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
opening the gates for lower quality games clearly doesnt work out for gog, they should abandon this foolish errand and go back to their golden days of providing good drm-free games
they should start with cleaning up their current assets
low rated
avatar
SargonAelther: Ok I see what you mean, those are asset flips that are trying to be taken seriously, so I would not miss them either. What about games that are aware of their status? Check out 882250 and a more controversial 1141550. At first glance they look absolutely terrible as well, until you realise they are on the same level as Postal'ish Goat Simulator. The goal is bad-taste satire and thus the reviews are actually positive, they know what they are and are not trying to trick anyone. There will still be loads of people against such titles though.
Well, let's see...
882250 - I can't call it bad at the level of "generally rubbish". Good - even more so. This is definitely not a game for me, and if personal filtering were introduced, it would definitely be on my blacklist. But if it suddenly turns out that there are a lot of people who want to play it, I won’t object. After all, GoG already has games of about the same level of controversy.
1141550 - but this, I think, is definitely not the level of GoG, from the word "absolutely".

P.S.: And about mentioned Goat Simulator - I never understood what people like about this game. But, as already said, everyone has their own tastes and preferences, and as long as these people do not try to impose anything on me, they can consider Pong the most interesting game in the world, stand on their ears, and generally do almost anything)


avatar
SargonAelther: Yeah that seems pretty reasonable, but I can totally imagine a scenario where a game is rejected and then another flame war starts where some users want a re-review versus another who want it to stay rejected. Who's in the right then?

The issue is that on some level both sides of the argument are right, BUT the effects of denial will affect everyone with no workaround, while if a trash game is allowed, nobody will be forced to buy it, so there's still choice.
The last word in any case will be for the employees of GoG. After all, they probably have some criteria by which it is determined whether the game is suitable for this store or not. Still, this is a store, and not a flea market that sells anything. But users should definitely be able to say "Guys, we think this game is better than you might think, we are ready to buy it, and we want you to look at it again"
In any case, in my opinion it is very important to add the possibility of personal and flexible filtering, as it would make life easier for a lot of people. No one will have to worry about something wrong being added to GoG if they can never see it


avatar
SargonAelther: Maybe they could add a filter to hide games with very bad reviews, unless the user disabled such a filter?
Another thing to keep in mind is that an overabundance of overly controversial games can turn off new users before they even get to filtering. Therefore, the initial screening is still necessary. But then filters come into play for those who are dissatisfied with some of the releases, and the possibility of reconsidering decisions for those who believe that somewhere the curators overdid it with the severity of the assessment

avatar
Outsiders: I'm jumping into this thread a little late but I'm not seeing a lot of AO games on GOG. I've seen a few and the most recent is supposed to be AO but it's censored and marked M.

Is there a list of AO games that GOG carries? Just curious...
Well... If you believe some of the inhabitants of this thread, any game in anime style (and not only) is a porn game. So the choice is very large :D

-----------------------------------------
By the way, if GoG is not up to it - is it possible to create such a filter in the form of a script or extension for a browser running on the user's side?
low rated
If you don't want the coomers here, maybe you should start petitioning Steam to stop being so arbitrary in their approval process. This is only happening because Steam's incompetence is creating a business opportunity
low rated
avatar
LootHunter: 1. Yes, I remember that.
2. Well, you did say "maybe some of those games should be banned".
3. No, I don't remember that. And it seems, I can't find such a comment. Are you sure that it's not you, who "puts words in someone's mouth" this time around?
1. OK.
2. There's a diffeence between demanding games are removed and saying they "probably should be". It has been assumed that I was demanding.
3. No. He originally said this to Orkhepaj in post 262:
"And what is "boring and lame" for you is quite interesting for another. How many times do I need to repeat the same thing so that people like you finally realize that all people are different and their tastes are also different?"
He then quoted the same thing to me in post 287. Perhaps he got confused about who said what but he obviously has some clearly defined ideas about what I think since he's refered to me as "people like you" (or variations thereof) on other occasions.
Let's also add:
4. Thinking my oppinion is more important than other people's.
"why do you think that your opinion is more valuable than the opinions of other people?"
5. My logic says people have to be offended.
"Hollywood has made thousands of films about good Americans and evil "Russians". So, now I have to be offended and demand that these films not be shown? By your logic, yes."

avatar
LootHunter: And after you said, that you didn't, you made a vegan analogy, so it looked like you did. It's not unusual for "ban crowd" to change their opinion on the fly, sometimes in a span of one sentence. So, I'm not really surprised that you failed to convince your opponent.
No. We've already discussed how you were both wrong here. He made the vegan analogy. I should perhaps have been more clear and said "Your analogy doesn't work because the vegan would actually have said...". The fact is, I told him point blank that I didn't think that and he continued to explain that games aren't real to me.

