It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
low rated
avatar
dgnfly: Some steam games are DRM free but not all, they leave it to the Devs. If it were up to steam they'd all just be DRM free.
If steam decided to release them with installer GOG be history by now so all they can go on is the good grace of its fanbase which it seems to care little about.
avatar
dtgreene: There's also the facts that:
* You need proprietary software to even use the store and download the game in the first place. (Granted, the games sold on GOG are (almost all) proprietary, but that's another story.)
* Steam doesn't make it clear what games are DRM-free and which are DRM-encumbered. (I hear they wouldn't even list Denuvo as third-party DRM claiming that "anti-tamper" is not DRM.)
* There's no guarantee that a game that's "DRM-free" on Steam will remain that way.
When you do the research all those things don't matter, Not to mention have an army of back-up hard drives. Even games here aren't secure and some have been taken off the storefront without any mention. I know you keep them in your list but that shows how some people will never get the chance to get the games the legal way. Then again even GOG says it can't get certain games and suggest sometimes the illegal way will, in the end, be the better solution for all problems.
avatar
richlind33: So you'd be OK with this releasing here without achievements or multiplayer functionality?
Is this new Wizardry game multiplayer?
(There have been games released on GOG without the multiplayer component before. Not saying I like it when they are though, just pointing it out.)

I personally don't care about achievements so it wouldn't bother me, but I know other people do so they are not without worth.
avatar
dtgreene: There's also the facts that:
* You need proprietary software to even use the store and download the game in the first place. (Granted, the games sold on GOG are (almost all) proprietary, but that's another story.)
* Steam doesn't make it clear what games are DRM-free and which are DRM-encumbered. (I hear they wouldn't even list Denuvo as third-party DRM claiming that "anti-tamper" is not DRM.)
* There's no guarantee that a game that's "DRM-free" on Steam will remain that way.
They list Denuvo anti-tamper as a DRM on game pages.
avatar
Elmofongo: But what about the whole idea that GOG won't get every game because a lot of devs don't want their new games DRM Free?
avatar
Lucumo: Where do you get that "a lot of devs" from?
Because otherwise we have Microsoft and Rockstar, and more games from EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Warner Bros, etc. here by now.
avatar
Ancient-Red-Dragon: The point is that GOG's decision makers have a long history of making terrible decisions that harm GOG and its customers. One game being a victim to that won't bankrupt GOG, but since it's a never-ending habit, GOG's perpetual series of very bad decisions very well might bankrupt them.

And when I say decision makers, I don't just mean the curators; I also mean their bosses who think that it's a brilliant idea to try to sell "boutique curation" as a main selling point as to why people should buy on GOG.

In reality, GOG curation drives countless sales away from GOG, and convinces no one to buy from GOG.
I remember when even cult classic older games with a decent following got released here....to both generate revenue AND please the userbase. Nowadays I wonder how many of them would've passed muster and been accepted if they had to pass the current curation process. :\
avatar
NuffCatnip: Gotta love the double standards. :/
But in this case it wasn't about censorship, it had something to do with the multiplayer part of the game I think. Don't quote me on that though, it's been some time and I don't really remember the whole situation. :P
avatar
richlind33: Try harder, please.
Sorry, I thought about it and still can't recall what the reason was. Now I'm not even sure if the online mode was the reason the game didn't release on gog...could be something completely different.
avatar
Elmofongo: And that is what matters in the end for me. DRM Free.

The day Steam sells games DRM Free AND without the need of a client is the day GOG dies.
DRM Free is definitely why I keep coming back to buy new games from GOG.
avatar
The_Gypsy: Yes, it is. Titles people like get on here, titles people dislike get on here. The only difference between curated and not curated is that GOG isn't spending money to avoid potential sales if they ditch the policy.
avatar
Elmofongo: But what about the whole idea that GOG won't get every game because a lot of devs don't want their new games DRM Free?
Many recently rejected games have happily offered to make them DRM free for GOG.....GOG still turned them down.
avatar
dtgreene: Actually, the first post in this topic *was* low rated at one point; I uprated ththe post as soon as I saw that.
avatar
Elmofongo: You can see that the community here is very divided.

Its a like a Forum Civil War.
Exchanging opinions isn't a Civil war unless you can't cope with different opinions. I always think it's refreshing to hear different sides. But all eventually decisions should be logically based which I see a lot of people disregard when it comes to why it shouldn't be on the store while people who want it gives an easy reply, ''Why?''

Some people just care about what they want and then there are people like me who just feel that the community in itself should decide by releasing the game and looking at how the game is reviewed. The game Deadly premonitions was a more broken game and that was released here and still was a masterpiece regardless of how it looked or played.
avatar
dgnfly: achievements in general mean nothing and were never included in the old days even if this version has it would nothing more than an online showboating grind fest, Multiplayer is only useful if it is future proof made. For instance, if you can host it yourself instead of relying on an intermediator as most Paradox games do
avatar
richlind33: A lot of peeps don't see it that way, tho.
Sadly they don't, Cause in the end the idea is longevity for these older games so they don't disappear.
Post edited May 18, 2019 by dgnfly
avatar
Pond86: I don't think abolishing curation totally would be the best call, otherwise we would get many asset flips and titles like them releasing here.

