ChristophWr: Many games aren’t doing well on steam too so maybe that’s a reason. Maybe they want to fix it first and release it later here.
Norms, rules, regulations, and standardization for digital distribution platforms would help a great deal for developers struggling to maintain their product on several platforms.
Last year, I had a discussion with the developer of World Turtles, whose game is currently in Early Access. I shared my experience and a list of bugs and performance problems I noticed on Steam. He told me that he was already aware of those problems, and that I should download a patch containing several fixes and improvements, and give it another try to see the difference. When I told him that this is impossible because I was playing the GOG version, and that the version was still the same since its release and that there are no patches available - of which there were around four released for Steam, he confessed that he isn't able to update both at the same time and that I should expect an arrival of patches and updates in a couple of months.
The game is still sold, probably still at the same version as at the time of its release, and it caused me to refund and not purchase it again after its release. If he can't handle to distribute patches and updates in a timely manner during EA, what are the chances to see any updates before months after release have passed - if at all? Other single developers do manage to update their games on a regular basis, pre- and post-release, on every single platform they are selling it, while others don't even try and abandon it on GOG, yet still gladly taking money for it. There is also no guarantee to receive updates, DLC, and patches from AA(A) companies, if they decide it's not worth their time and effort and they could afford to do it.
Changing the way games, patches, major updates, and DLC are made, prohibiting any code adapting and binding them to a single distribution platform, would be a literal game-changer. That's because there is NO REASON AT ALL to be forced to buy from one platform and use their client - which has nothing to do and is unnecessary to play games and doing what shops are supposed to: Selling games not building a monopoly. There is also NO REASON why it shouldn't be possible to buy a DLC on GOG while owning a game necessary to play them elsewhere.
The only reason why this isn't possible is that games are tailor-made around platforms and clients, and a GOG version can't work with Steam's DLC, patches, and mods are locked behind a platform, which is user-created content and so could as well be accessible with an account and the possibility to directly download and use them, if and only if games were no longer made for shop platforms. Platform-agnostic development, and decoupling of code for digital distribution platforms for multiplayer, achievements etc., from games, DLC, patches, and updates, will make it easy for an Indie outfit and large companies to save money and earn more, instead of wasting time and money to develop different sets of patches where that is necessary, just because shops have their own clients, and processes in place to release and maintain products.
Take a look at audiobooks, e-books, and music, and it becomes clear that it is possible to obtain content from hundreds of shops, with and without DRM, with and without platform-specific formats and software to download and play or read them. No matter where you buy, you receive the same product, and you don't have to rely for an episode in a series to arrive - if ever, on one specific shop, but can go ahead and buy it elsewhere.
If companies insist on using DRM software, which in the past had caused them more work because a European version was protected with TAGES, while a US or international version relied on SafeDisc or StarForce. Disregarding several other differences in international to localized versions, necessitating writing patches for each individually, they can as well use it, without affecting the ability to buy it anywhere a customer likes to and without more work.
Ultimately, if there were such norms and standards, it would help companies to conform with consumer protection laws and rights, demanding timely updates, keeping customers informed, extending the mandatory warranty period to 2 years (EU) and more. We can't enforce those rights, due to the way that laws are still stuck in the past, so either GOG or we can make demands to developers, to keep products up-to-date, because we have no rights or laws allowing it. Not entirely correct inasmuch as France, as the only country within the EU has such a law, but that isn't helpful when it isn't adapted and adopted anywhere else.
In summary, if there was a willingness to collaborate and implement such changes, platforms like Steam, Epic, GOG, Microsoft, Ubisoft, EA - standing in for Apple, Google, Amazon, and other companies currently restricting access to products and updates, thereby binding customers to their platforms, would no longer hold in their hands and wield such power over them.
Considering the recent changes in TOS and COC on GOG and elsewhere, and the potential consequences of account termination, which not only means losing access to one's library but also patches, updates and future DLC, the impact of such measures would diminish. These changes would enable us to purchase additional content from other platforms and access patches and updates without delay, instead of waiting and relying on the willingness of developers and publishers to release them weeks or months later on GOG or not at all - as is currently the case.
This would be the kind of improvement a thousand consumer protection laws can't guarantee us, as long as we are bound to the whims of platforms and developers, and endure lengthy and costly processes when seeking to invoke our rights. At the end of the day, developers and publishers anticipate a return on investment and time dedicated to developing a game, while we are expected to pay for it. Therefore, it should also be in their interest to bring about changes to the current system.
-
On a personal note, if developers can't be bothered, it's better when they leave, sparing customers the risk of paying for an outdated product they are still maintaining elsewhere. I certainly don't shed a single tear when they cease doing business on GOG, to the detriment of paying customers, when they are gone.