avatar
HappyPunkPotato: Do people really believe that or is it just trolls trying to make anti-porn people look silly by pretending to be them and claiming they think that, or even people like JuWalk saying it so many times that people start to bleieve it's a thing?
avatar
LootHunter: I don't know. I'm no psychic, so I just assume people mean what they say until it's proven otherwise.
I tend to do that too but I do sometimes I wonder. It would be interesting if there really were a large group of people who actually thought that.

avatar
HappyPunkPotato: And yes, I consider negative impact on mental health to be a valid reason
avatar
LootHunter: I agree with that. The question is - do porn games impact on people's mental health negatively?
I really don't know and it's difficult to get to the bottom of when passions are running high.

avatar
JuWalk: But how to prove this negative influence? Just believing if a person says "this game causes me mental suffering"?
Well, yes?

avatar
JuWalk: Let's say we somehow found a way to prove a negative impact. How do you decide what to delete and what not? Whose suffering is important and whose is not? With this approach, we will put some people above others. And this is bad and unacceptable. Deleting everything so as not to offend anyone is also not an option, because this way we will be left without lots of games, and no one will be happy. So how can you be fair if you still start deleting something? I think it's just not possible. Therefore, I advocate the introduction of the possibility of adding a game to a personal blacklist and oppose anyone who proposes removal or supports those who propose it.
I don't know the best way, it would take someone smarter than me to figure it out. Alternatively we could make it fair by banning all games that affect people's mental health, then we're treating everyone equally. A lot of people won't like it but a lot of people don't like it your way either. And as I can feel those assumptions just bursting to get out of you again, I'd better add, I'm just playing Devil's advocate, I don't think we should do that.

avatar
HappyPunkPotato: If you're so keen on facts and objectivity why did you keep making stupid assumptions about me and not correcting them when told otherwise?
avatar
JuWalk: Because words are at odds with deeds. Here is an excerpt from your first post in this thread:
avatar
HappyPunkPotato: Not directed at the people I quoted: The complete lack of empathy and desire to understand from some of the posters here is frankly quite scary. "I want sex games so how dare you be against them even if you find them genuinely troubling, you're so selfish!"
avatar
JuWalk: Not a word about the representatives of the opposite camp, who also did not show the slightest respect for other people's opinions, and even insulted those who opposed the removal of these games, and even those who silently play them. Such a one-sided approach quite clearly demonstrated that there is no question of any neutral point of view.
Well if they have genuinely insulted you or anyone else then I am sorry for not commenting on it. I did consider mentioning some of the "silly little boy" type comments (which I find unnecessary and unfair) but figured they came from a place of hurt instead of a place of "I want" so I left it. I'm "in the middle" of the ban porn argument but I saw more mocking language coming from some people on "your side". That quote of mine ended with "Try looking in the mirror Agent-94", they were calling people narcissists. You described yourself as a bastard. I just called it as I saw it.

avatar
JuWalk: 1) Some kind of curation is still necessary so that the store is not flooded with hundreds and even thousands of objectively garbage games.
Totally subjective.
low rated
avatar
kribby06: If you don't want the coomers here, maybe you should start petitioning Steam to stop being so arbitrary in their approval process. This is only happening because Steam's incompetence is creating a business opportunity
so if steam would stop selling these the coomers would starve out? hmm i call that fat gabe then
low rated
avatar
JuWalk: But how to prove this negative influence? Just believing if a person says "this game causes me mental suffering"?
avatar
HappyPunkPotato: Well, yes?
The Heroes of Might and Magic series is causing me terrible, unbearable suffering. And the Witcher too, yes. Shall we remove them?


avatar
HappyPunkPotato: A lot of people won't like it but a lot of people don't like it your way either.
First, they can't be dissatisfied with my way, at least because my way has not yet been implemented. GoG still didn't give us the ability to hide what we don't like. And those to whom these games are so much an eyesore, for some reason, are in no hurry to demand this opportunity. Maybe, in fact, they do want not to rid themselves of what they do not like, but simply to play "we are the power here"? Who knows, who knows...

Secondly, some of the dissatisfied are ordinary trolls who run around the themes of all games in anime style (even those that do not even have simple erotica, not to mention something more serious) and write nasty things, and sometimes - several times per day. If a person doesn't like, for example, point and click games, he will not run around the topics of all these games with manic obsession and write all sorts of nonsense. At least if he's sane

avatar
HappyPunkPotato: Well if they have genuinely insulted you or anyone else then I am sorry for not commenting on it. I did consider mentioning some of the "silly little boy" type comments (which I find unnecessary and unfair) but figured they came from a place of hurt instead of a place of "I want" so I left it. I'm "in the middle" of the ban porn argument but I saw more mocking language coming from some people on "your side". That quote of mine ended with "Try looking in the mirror Agent-94", they were calling people narcissists. You described yourself as a bastard. I just called it as I saw it.
I've been reading this thread since the very first post, and many of the deletion advocates were also far from being "white and fluffy". So the response of opponents was more than expected and justified. If someone allows himself to speak disparagingly about other people, he has no right to be indignant when they begin to do the same to him.

