Posted February 27, 2015

In any case, since GOG is the one carrying the legal risk, it's definitely their call where to draw the line.
And if that means that banned titles are a no-go, while +18 titles are allowed, than thats how it is.
@john_hatcher, going from my interpretation of the law, I would agree that there still is a legal risk with the way they are handling +18 titles. But I tell you what, I'm not going to complain and try to convince them to stop selling those as well ;)

I personally would love to see some public/political discussion on how we handle these matters in the media in general. But then, isn't it a bit unfair to just expect publisher to lead this discussion? Shouldn't the main impulse come from us, the gamers, the readers, the general population?


The reason for preemptive self-censoring was, that publishing games was really expensive on physical mediums and losing all this money for nothing and probably having to pay for getting the stuff from the market again was a problem.
With digital distribution, there are not millions of CDs pressed anymore and put into nice little boxes with nice little booklets that cost a lot of money in big numbers. All they'd have to do today is pulling the plug by not distributing anymore.
just put a game in the store that you know for sure will be declared illegal. Then when court order comes and the game has to be removed, you just tell your german customers:
"sry, please be patient. "
"We will now set our developers to work on a censored version."
"Yes, we knew this would happen, but uhm ...."
sounds like a good business plan. I wonder why no publisher does this?
Post edited February 27, 2015 by immi101