Hey, whilst it's pretty nice to read through an articulated argument, I have to disagree with your post for a few reasons: 1. Censoring/Taking down a work of art over political pressure coming from a despotic dictatorship is not understandable, it's despicable. Every time this has happened it's been nothing more than despicable and we really shouldn't justify the behaviour and what that behaviour entails for everyone, because it makes sense economically.
I always try my best to be as constructive, empathic and understandable as I can, but in this case gog isn't anyone's friend nor it deserves a friendly and comprehensive paternal voice saying 'it's ok' when it's not, because it isn't. 2. Sorry but this is horrifying to me. Is this all a PR problem? Is all this OK so long as it's articulated elusively or deceitfully? You said you are a guy who "repudiates any and all censorship practices" but the problem here is objectivity? I honestly don't get it. One of the major and worst problems communication has always had is shaping a narrative that obscures reality, and here we are defending its practice and giving examples on how to do it properly...

All in all, we all know that this isn't about what gamers want or don't want, it's about coercion, censorship, it's about Devotion being a Taiwanese game, and ultimately it's about putting money over everything else. None of those are justifiable in the eyes of many, so why should we encourage that anything goes so long as it's finely wrapped under a constructed empathic and smiley-faced narrative? Once the king's robe has fallen, what's the point on dressing him up again, what's the point on trying to make a company look human, humane, and empathic, when it's none of those things?

If I was a GOG/CDP shareholder, I probably would have demanded CDP will do whatever it must to secure my investment so that I don't lose it, as long as it is not something illegal or clubbing baby seals (I love baby seals).

So yeah, I would have probably told them NOT to release a game that is a politically a hot potato in the store, if it jeopardizes their business in China. UNLESS, they are able to convince me that in the end doing this would bring GOG more money, than lose it. Convincing me that it makes business sense to piss off the leader of China would take some time though.

There is a reason people buy shares of companies: to make even more money. Capital investments man.

First of all, they didn't "take it down". They refused to release a title they learned was politically a hot potato. And that in itself is not the same as siding with or promoting the dictatorship of China, it is about not wanting to get involved in political issues that may affect the business.

If you feel GOG shouldn't care if China blocked GOG operating at all in the Chinese market and possibly ran a series of DDoS attacks on GOG servers... go tell that also to Steam and other stores, or any other companies that make any kind of business with China.

People do virtue-signalling in issues where it is convenient for them. If I demanded you to make a political statement that would possibly get you fired from your job and cause you a personal bankruptcy where you lose all your life savings, I shouldn't act surprised if you declined.

Releasing a politically hot game in their store is a strong political statement in itself.

Unfortunately I agree with every word, Mark.
This is exactly my point. And I say again: I think it is disgusting that we have to come to this, to think this way, but it is what it is, the rotten way in which some things in the world work.

Totally agreed with you man.

Of course that would still piss us all off, but there's one big difference: At least they would have been direct and honest.

Transparency is important, and passing the blame onto us in such an obvious, shameful and insulting way is orders of magnitude worse for everyone involved.

This, very much this. +1

It will not be forgive and forget, but at least it won't be the insult of intelligence that it was when they passed the cock and bull story. How about this:

Due to an error in judgment we cannot publish Devotion due to future business concerns. We are sorry for those that were looking forward to this release and even more so to Red Candle Games for this mistake.

With all the respect to your point of view, which I will say before anything else, I understand, this is utopic.

We barely started talking about the political reasons of why this happened in another thread and someone reminded me that focusing in Politics is forbidden.

But bear with me for a while.

Things involving the C_Country aren't dependant on GOG itself, as this involves greater political reasons far greater than company management, which are decisions made not only by "one head" in GOG headquarters, but many investors and %holders around the world, from many countries.

Im NOT defending GOG in this matter, Im actually trying to clarify the facts for people that may not know how company management works in practice and Im also not saying people around here doesn't know about this, but some may find this information usefull and may understand why Patias is so empathetic about it.

It's hard. Believe it, it is. Many people involved and many carrers that may come to an end, which means, many families might get in harsh situations. Which, if we think, is happening right now in C_Country because of their internal policies, so let's think about this a little. That's why we shouldn't agree with their external policies of literally, in the end of the line, dominating every country through marketing and free market strategies.

Im new around here. Started focusing on GOG after an episode in Steam that made me start to hate DRM even more in a way I didn't before. It's a shame that, when I come to start buying games only here all this mess is going on.

Maybe staying with the...

...is better while we have it.

It's a sad situation - new user point of view - and I understand both, user dissatisfaction and company decisions alike. Whose, as masterfully explained by Patias, still not the best communication decision, from client standpoint.

I hope (I really do) GOG come back in it's wrong decisions and decide, now, to be honest with it's consumers from here on out. (Even more honest, if it is being honest right now.)

You have fully understood the signs of my message.