And if anything, I did not call myself that, I said:
[i]"If you say you care about others, help those who really need help. And if you don't want to help those in need, but just want to fight on the Internet, don't lie that you're worried about others. That's all If anything, this is not addressed to you personally, but to everyone in general.
In my opinion, it is better to be an honest bastard than a deceitful and hypocritical pseudo-good guy"[/i]
It only meant that someone who honestly admits that he just wants to argue with someone on the Internet will receive more respect from me than someone who will argue for the sake of an argument, while declaring "No, no, I'm a truly high-moral white-cloaked knight who cares about others and fights here for their good". Because those who genuinely care about others are helping real people to the best of their ability, and not waging a multi-page war against pictures.


avatar
JuWalk: 1) Some kind of curation is still necessary so that the store is not flooded with hundreds and even thousands of objectively garbage games.
avatar
HappyPunkPotato: Totally subjective.
This issue has been discussed in some detail below. In short: There are games where it's pretty easy to say "yes, this isn't GoGs level" even for those who don't usually agree. For controversial games, the last word, in any case, belongs to GoG itself. Users should be able to request a review of the rejection of a game by expressing a desire to buy it. And there already GoG decides - for the first time the game was treated too strictly, or for some reason it really doesn't belong in this store. This will keep GoG as a store, not a flea market, but also correct some of the controversial decisions of the current curatorship
low rated
Glad to see I'm not the only one who's sick of seeing the storefront being shitted up with animu crap. As if we needed any more evidence GOG doesn't care about quality curation. Good Old Greed, more like.
low rated
avatar
iqfinal: Glad to see I'm not the only one who's sick of seeing the storefront being shitted up with animu crap. As if we needed any more evidence GOG doesn't care about quality curation. Good Old Greed, more like.
meh, people say that about everything they don't like. 2d, pixel art, muh dudebro shooters, visual novels, old games...
you name it, someone doesn't like it, and somebody else does.
(as long as there is a good game beneath the aesthetic or genre, I think it should be considered for inclusion)
Post edited 1 hour ago by Plumb
low rated
avatar
HappyPunkPotato: 2. There's a diffeence between demanding games are removed and saying they "probably should be". It has been assumed that I was demanding.
3. No. He originally said this to Orkhepaj in post 262:
"And what is "boring and lame" for you is quite interesting for another. How many times do I need to repeat the same thing so that people like you finally realize that all people are different and their tastes are also different?"
He then quoted the same thing to me in post 287. Perhaps he got confused about who said what but he obviously has some clearly defined ideas about what I think since he's refered to me as "people like you" (or variations thereof) on other occasions.
Let's also add:
4. Thinking my oppinion is more important than other people's.
"why do you think that your opinion is more valuable than the opinions of other people?"
5. My logic says people have to be offended.
"Hollywood has made thousands of films about good Americans and evil "Russians". So, now I have to be offended and demand that these films not be shown? By your logic, yes."
2. Is there a difference? How would you react if I say that HappyPunkPotato probably should be banned on the GOG forum? Would you perceive that as a neutral statement? Or demand?
3. No. "People like you" refered only to people like Orkhepaj.
4. Well, you did suggest he "quit moaning" but didn't suggest that to Orkhepaj. So maybe he perceived that as you taking Orkhepaj's side?
5. So, women don't have to be offended by sexist games? That was the argument about, I believe.

avatar
LootHunter: And after you said, that you didn't, you made a vegan analogy, so it looked like you did. It's not unusual for "ban crowd" to change their opinion on the fly, sometimes in a span of one sentence. So, I'm not really surprised that you failed to convince your opponent.
avatar
HappyPunkPotato: No. We've already discussed how you were both wrong here. He made the vegan analogy. I should perhaps have been more clear and said "Your analogy doesn't work because the vegan would actually have said...".
Yes, you should have. Even if I'm not sure that you are correct - people here do behave like ethical vegans - they think "porn games" shouldn't exist at all but "make a compromise" for them not existing just on GOG.

avatar
LootHunter: I don't know. I'm no psychic, so I just assume people mean what they say until it's proven otherwise.
avatar
HappyPunkPotato: I tend to do that too but I do sometimes I wonder. It would be interesting if there really were a large group of people who actually thought that.
Well, the only way (at least for me) to determine that is to compare a person's claims and statements. If they are all in line with each other, then they are probably genuine. But sometimes they contradict each other - to me that's an indicator that a person isn't honest.

avatar
LootHunter: I agree with that. The question is - do porn games impact on people's mental health negatively?
avatar
HappyPunkPotato: I really don't know and it's difficult to get to the bottom of when passions are running high.
Well, don't you think that we should determine the impact of porn games first and only then make the decision of banning them?
Post edited 1 hour ago by LootHunter