kohlrak: In a weird way, expecting thanks cheapens a giveaway, and it also cheapens the "thank you." Instead of giving something to be nice, and someone saying something nice to show appreciation, it becomes the most shallow and lame contract of someone doing something nice, and then someone simply paying an obligation. For this reason, it kind of bothers me when parents demand children thank someone. The child should understand and do so automatically if the honestly appreciate something. But, then again, i'm not a parent, so I can't really speak from experience. That said, the whining is straight up uncalled for and disrespectful.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+20%3A1-16&version=NKJV I know your average shmuck anymore doesn't believe, but even an atheist should understand the philosophical standpoint of Jesus' teachings. It is precisely what we're seeing unfolding here. I don't think GOG really did it for PR, 'cause there's so much easier stuff that would've been far more effective. Let's suggest that GOG knowingly set up this terrible failure: what could they have gained from it? The real kicker? The blue just admitted that some of the games gifted weren't even from the sale. Why were they not on the sale? Because they couldn't strike a deal. I'm sure a deal would've been harder to strike to give away a free copy. This means GOG paid the dev their cut for our free game. GOG actually sacrificed more than just a sale: they took profits and decided to give us a nice little gift. Usually the giveaways get some sort of agreement with the dev or something like that. GOG was much more limited this time, compared to previous giveaways, because the devs still wanted money for the games that were given away, so GOG had to pay for it. Unless the devs only get a dollar, that means GOG spent over $10k ($100k if they paid each dev 10 bucks, which we know it was more than that) to do something nice for us, and we have people complaining that it's not fair that they didn't get in on the cut, and GOG did it to be mean, because if they think that GOG foresaw the PR blunder, then they believe gog also could not have benefitted from this, therefore GOG spent thousands just for the sake of controversy. Am I the only one that sees how incredibly stupid that is? If you pay attention to how GOG was founded and why, the whole thing makes perfect sense. If you don't know the history (which is available to everyone), none of this makes sense.
I am maybe judging or even given any opinion about if giving or not thanks to this gifts is obliged, correct, good or wrong? Nope, not at all.
I am not entering what it is a moral question and not related with anything i literally said. I just said that it's weird and very different from any other past giveaway, and it feels strange so i wonder if it has been a bad decision or implementation because, even after what you said, i still think this kind of event and big giveaways should be like fireworks for all to see. IMO, it's not about being humble, not expecting thanks or whatever, but about image, visibility, reputation and public relations (for us, for sector's magazines to see and comment, for potential new customers, etc)
Just going into it to be safe, especially given the opportunity presented by a higher than usual quality statement that you provided.
Yes, thread has complaints but not every one of those are about not getting a free game, but about the quality of the sale and the way this has been managed and communicated as a PR event (something that elcook mentions in his last post to clarify things)
The communication about this event is all about people "getting their hopes up for nothing." In other words, people are sore about not getting a game, but are trying to strawman themselves, in a sense, to hide this. GOG was quite clear as it was. As for the sale, well, GOG has been vocally clear about that as well. Sure, the sale is a bit... derpy. It's lackluster, but the whole thing was, even the PR email was lackluster. It was more like "PSA, we have a wishlist feature, and we're going to do something cool with it."
As i said at the beginning of my post, I do not share any anger some people (very few, in fact, if you read all the thread) seem to have about not getting a free game, but i do share other opinions about this whole somewhat strange event and i can't see why saying what you think, while being respectful as you say it, is wrong. Being harsh or, yes, ungrateful? Then yes, i agree, that's uncalled and disrespecful.
That's the thing, this had to be the most anti-climatic PR stunt ever, if it was one. GOG rarely gives fancy emails out like that, and it was almost like they were saying "btw, since you guys signed up for the secret email service, we're going to tell you a nice little secret." Then i heard it was on twitter, too, but I don't use twitter. It wasn't on the main site: the primary venue for PR stunts. It was almost like they were saying "hey, you, people who've been with us for a while, we're having a secret lottery, so use your wishlist feature if you haven't, yet, so we know what to give out as prizes." Otherwise, the whole sale is about as boring as a weekly sale.
Finally, and saying this also without any anger, uncalled and disrespectful has been your Bible citation (as if i were a child who share your beliefs and need to be educated by you), that "i know your average shmuck" totally out of place and like if you were morally superior to others here (and what if i were an atheist? then i deserve your "lessons" because you don't respect that way to think?), the "I am the only one that sees how incredibly stupid that is?" as if you were also intellectually superior and, of course, the final "If you don't know the history (which is available to everyone)" that seems to say that you also feel more learned than others who are also, it seems, lazy or indolent for not knowing which is available to everyone? Oh, and also you prejudge what i know or i don't know.
Really, take a breath and think about what you are writing. I was not being disrespectful to anyone and of course not to you, but you have been. Just let this keep this thread on with mutual respect, please.
If you run outside in the rain and get wet and then complain about it, i'm inclined to inform you of umbrellas and raincoats, because for some unknown reason you presumably were unaware. Otherwise, why would you throw a fit about something that you did to yourself? This is what's going on, here: people hyped this up for no reason then wondered why it didn't turn out as they planned. The community did this to themselves.
kohlrak: Another thought just occurred to me. Why are we holding GOG to a higher standard than the community?
Breja: I can't believe this even needs to be explained, but very well: because the "community" is a bunch of random people on the internet and "GOG" is a business employing selected professionals.
Again (beceause I see even very simple things are hard to understand sometimes) I'm not angry or even disappointed in the slightest with this giveaway. Quite the contrary, I think it's great they gave away so many games, and used the wishlists to make sure it's games people wanted.
I'm just saying that it was very poorly communicated up front, and GOG being surprised or disappointed with the community's reaction is like leaving a kid alone at home with a box of paints and some paper to entertain himself with, and being surprised upon return to find that the paper is the only unpainted surface in the entire house. Yes, you had the best of intentions, no you're not the one who painted the walls and the cat red, but you really should have known better.
Gog isn't the one complaining: the community is. GOG is also a small business. The community warned itself against itself.
_P136_: The promotion was poorly thought out from the start. By design, most people get nothing, which doesn't feel great, particularly when some others do indeed get something for free at the same time.
It could have actually worked had there been some interactivity element to it. For example, let people roll the dice: once per every active user, and then an extra chance for each purchase in the past month or so. Afterwards, the user is immediately told whether they got anything or not.
But at the very least, the terms should have been communicated more clearly. The way it turned out, it seems GoG would have been better off not running it at all, instead of spending money and effort on alienating much of the user base.
On the other hand, I note that people are very quick to assume ill will and some ulterior motives. I don't think it's warranted either. Do not assume malice in what is adequately explained by incompetence.
That's the thing, though. If this was a PR stunt, they should've done a better job of even presenting it as one. They didn't. The website is the primary place for PR stunts, and that's not where people heard of this. It was brought up in the more obscure channels, like the optional email newsletter.
