I'm not sure how that would be relevant, considering that Opus Magnum is a vastly different game, and it seems to be very successful on the distribution platforms where it has actually been released. ( Besides, they keep releasing other "mobile games". )

I consider expected sales a valid argument to sell or not to sell a game, and gog do have the real data on what these games sell and for how much at their store. Maybe their projections are wrong, but we'll never see that info. Perhaps they consider that the release on early acess also trimmed sales on gog from the potential client pool. I dont think having already released a game here should be a green card to release everything that comes after, and gog already showed they dont give green cards with at least 1 developer/game that i remember (Starward Rogue).

Another day the nerd in charge says "too niche for GOG". Nothing new to see here.

While the excuse is pretty crap (and ridiculous, it doesn't look at all like a mobile game to me and we have many actual mobile ports here anyway) I imagine the real reason (assuming they have actually rejected it) boils down to sales. Which is a shame as I have enjoyed there other games (well, Spacechem and TIS, I've yet to buy Shenzen) and I thought they did sell well.

That being said I bought Spacechem on sale for £0.79, and have seen it at that price quite often since. And as good as they are, the games are in many ways practically identical with just a different coat of paint so perhaps the later games are no longer selling as well and GOG do not consider it worth selling here.

Whatever's happened it is a shame as I would be quite interested in the game (though the theme doesn't appeal as much as there other games).

Would "wasted" be a more appropriate term in your eyes? Anyway, yes, they would have sold the game to OldFatGuy and me and probably at least thousands of others if they had it on the store. They didn't put the game on here so these potential sales are lost. Makes perfect sense.

Anyway, rejecting a Zachtronics game is a level of... foolishness that makes me want to flip my table. For frigg's sake, "looks like a mobile game"? Have you guys seen SpaceChem, also by Zachtronics, which IS on GOG? I don't know how well the game is going to sell but assuming that this is about "maintaining standards" on the store (which is apparently the case): this is one of the dumbest decisions GOG has ever made. It becomes even more ridiculous taking into account the games GOG has greenlit, some of which literally are ports of simplistic mobile garbage.

I honestly hope that someone at GOG is going to recognise this error, swallow their pride, apologise and ask the developer for another chance to release the game here. You know, you can always put the blame on some intern.

Using social media to bully a platform into accepting a title seems kind of a silly thing to do. I'd hope GoG has some standards in its curation of titles offered, lest this become another Greenlight / Hentai shovelware site like that other place...

Making insinuations like that on a public site isn't earning Zachtronis any points in my book.

Zachtronics games are really good, though a bit niche (ironically) in that they probably largely appeal to programmers and people who enjoy that kind of thing.

But that being said, as far as I can tell they are all pretty much the same basic idea; which is take an input, create a system/machine to modify it to a required output, maximise this operation to make it the most efficient it can be.

I've got Shenzen wishlisted (which didn't come out all that long ago) and as interesting as that is to me I won't be buying it till it really drops in price as I know it will be very similar to Spacechem and TIS-100

Perhaps, but GOG has no reason to care about that. You could say the same thing about any game, no matter how bad, because they all sell on Steam. I'm sure GOG was fully aware before this alleged rejection that some people would have bought the game here.

Yes, that's very true. Breja above made the same kind of point (I think anyway lol) when he talked about you may as well say you're losing a sale by not selling pizza here. Technically it's true... GoG is losing potential sales of pizza... who knows how many pizzas GOG could sell if they chose to. But they DON'T CARE ABOUT that. They're not in the business of selling pizzas and don't care.

And, the fact that I am only ONE PERSON is reason enough for them not to care about losing my sale. I never post a thing like this thinking that it will suddenly make someone change something because "they care." They couldn't care less about losing a sale to me.\

But it's the only way I know to voice my opinion (I can't "talk" with my wallet because the only company hearing my wallet is Humble Bundle who did get my money) AND it is possible that there are some here who DO CARE about this issue. And if it turned out that, oh I dunno, 2,000 people cared enough to say the same thing, then GoG would be potentially losing 2,000 sales.... and I don't know if even 2,000 is enough to make them care, but there is a number somewhere that does. And you always have to start at one.

I don't mind the Hentai shovelware ;) hehe

I agree... if it's an insinuation. If it turns out to be just that... then Zachtronics has lost points in my book too. But if it's true??? Because it APPEARS to be a genuine question aimed at GoG customers.... "If GoG won't sell this (because of reason A), then where else would you prefer to buy it?" If reason A is accurate, I have no problem with this post as it seems legit. If reason A is bullshit, then I agree 100% with you that they lose points.

The fact that GoG hasn't responded is some (very tiny amount) of evidence the reason isn't bullshit. Unfortunately it could just as easily be evidence that they haven't heard about it or won't hear about it until later (since it's obviously late at night there as we type this). All in all it would be nice to hear from them. But if a week goes by without hearing from them, then (in my mind anyway) its very good evidence the insinuation is not an insinuation but just a plain old fact.

The difference is that:
1. This was not some super hypothetical scenario. Communication was already going on and the partner has a proven track record, also with GOG. It's not a wasted opportunity like, say, failing to send out a CV - it's like being directly approached with a job offer and failing to respond because reasons.
2. Offering good games like this is something GOG does and should continue to do (unlike KFC offering fish burgers, I guess). Accepting this game into the catalogue is not some risky decision that messes with GOG's image or anything, it's simply a mistake.

All of this is of course based on the assumption that the reason Zachtronics cited was not some BS but actually GOG's reasoning when rejecting this game. If it's about Zachtronics' games not turning a profit for GOG or some issues in working with him, fair enough, but if it actually was about curation then God dammit, this is not just about GOG rejecting this one game, it's about GOG being fundamentally unable to do any sort of curation.

Well, either you've never tried a Zachtronics game or they just aren't your cup of tea but honestly, to me video games can be hardly anymore interesting than anything the guy makes (well, maybe excluding Ironclad Tactics which I haven't played yet). The only thing remotely similar to Zachtronics games that I can think of are city builders and some business sims, I guess, and none of those resonate with me the way Zachtronics games do. There's a really unique philosophy to them, a unique approach to providing challenges and ways to overcome them, that makes these games more satisfying than almost anything I've ever experienced in gaming. And they are immensely relaxing.

I'ma +1 you on that. 'Voting with your wallet' tells nobody anything when that vote is "no". There are any number of reasons - some of which have nothing to do with the title in question - why someone does not buy a game. I haven't bought most of the games available on gOg, but does that mean I've voted against them with my wallet? No.

I differ from you here, tho. They take their negotiations seriously and don't make a habit of discussing the why's of rejection or acceptance. There may have been a few times when they talked about it, but it's certainly not the norm. I don't think it's fair to assume that silence means verification.

Another possibility is that GoG had another reason (though any reason to deny Zachtronics seems silly to me) to avoid selling the game, but that there was simply a miscommunication or misunderstanding, causing Zach to speak as he did.

I'm reminded, also, of how GoG refused (at first) to publish Lethis: Path of Progress. Apparently GoG thought that no one would buy games like that, according to the developer (edit: I think, could be mistaken). This, despite the fact that games made in that style (Pharaoh, Caesar III, etc) sold excellently on GoG. Eventually, they changed their mind and let it be sold, but only after Steam had beat offered it for many months. I'm sure GoG sales were much lower as a result. I'd wanted to buy it from them, but gave up and just bought it from Steam.