I would say though for big developers such as XSEED, Disney, 2K, etc that curation could be abolished for them as they are well know developers. And all have huge backlogs that people would want.

For smaller developers such as Eek! Games, Frozen District, 10tons, etc. And for people that might create the odd game such as In Dev games. Then curation could be used, until the developers make a name for themselves and get promoted.

And if GOG curation gets it wrong then, you could have a separate community wishlist section which if the game gets enough votes could be allowed on GOG, even if it didn't pass curation originally.
avatar
richlind33: Better curation would be preferable to no curation. Better communication, which would be about the easiest thing that GOG could do, should be a no-brainer -- but it isn't.

Yo GOG, whassup? o.O
A possible fix: Let the wishlist numbers act as a moderator to the final decision(along with staff curation opinions), or even a "saving roll" if curators reject a title(if the wishlist numbers are high enough then that rejected game would get another shot via a poll of some sort/some other sort of vote).
avatar
Ancient-Red-Dragon: The point is that GOG's decision makers have a long history of making terrible decisions that harm GOG and its customers. One game being a victim to that won't bankrupt GOG, but since it's a never-ending habit, GOG's perpetual series of very bad decisions very well might bankrupt them.

And when I say decision makers, I don't just mean the curators; I also mean their bosses who think that it's a brilliant idea to try to sell "boutique curation" as a main selling point as to why people should buy on GOG.

In reality, GOG curation drives countless sales away from GOG, and convinces no one to buy from GOG.
avatar
GameRager: I remember when even cult classic older games with a decent following got released here....to both generate revenue AND please the userbase. Nowadays I wonder how many of them would've passed muster and been accepted if they had to pass the current curation process. :\
I know what you mean. I would like to see more DOS games released here. T_T
avatar
richlind33: So you'd be OK with this releasing here without achievements or multiplayer functionality?
avatar
SpellSword: Is this new Wizardry game multiplayer?
(There have been games released on GOG without the multiplayer component before. Not saying I like it when they are though, just pointing it out.)

I personally don't care about achievements so it wouldn't bother me, but I know other people do so they are not without worth.
I'm asking because peeps complain when games release here without every single bell and whistle that the Steam versions have. Galaxy implementation might be as much -- or more -- of an issue than curation is.
avatar
Elmofongo: The Ratings here are meaningless. I get low rated for saying innocuous posts once.
So I guess you think it's like "Who's line is it anyway?" 0.o
avatar
Elmofongo: But what about the whole idea that GOG won't get every game because a lot of devs don't want their new games DRM Free?
avatar
dgnfly: If Devs don't wanna release that's not on GOG and isn't something they can change, but GOGs refusal to release games that are offered is the problem. In the end, they need to expand and excluding games on their personal taste will just drive users to another digital storefront that do allow free choice. GOG must be wanting to go bankrupt real quick. it's not as if GOG has any exclusives, unlike other stores, so they should be happy with what they can get.
Imo GOG uses curation to make them seem like a better storefront with a better game selection(on average), but it also makes them seem too high and mighty to some who used to see them as the "game store underdog" fighting to get hard to find titles to the masses who loved/played them when they were younger(or always wanted to do so).
Post edited May 18, 2019 by GameRager
avatar
Lord_Kane: I dont know, I am depressed and in a bit of mood, I dont know where I am mentally right now
just ignore me
avatar
Elmofongo: Just calm down and rethink this.

You are condemning an entire store front because they turned down ONE game that you want. One out of several games they have planned to release here and games they already have.
It's not so much about the games themselves as the symbolism of it. GOG are abandoning the audience that made them what they are today, the fans who bought Baldur's Gate, Arcanum, Fallout, Icewind Dale, and are instead chasing the younger, gen-Z audience with all the artsy pretentious indie games. GOG are pretty much saying "Yeah you guys put us on the map, but we don't need you anymore".

You can see these people on this forum, they rarely talk, they just lurk and downvote everyone who disagrees with the direction GOG are going in. They don't talk because they have no arguments.
Post edited May 18, 2019 by Crosmando
avatar
SpellSword: Is this new Wizardry game multiplayer?
(There have been games released on GOG without the multiplayer component before. Not saying I like it when they are though, just pointing it out.)

I personally don't care about achievements so it wouldn't bother me, but I know other people do so they are not without worth.
avatar
richlind33: I'm asking because peeps complain when games release here without every single bell and whistle that the Steam versions have. Galaxy implementation might be as much -- or more -- of an issue than curation is.
Thank you for the clarification.

It is vexing when the GOG version has less features than can be found elsewhere.

Some times if it is small stuff I don't mind as much though.