the agreement that if GoG remade the game while you still had the VoteOrder, that (if the VoteOrder amount was sufficient) you'd automatically have the game added to your game inventory, and GoG would then know they could keep said money. If the VoteOrder was insufficient, you would only have to pay the difference to get the game. If the VoteOrder exceeded the price of the game, you would be credited back the difference, or maybe get in-store credit.
It's WIN-WIN.
And VoteOrders give us gamers a FAR more powerful method of voting for a game. Traditional voting is more of a "I love that game" whereas VoteOrders is more of a "I will actually buy that game, shut up and take my money!"
And money keeps GOG afloat. Not votes.
(Now, we'd have to have limitations, of course. Can't VoteOrder more than x dollars/euros/etc for any classic game. And can't have more than y dollars/euros/etc in total pending VoteOrders)
I would even VoteOrder some arcade console classics! If there was enough money literally just sitting around waiting for some old gaming developer to be had within a few days, many more classic games that were actually wanted would be actually remade. (All GOG has to do is incorporate an existing ROM into a good emulator they could license on the cheap; all the owner of the game has to do is give them the go-ahead to do so) I'm sure I"m not the only one.
GOG would simply not talk of games that might be added via this method. Any developer would know they'd INSTANTLY have x dollars/euros/etc, and would also be able to deduce how much more money would likely follow after it was for sale, based on previous games' statistics for VoteOrder funds vs funds that followed after GOG released such games.
It's like crowd funding, only there won't be the occasional developer ripping off some people by not delivering on their promises!
If the game isn't done, the money can always be returned. If the game is redone, unlike many crowd sourced games, it doesn't fall short of expectations, because it's already a finished, polished game, and GOG is too good to mess up a game. And it's only like $10 or equivalent, so it's not like people won't do it for a few old favorites. This is far different than preordering a game for $60.
And if you don't like the idea? Simple. Don't VoteOrder. It's that simple. If you do like the idea, do VoteOrder. This is just an option. The old voting method will still be there. Game makers will still want GOG to convert classic games regardless.
But first it needs to be implemented! So, if you do like this order, say it and say it loudly in this thread. The more that voice their opinion for VoteOrdering, the more likely they'll implement this change.
They should be able to PreOrder it. Not in the traditional sense. Maybe call it VoteOrder or something, as it's clearly different than PreOrdering.
Seriously.
If you want them to remake a classic bad enough, you should be able to put 10 dollars/euros/etc down on that game. At any point, you'd have the right to cancel and get your money back.
But the VoteOrder would be under the agreement that if GoG remade the game while you still had the VoteOrder, that (if the VoteOrder amount was sufficient) you'd automatically have the game added to your game inventory, and GoG would then know they could keep said money. If the VoteOrder was insufficient, you would only have to pay the difference to get the game. If the VoteOrder exceeded the price of the game, you would be credited back the difference, or maybe get in-store credit.
It's WIN-WIN.
And VoteOrders give us gamers a FAR more powerful method of voting for a game. Traditional voting is more of a "I love that game" whereas VoteOrders is more of a "I will actually buy that game, shut up and take my money!"
And money keeps GOG afloat. Not votes.
(Now, we'd have to have limitations, of course. Can't VoteOrder more than x dollars/euros/etc for any classic game. And can't have more than y dollars/euros/etc in total pending VoteOrders)
I would even VoteOrder some arcade console classics! If there was enough money literally just sitting around waiting for some old gaming developer to be had within a few days, many more classic games that were actually wanted would be actually remade. (All GOG has to do is incorporate an existing ROM into a good emulator they could license on the cheap; all the owner of the game has to do is give them the go-ahead to do so) I'm sure I"m not the only one.
GOG would simply not talk of games that might be added via this method. Any developer would know they'd INSTANTLY have x dollars/euros/etc, and would also be able to deduce how much more money would likely follow after it was for sale, based on previous games' statistics for VoteOrder funds vs funds that followed after GOG released such games.
It's like crowd funding, only there won't be the occasional developer ripping off some people by not delivering on their promises!
If the game isn't done, the money can always be returned. If the game is redone, unlike many crowd sourced games, it doesn't fall short of expectations, because it's already a finished, polished game, and GOG is too good to mess up a game. And it's only like $10 or equivalent, so it's not like people won't do it for a few old favorites. This is far different than preordering a game for $60.
And if you don't like the idea? Simple. Don't VoteOrder. It's that simple. If you do like the idea, do VoteOrder. This is just an option. The old voting method will still be there. Game makers will still want GOG to convert classic games regardless.
But first it needs to be implemented! So, if you do like this order, say it and say it loudly in this thread. The more that voice their opinion for VoteOrdering, the more likely they'll implement this change.
