I decided to poke my head around the enthusiast forums, and I can't help but notice that there's no signal of anyone outside this forum even having noticed this program to have kicked off.

Not a great sign. And searching for "GOG Patron" seems to point towards this game instead: https://www.gog.com/game/patron

So I dunno, maybe slap the head of whose job it was to come up with a convincing, searchable name?

It does give them a highly credible alternative outlet to sell their games that dodge Steam's enshittificatory fees and any future restrictions and/or boycott coming from them.

Given I what I've read online about some devs dissatisfaction with Steam, GOG seems to me like a very good card for CDPR to hold in their hand as long as they remain in the business of making and selling games.

If I was them and had this sister company that was not completely hemorraging money (say less than a 20%-30% fee on a big chunk of their sales when they release new games which for franchises like Witcher or Cyberpunk is a considerable amount), I'd keep it around.

Actually, I thought they should have done it a while back. If it allows customers like me to have an increasing ratio of their catalog well maintained and gives gog additional pr on their claim that games you buy here 'live forever', seems like a win-win to me.

I'd just prefer them to work on portability for a free os like Linux and not Microsoft's ever-increasingly enshittified offering. At the rate they are going, Windows will be a complete turd by version 13-14 for anyone caring about ownership or having some degree of control over their machine. I've heard that with Windows 11, it is no longer possible to even setup Windows without online activation

So when will gog start shilling coffee brand coffee and raid: shadow legends? Update to this tier or added in the next?

>implying they listen much here to begin with

Latest version of witcher works for me. Dunno how it'll fare for anyone else, though.

Anyone else remember when gog gave kudos to it's 'tech elves' for game fixes they didn't actually make?

I was going to write some long paragraphs with some math proving that CDP makes more money proportionally on Steam due to the sliding cut (20% on sales above $50M USD) compared to GOG.

Just keep in mind that while CDP does see 100% of the sales revenue, they still have to pay out GOG staff and other costs so they effectively make 6% net profit margins at best. With > 20M Steam sales by Leitboxer approximation, Steam is taking close to the 20.2% weighted cut for all historical sales. So that's a 79.8% cut for CDPR.

And let's not forget that EGS is even more friendlier to devpubs and takes 12% after $1M USD in sales, so if CDP needed a redundancy and pump its numbers more than GOG still, they've still got EGS too.

So for example, let's say someone bought CP77 for regular price at $60 USD today on all the stores. What does their net profit look like per copy sold:

- Steam ($19.15 USD net profit) - CDPR takes a 79.8% weighted cut = $47.88 USD revenue and then makes 40% net profit after that = $19.15 USD net profit
- Epic ($21.12 USD net profit) - CDPR takes 88% cut = $52.8 USD revenue and then makes 40% net profit after that = $21.12 net profit
- GOG ($17.88 USD net profit) - CDPR takes 70% cut = $42 USD revenue and then makes 40% net profit after that = $16.8 USD net profit. GOG takes 30% cut = $18 USD revenue and then makes 6% net profit after that = $1.08 USD net profit. Then big daddy CDP adds the two net profits and gets $17.88 USD net profit

So when someone buys on GOG, it's still 7% less net profit than if someone bought it off Steam OR 15.3% less net profit than someone buying it off Epic instead.

Do a qualitative risk analysis here. There is no way Steam isn't going to publish CDPR's next game unless it's illegal because they'd be looking at a lost opportunity of $202M USD in lost revenue. The chances of this happening is so low, it's effectively a moot point.

Even if they "preserve" these old games, there's nothing stopping IP holders from pulling the game after all that work unless this was written in the contract. Remember, these devpub execs don't think like you and me. They probably see old games as competitors to their remasters (e.g., Warcraft 1 and 2 that was recently delisted here). Again, talk about a lot of wasted effort and costs to appease some of the oldest and paradoxically some of the most price-sensitive customer base despite having the most disposable income.

You can do whatever you want with your money and I will do the same with mine. I do not support GOG going down this route and their upper management and whomever suggested and enabled this stupid business model should all be fired and replaced.

GOG should consider to put this forum behind the GOG Patrons program. It would solve certain problems.

:D


This must have been last week.

"2.0.0.7 Changelog (6 October 2025):

Crysis now uses the open-source C1-Launcher created by Daniel Hryzbil (ccomrade)"

Honestly, i can not "handle" your, for me, screwed up maths because revenue is not profit, those are different things. On GOG the costs are shared along ANY publisher providing revenue, not only being keep up by CDP (you simply see CDP as some sort of upper boss of the whole construct... while CDPR and GOG are part of it). CDP is simply the "revenue-pool" but got nothing to do with those platforms profits.

