Get in line. Starts to the left. Over there, by Poland, winds its way to about Detroit.

Gooble Gobble!

Everyone complains about the forum for years here. It lacks tons of functionality, and it doesn't look like GOG are in any rush to upgrade it. Still. I'd think they would listen to developers more than to user crowds ;)

From those "We submitted our game, GoG rejected it but won't give us a solid reason why" threads, maybe not.

Hey, at least you're taking it all with a sense of humor. :D

I'd like to add, despite all the complaining about the pricing here, I do like the overall style of the game, and that whole concept of a drug induced alternate version of the game world. Not really a fan of sandbox survival games, but I'll keep an eye on WHF, to see how the story portion of the game turns out.

If I remember correctly, The Long Dark had a story mode added to it recently, and that greatly increased my interest in that game.

Wait wait wait, does this mean the game as it is now requires an online connection for its single player part?

I feel very confident that this big secret involves a publisher. If I'm right, I really hope it's a good one.

Nope, I said I would t be surprised if they announced some thing like that, I have no inside information, just guessing based on the way the industry is going.

It's not really because I don't ant that gamne anymore. I simply don't want to support the devs anymore - not even accidentally. So if it goes off my wishlist I make sure that they don't get any money. I love my principles and my morals and there are many great devs out there which games I would buy twice just to support them. Especially indie devs should value their potential buyers and I cannot see this here.

If your game hasn't gone off my wishlist already because of this "stunt" it would now. Devs not being transparent is the other thing that I hate. Hope you have more luck with future games (in case you earn enough to even make another game). Bye.

What you are blaming simply are rules of the free market and if you cannot compete you simply should not participate. You would not buy a $40 Blu-ray either but that always was the price the industry had aimed for as an elite product only. Now it's a mass media like the DVD before it only slightly more expensive than the DVD. The same thing applies to video games. More supply constant (or even falling) demand - market moving from physical goods to digital downloads only -> price going down. There's nothing you can do against it once it happened. If you want to commit economic suicide you might try to sell your goods at a much too high price no matter what but only if your goods are so extraordinary and so well demanded you will even get a chance to sell enough that way.

I had written a really long post, but ultimately I thought it isn't worth it discussing things like that in here with the "pure good old gamer", so I'll just say this: there's no need to be so aggressive and rude towards Manywhelps, and especially implying Compulsion Games are being dishonest and not tranparent, when they've always been one of the most forthcoming studios out there, releasing update after update on their own forum and site, Steam's discussion boards or even GOG's subforum for We Happy Few.

For the record, I'm not buying the game anymore, either, and I absolutely disagree with this price increase, mostly because they're increasing the price of a game that still is -- and will remain -- in Early Access. But, seriously, some of us really need to take a chill pill; it's fine to stand up for our rights as customers, but I think most of the time the vast majority of the GOG forum community quickly goes from "standing up for our rights" to downright paranoid persecutory delusional...

'All of the time.

FTFY.

Please tell me where I have accused them of being dishonest (it may be "stunt" is the equivalent of this but in this case I simply used the wrong word and apologize for it. I just wanted to put a name this "30 to 50 raise without any possible explanation"). I just said that they are not transparent IN THIS CASE which obviously is true. Otherwise there would not be any "I cannot tell you before 16th of August" reply at all. I am also not emotional at all. This is pure logical thinking of me. If I think a dev is worth my money and I am interested in the game I might buy it. I recently spent 80 Euros on a Kickstarter project just because I think the devs are awesome - so it's also not really about the money. But raising a price and not at all telling us why - in fact instead telling us that they CANNOT tell (or that they are not allowed to do so) is everything that I would never support at all. So they may have been friendly, informative and transparent in the past but in this case they are not transparent because of higher beings or whatever. I as a potential customer could not care less about the reasons but I also have the right to be annoyed by such things and telling them straight that I am not interested in supporting them because of this.

Well, you make a valid point, indeed. You really do.

But I still say that, despite the "dishonesty" of not being able to tell us *why* the price increase and the reason behind it (which makes it look even more like some corporate agreement bullshit, in line with my guess that they're being picked up by a major publisher -- in which case they should tone done passing this as "good news", in my opinion), they're at least being honest by telling us this will happen and how much the game will sell for, instead of just dropping it on the customers come next August 16th. Sure, we could argue this is but a marketing technique in order to get some much needed cash flow by appealing to people who want the game but won't buy it for $50; this is a legitimate thought, but ultimately falls in line with the delusion of persecution I mentioned earlier, which makes us think of all studios as "EVIL" and greedy and out to get us, innocent and gullible paying customers. Plus, Manywhelps already made it clear this isn't about cash flow, and I have no reason not to trust them, if I'm not being paranoid about how all devs are so disrespectful and dishonest.

All in all, I think we *should* let them know we're buying or not buying their game. They seem to take criticism to heart, unlike other studios, and I'm pretty sure the folks at Compulsion Games are at least considering the weight and proportions of this decision because of all the people who now won't even buy their game (like you and me), and that's something, at least.

[EDIT] By "considering the weight and proportions of this decision" I don't mean to suggest I think Compulsion will pull a 180º and back down from this move; the price hike *is* going to happen, that's not debatable at this point; all I mean is that I'm sure at least some folks at Compulsion are thinking about this move and how right or wrong it was. But, continuing to be a smart-ass about it, like I've been doing since yesterday, it's likely that Microsoft won't let them sell the game for less than the 50 buckazoids. :P