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

×
There is absolutely nothing shady about Redshift. At all. The "paid mods", "microtransactions" or "DLC" are not what you think they are.

Back when The Quest was first released, in 2006, it included an excellent, easy to use free editor, where users could make their own maps and share them, if they wanted. Some users gave their work away for free, others decided to sell it.

This was completely independent from Redshift, though I imagine that users who decided to sell their expansions had to make a deal with Redshift.

Apparently, this was profitable enough for a couple of users that they decided to create quite a few expansions for The Quest. http://zaristagames.com/

Again, this was back in 2006, for the original release of The Quest for PocketPC and PalmOS, with a later windows port.

A few years later, when Redshift ported The Quest to iOS, Zarista Games again sold their own expansions on the platform. This is what is being ported to and sold on Steam - user made expansions, with no input from Redshift.

If you want to accuse someone of being greedy, I guess you can shame the people who spent countless hours creating multi-part expansions for those who couldn't get enough of Redshift's excellent engine and ruleset. You know, if you want. I certainly won't.

The fact that after all these years they are still working with the Redshift guys, must mean they are pleasant enough that such a partnership is still very much healthy. According to my own personal experience of speaking with both Redshift and Zarista people, this is quite true. They are all very accessible and courteous professionals.

The game itself is Redshift's third game. The Legacy, their second game, also came with a similar editor, and there were many free & commercial maps available back in the day. I managed to collect and buy them all, and not once have I felt ripped off. Again, Redshift's engines and rulesets are a pleasure to play, and though I do not want to take away from the effort of the people who created the many hours of gameplay, you'd have to monumentally screw up to make a bad game using Redshift's tools.

The Quest itself plays pretty much like a sprite based Legend of Grimrock, though it came out 6 years before it. It's the first Redshift game to have animations outside combat, and though they aren't anything special on PC, they looked pretty damned good on the Palm. The world is huge for a mobile game, with many hours of exploration both outside and inside dungeons and caves.

Far from being a lazy port, the artwork was all cleaned and redone for the Steam version.

If you like games like Wizardy, Dungeon Master, Eye of the Beholder, Legend of Grimrock etc., I'm pretty much certain that you'll love The Quest. I know I loved their games enough that I still keep my N-Gage around and even bought a Palm TX especially for playing Redshift games (a couple of years ago, at a very low price, of course).

To anyone who played the game, it is mind-boggling that GOG declined it.
avatar
StingingVelvet: This is your S-U-B-J-E-C-T-I-V-E opinion.
avatar
fronzelneekburm: Let's take a game called One Finger Death Punch, which was rejected by the "curators". If I have the S-U-B-J-E-C-T-I-V-E opinion that this game is good and it should be here, that's cool, but it doesn't really have any impact on the decision of the curators.

However, if that same game has some 10000 S-U-B-J-E-C-T-I-V-E reviews on Steam and those 10000 S-U-B-J-E-C-T-I-V-E opinions are overwhelmingly positive, then i can O-B-J-E-C-T-I-V-E-L-Y surmise that this is probably a pretty good game and the "curators" have O-B-J-E-C-T-I-V-E-L-Y made the wrong call.
That's a good point.

That said, we see this specific case. The Quest has a whopping 230 reviews, 86% of which deem it "very positive". 230 ain't a whole lot to go by, and that number isn't strengthening the argument griping about gOg calling it "too niche' - if they did, in fact, reject it for that reason.

I'm as apt to go with timppu's Steam Workshop explanation in Post 34.
avatar
tinyE: Is it "too niche",
Or is it "two nitschke"?
Maybe it's too Nietzsche?

Wouldn't risk two Nietzsche though. You don't want to untangle these mustaches when they get to close to each other :/
The fact remains that none of those paid mods can be refunded or even reviewed by customers due to them being released as ingame items rather than as DLC. Still seems pretty shady IMO.
avatar
robomagon: The fact remains that none of those paid mods can be refunded or even reviewed by customers due to them being released as ingame items rather than as DLC. Still seems pretty shady IMO.
You could contact them & voice your concern. In my own experience, they've always been very accessible people.

Both the Redshift & Zarista staff post here:

http://linux.redshift.hu/forums/index.php

There's also the official pages. I tried linking them all, but my post failed. Maybe GOG doesn't like too many links in one post?

Perhaps they will change the way they sell the Zarista expansions. Their own official expansion & soundtrack both have their own Steam pages. They didn't have Steam Workshop integration.
avatar
real.geizterfahr: Wouldn't risk two Nietzsche though. You don't want to untangle these mustaches when they get to close to each other :/
Jean-paul Sartre? Is that you !?
i'd totally buy the quest and its expansions. i dig the graphic style too.
Post edited March 16, 2018 by fortune_p_dawg
avatar
X-com: Am I the only one that doesn't like RPG's/Dungeon Crawlers where you can only turn left/right, move forward/back/strafe and only stand in the middle of a square/tile? It seems really constraining
Same here, especially if it is (semi)realtime. Sure it was cool for e.g. Dungeon Master and Eye of the Beholder 1-2, but ever since e.g. Ultima Underworld appeared, I haven't really yearned for these square-dancing RPGs. Even for retro-value, but I guess I will play the Grimrock games at some point...

It just feels so fake and restricted for modern games, with no real benefits.
avatar
fortune_p_dawg: I'd totally buy the quest and its expansions. i dig the graphic style too.
Hmmm very much reminds me of Might and Magic, or Daggerfall.