Anyway, i totally agree that CDPR can NOT support GOG only because in this case the 90% of gamers never buying a single game on GOG may still not buy it... so those gamers not even touching GOG would be a "total loss" for CDPR. So in order to "reach" any consumer they critically have to "use" any platforms at best. On GOG they (CDP) do not have any "cut" unless they do not see GOG as "part of their company"... which is weird because according to your theory "if it comes to the costs GOG suddenly is comparable to CDP (so CDP have to pay them) but if it comes to profits and revenue then GOG is a completely different company such as Steam. In this case it gets to "compete" with those other companies with the exactly same terms. It is just a weird world but i do not need to understand every world.

Now i still do not know what it got to do with the "extra income" GOG is trying to generate using some new options or programs. Guess i am way more logical and straight forward with my "mental approach" and i am not trying to move around every corner several times in a row.

Since I won't be here as much anymore, I'll be honest with you.

I don't need any of your explanations on math or finances. I'm probably one of the few around here who uses it the most in replies. I'm pretty transparent in how I source my data and calculate things. I definitely don't cherrypick my numbers to prove a pre-determined conclusion unlike your previous posting history re: regional pricing by quoting the richest minorities rather than medians and averages from official sources with higher sample sizes.

Your posts are absolutely incomprehensible, much more than mine. Like I don't even bother to read your posts because that's how bad they are. And that speaks volumes considering I'm an engineer and English wasn't my first language.

No issue to me... because the world may become less complicated after. GOG simply will have to generate sufficient money in some way, no matter how it is done. This is not "rocket science"... simply trying to find a way on how to generate more wealth, as easy as that. The devil is in the details and obviously, you so far was not able to find a solution to this problem... but your critics and complicated maths surely are very visible.

Yes, EGS and Steam can take "less cut" as they have way more gamer support... so they simply got a bigger pool of money they can "use". EGS got the UE5 engine and Fortnite as their big cash cow... not the sales themself, this is well known and no secret.

It is not a matter to CDP/CDPR as they are "a united company" as they share the revenue with each others. So this is not a competition... as long as we do not see it as "internal competition" for the shareholders in order to tell "who is providing us with more profits". I am not that much of a capitalist because in the end "it simply have to work out somehow" as a general and overall solution. Not as a number cruncher for those who think they are better at maths than anyone else. In the end... number crunching still does not help if the core of the issue simply is "lack of support, nothing else".

Guess i prefer a more philosophical approach, thats why i can not put sufficient value in a huge list of numbers which, in the end... can not solve any issues other than "blaming whatever it has been targeted with".

That's fine. Is getting in touch with Jed / king_kunat sufficient for you? Otherwise, as you suggested to me with EA, maybe you want to try reaching out to "higher-ups" on LinkedIn.

The only staff I've seen on GOG Patron Discord have been Jed and website maintainer jpo(-something).

As I've said in the other thread, I don't want really need to talk with staff. I wanted to get prompt news updates so I can plan ahead with purchases and vacation time. When it's posted to one platform, it should immediately be shared with everyone else within a reasonable amount of time.

Everyone expects this and they've been doing a poor job doing so. I don't want to read a teaser about upcoming games like Clair Obscur 33 on Twitter or some Discord-exclusive server when I use the forums the most because I'll probably miss it. I should be able to use any socmedia platform I want to get the same news everyone else is getting.

It's poor management, PR/marketing/communications, and execution overall and unfairly discriminates against certain types of customers.

Thanks, I should've clarified earlier that I read through the Patron information page. And yes that's what was confusing to me also. The "Vote on Preservation Program priorities" thing sounded exactly like the purpose of the Dreamlist...which is already free. I see in the FAQs that they promise to give us periodic updates, but in the answer to the "What exactly does GOG Patrons give me?" question, it doesn't list anything about preservation priorities being one of the perks. That's disappointing.

M'kay. I don't really see a change happening unless enough people get an annoyed about it like you. GOG doesn't seem desperate enough to change yet.

Except that GOG employees are getting paid not just from CDProjek's sales, but from the ~30% GOG takes from the sale of all the other games in its catalog from various sources. The GOG platform is financed mostly from sales from other game devs.

Epic store is not much of an alternative to Steam which is still the 800 pounds gorilla in the room... people are less likely to want to setup Steam AND Epic on their PC. And given that Epic impose its own cumbersome client like Steam and has a similar corporate DNA (for starters, they are both American), it is liable to enshitify in a similar manner as Steam over time. In fact, the two of them might end up colluding on some issues if they don't do so already. "rivals" tend to do that when there is a small manageable number of players in the room... they can get pretty chummy as differences can be set aside in the interest of squeezing buyers (ie, us) and sellers (ie, game devs).

A lot of very powerful platforms are squeezing out both sides of the market that they serve nowadays so I can see why CDProjek would want to keep their own established platform as an insurance policy if nothing else.

Please explain this math to me.

Used to be games stores just sold games to make money. Now they're begging us to donate cash on top of what we buy. Doesn't look good from where' I'm sitting.