Nope I'm not going to tip GOG, because I don't want them to be relying on this system, nor do I want them to use it to increase their bottom line rather than actually bolster the Preservation effort on top of allocated budgets.

I've seen no guarantees as yet as to how this system is supposed to help the program beyond a fraction of a pittance.

Gog already sells shares, that's partly why it has ended up in the mess it's in.

I can't endorse donations from the financial side.

It's not transparent how CDP management is tracking and budgeting this in their books. Until then, people could be donating to cover all sorts of costs like selling costs or G&A costs (e.g., management bonuses, staff salaries, amortizations). They all could be involved with the program, but there's no way to know how much is being allocated.

I sent in a fiver when i claimed the pr0n bundle. A couple of bucks once or twice before that. I'll keep doing it whenever i feel like it.

Well, not directly but indirectly through their mother company. It is messy because those investors will always compare GOG with their mother company and if it performs worse it is basically "the weak chain".

It would be better for GOG to become privatized because it will allow for more freedom without having to worry about someone "cutting them off". In the end, the investors are not throwing in new cash anymore it seems, so it is kinda a "one sided" situation in which GOG can only lose. Fair enough... although GOG is probably not small enough in order to only serve pretty special interests; have to be realistic and look at it from a wider angle, in order to gain sufficient liquidity. I would say it is a "fair demand"; but simply not realistic at the current state GOG is in. Why is not hard to guess, because way to less gamers are having your demand it seems and at the same time... because of this lack on demand... no one is investing into GOG anymore.

Gamers pretty much "was dividing" their territory in which one platform, one browser, one OS and so on has been considered sufficient to them.

Remember: Linux gamers are still 1% of the cookie and legal-DRM free gamers perhaps another 1%...

You do not know if it is empty... this is a assumption.

I think only thanks to GOG some great classics has been made available and being preserved so far, so i am less critical than many other gamers on that matter. The classics (back catalog) and preservation i do consider important and i value it but... it is in economical terms as good as "non important" and in reality probably non profit if it is done in any "non trashy-way" because the work it takes is just to big compared with the very limited "possible market demand".

Most gamers are "new hype gamers" and are throwing their old games away at some point unless it is a live-service game being constantly updated and with near endless micro transactions. This is as well the reason why GOG at some point get AAA for cheap, yet... the demand of offering them and keeping them alive is still pricier than what the limited income may allow, a harsh revealing; at least from a commercial-standpoint.

But yeah, perhaps GOG should turn into a official "non profit" at some point, which means they only take what they need in order to "keep their service alive"; the rest of it goes back to those offering their IPs to GOG. However, it would mean to split GOG apart from CDPR because CDPR is "profit-based" so it can not go along. Not sure the shareholders enjoy it because they may lose access to it and it could be a emotional thing. Still, they could be happy if done so because the mother company is the possible cash cow, nothing else... so it is just what they "actually want".

Although, Mozilla knows very well that it does not make them any rich, not even a bit... and they constantly will have to survive... which is already a "non profit". The true money simply lies into anything which is with sufficient force and dominance, those will get as good as any resources. It is called capitalism, for those who do not know.

Lets be honest: You already got this method by buying games outside of "sales", yet you are probably not doing it. It is just the nature of humans... almost anyone to some extend want "to profit" no matter if they actually could afford it to be more generous.

I do not even want to blame them. Seeing a good offer acts like a drug inside most humans brains... it is a very old "brain-configuration", from the stone-age which, no matter how much someone already got... is still making the brain "freak out" with success-hormones the "better" we was able to "handle" it... for ourselves in usual.

I do not think any brain initially "can be social" without external help, which is the heart, the stuff and the people we actually love and care for. I for myself can only overcome it be critically shout at my own relentless brain, "stop it and go home, there are more important matters than always trying to profit from something else".

I never was able to actually understand why games need to be so dirty cheap like less than 1 coin, it may not even cover the transaction costs. 30 years ago such a game was 100 CHF for me... no kidding. I think 10-20 coin is a fair price for many classics and a 50% cut for "poor countries"... why should i care, i do not always need to profit.

I do not think things like that can keep up a company in long term, it may only delay a matter in order to "gain time" for even better decisions. So it can only be temporary, which in long term will need "bigger changes".