Certainly not too niche. However most of those games are in bundles or free with other purchases that look THIS old school.
avatar
X-com: Am I the only one that doesn't like RPG's/Dungeon Crawlers where you can only turn left/right, move forward/back/strafe and only stand in the middle of a square/tile? It seems really constraining
avatar
timppu: Same here, especially if it is (semi)realtime. Sure it was cool for e.g. Dungeon Master and Eye of the Beholder 1-2, but ever since e.g. Ultima Underworld appeared, I haven't really yearned for these square-dancing RPGs. Even for retro-value, but I guess I will play the Grimrock games at some point...

It just feels so fake and restricted for modern games, with no real benefits.
For me I thought MMX really captured the strategic possibilities that style allows.

In much the same way as a poem doesn't have to be a sonnet to be good, and there are plenty of crappy sonnets, but someone using that structure and set of restrictions creatively and smartly well can do cool things with it.
avatar
Sjuan: In what place GOG said that they does not accept The Quest for being very niche?? I can not find it
Go look on Steam, under the FAQ. There is a question on whether or not the game would be on GOG. Developer clearly states they were turned down by GOG for being "too niche."
avatar
Alexim: This game seems to have microtransactions, so it could be justified its absence.
Nope. Only on the phone version, in the sense that you can play a demo first and then actually buy the game if you want.
avatar
Niggles: Is it originally an android or PC game? (sure looks very androidy)
It was originally a phone game, now full-blown on pc.
avatar
Breja: And the "most generic fantasy RPG title ever" award goes to...
No kidding. I did a search for images and there seem to be a ton of games with the same name.
avatar
Breja: And the "most generic fantasy RPG title ever" award goes to...
avatar
Darvond: Look at the actual game page on Steam. It's an even more generic looking dungeoncrawler than I've seen in a while.
Looks deceive. Sure won't be everybody's cup of tea, but an average playtime of 50 hours and tons of things to do - plus the fact that it's not a "hand-holding" game - sold me.
avatar
bler144: As someone who likes generic looking dungeoncrawlers, that's not by itself a negative thing.

If the gameplay is good.

I've had it on my Steam WL for future sale/bundle monitoring but probably wouldn't pay $10. Partly because my budget doesn't really allow that, anyway.
avatar
Darvond: I'd be wary of any game of this type with micros in it.
Does NOT have micros.
avatar
bler144: I've looked at the game several times and haven't seen any mention of that in the specs or the reviews (even the negative ones).

Where are you seeing that?
avatar
Darvond: There's clearly listed DLC on the very steampage and it appears there's a large handful.
MODS. There's no "DLC" on the game page under "Links."
Post edited March 17, 2018 by DieRuhe
avatar
MarkoH01: So now we are just assuming that GOG rejected the game for being "too niche" without ANY source?
Yes, it is correct that some of GOGs rejections probably weren't in their interest as well (just remember the success of Opus Magnum so it was really confusing why it was rejected at first) but only because of some of us would want a certain game which has been rejected it's not necessarily a wrong decision from a commercial point of view. If we would have more information we might be able to judge but imo we just don't have enough information yet.

A game might be great in general but if GOG does not think it fits OR sells they probably would not accept it. There might as well be other reasons we will never know because part of the rejection resons could be under NDA (I highly doubt that the devs only get a piece of paper with the words "unfortunately the game is too niche" on it). We should always keep this in mind. Again, I as well don't agree with every decision GOG has made in the past but in the end they are responsible for their store and for their sales. The alternative would be (and that is just not GOGs policy) to accept every game as Steam does. Not accepting every game here has downsides (since it will always be a subjective thing and the decision might be incorrect) but it also has positive sides imo.

If this really is a game that should fit on GOG and that many would actually buy I guess voting for it on the wishlist would still be the best way to change their mind.
Just go look at the Steam page. FAQ's.
avatar
johnnygoging: people who want their throwback games with microtransactions systems is a pretty small niche.
Again, NO micros.
Post edited March 17, 2018 by DieRuhe
avatar
MarkoH01: So now we are just assuming that GOG rejected the game for being "too niche" without ANY source?
Yes, it is correct that some of GOGs rejections probably weren't in their interest as well (just remember the success of Opus Magnum so it was really confusing why it was rejected at first) but only because of some of us would want a certain game which has been rejected it's not necessarily a wrong decision from a commercial point of view. If we would have more information we might be able to judge but imo we just don't have enough information yet.

A game might be great in general but if GOG does not think it fits OR sells they probably would not accept it. There might as well be other reasons we will never know because part of the rejection resons could be under NDA (I highly doubt that the devs only get a piece of paper with the words "unfortunately the game is too niche" on it). We should always keep this in mind. Again, I as well don't agree with every decision GOG has made in the past but in the end they are responsible for their store and for their sales. The alternative would be (and that is just not GOGs policy) to accept every game as Steam does. Not accepting every game here has downsides (since it will always be a subjective thing and the decision might be incorrect) but it also has positive sides imo.

If this really is a game that should fit on GOG and that many would actually buy I guess voting for it on the wishlist would still be the best way to change their mind.
avatar
DieRuhe: Just go look at the Steam page. FAQ's.
With the quote above I was replying to your OP and at the time you did not include any source which I would really suggest if you make such a statement.

As I said the devs saying that GOG did turn down the game because it is being "too niche" does not necessarily mean that this is the only or even the actual reason for the rejection. I was told personally that if GOG is rejecting a game the devs will get a DETAILED explanation. However sometimes those things are under NDA and it might be that they are not allowed to share everything here.
Post edited March 17, 2018 by MarkoH01
Regarding "in-game purchases":

by Elendil / Redshift » Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:42 pm

We are working updating the editor and adding Steamworks support for the Steam version of the game. When that's ready, anyone will be able to create expansions (or update existing ones, in case of Zarista's).

If/when any worthwhile expansions get released on Steamworks, we can get in contact with the creator(s) and port them to iOS and Android.

http://linux.redshift.hu/forums/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=4210#p12691
deleted