I still provide the position that they can ask for whatever they want to ask for... no one is forced doing any kind of support.

As does most if not all other businesses.
I am not talking about them ... or them done in the usual way.

They could for instance, say donate $20 and we will give you a share in GOG ... just one small share for each $20 or so, or maybe they would just limit it to one.

Then GOG need to be a own company, so basically break away from CDPR and achieve a own stock-market in which anyone interested can invest shares. That way GOG indeed can become way more liquid but i am still not sure if it will solve the issues of just "way to less gamers", just not sustainable. There are bigger changes needed, such as a lot more competence and simply a "better working" infrastructure in general. A lot of investment would be required... in a environment which is already a quasi-monopoly on the PC market and the gamers seems to love and protect this platform at many costs... as this is now basically "their home". So, it is very difficult for GOG, no matter how much they would improve, for gaining a way higher market share. EGS is struggling as well and they was able to pump way more money into it than GOG.

However... one part is "having good games", another part is "having a good infrastructure (in general)" and the third part could be "ethical matters" which is currently the only advantage of GOG, which... in a world with low necessity for economical ethics... is not sufficient to make someone, with exceptions, turn around. It simply will take more than that in a "war torn world" with most people "looking out for the best personal benefit". Look at Mozilla for example... almost no browser users there.. but Google gets almost anything of the shares: If you ask me... i can browse very well with Firefox, on any device (smartphone too) and even play a lot of great games using GOG... so it is not a invalid alternate way, it can be fully valid, but simply rarely used.

For this delay to occur, it would take significant donations, and if things weren't serious they could go to the mother company etc. And if serious, they are doomed.

So I am still not seeing any good reason to ask for donations.

Maybe they should do a Kickstarter campaign, because this has that kind of feel, except we don't get any declared or obvious benefit, except maybe it helps with Game Preservation in some way, which would need to be made clearer, for folk to risk their money.

But of course, maybe GOG are hoping there are gamers out there who love GOG and have plenty of money to throw away, because that is what it could amount to. ... very likely in my view.

I never said they can't ask, just that it is a bad idea ... gives us the wrong or right impression.

I am not against a GOG-led Kickstarter campaign, it surely is offering way higher transparency. The basic issue is just that GOG actually can not give out any specific "warranty" on what will happen if a certain goal has been met. Because from what i am able to hear out "it is totally random" which publisher is actually willing to publish something else and even at what cost. As long as the entire condition is unknown i dunno how GOG could make any serious Kickstarter-campaign.

I do agree that "offering a tip-option" is kinda sneaky and not a very effective way of increasing some funds and in my book it will not sufficiently help many matters, but thats just me. I simply support GOG by buying lot of games, even very pricey ones. If they want to truly improve matters i would as well vote for a "more specific approach", as it will be able to make things move with higher force.

Well, since you don't know, what I know, your statement is also an assumption.
shrug

That one is actually easy to answer: because some people are naive enough to answer positively to that call.

It is, literally, free money for GOG. Money given to them in exchange for nothing, not even an empty promise.

Why bother spending time securing distribution rights and fixing old games to work on current systems, if you can already get the players money by doing nothing at all?

Worked also pretty well for some people using Kickstarter.

If the gamers are willing to give them "free money" and if GOG is not doing anything in exchange unless drinking a lot of expensive coffee with the most pricey cookies they was able to find, then OKAY, why not. It is probably a bit corrupt in such a term but they made no clear promise and the donating people has been informed about... not to get any clear promise. Perhaps they was in need of a better coffee with better cookies in order to *extend" their work-motivation... so it may still not be a lot of corruption. If ya ask me... the tips GOG may get may not exceed the possibility way above this "spending level"; as 100 pots of pricey coffee with a lot of packages of luxury cookies for around 100 workers... paid by a bunch of indios... is almost anything it could realistically "pay".

Sure, it may not be sufficiently effective but still not a big loss... no matter what it may produce out of it.

You made my day... because unfortunately, even by using Kickstarters it does NOT grant any warranty for some real "value being provided" but at least it can provide a more specific target.

We already established in posts #26 and #28, that your posts are not meant to be understood.
So...shrug (again).