Do all those games have blood or exhibit extreme violence?

Been a while since I played Hi-Octane but DD and Flatout combine racing and smashing into each other violently awesomely, TET only said a teaspoon of blood and every driver is full of 8 pints of the stuff, as a ingredient in the car / driver relationship!

I was curious about the teaspoon of blood. Carmageddon is pretty bloody, far above a mere teaspoon...hmm

Hm, did TET actually slow down the speed he narrates or was it my imagination?

GOG, I am the one who knocks.

If it is I will be shocked. Yet it would be a nice surprise, and day one purchase.

I'm more intrigued about that too. M&M X was released in late August on other services, but it's in a beta state, and GOG's not done that sort of thing before. On the other hand, they have all the others in the series.

As the man wrote, "curiouser and curiouser."

In the video, you claim that "Montague's Mount" has Oculus Rift support.

However, people who bought the game and already have the Rift can't find a way to use it with the game. Furthermore, the publisher himself said on Twitter that Rift support does not exist yet, "it's being worked on" with no timeline given. Wouldn't it be a better representation of the facts to state that this is a "planned feature", instead of just saying that the game supports hardware which it currently does not?

This is a bit awkward since we were already misinformed about the game's completeness - see posts , [url=http://www.gog.com/forum/general/preorder_montagues_mount/post55]here, and . The publisher claims that the game [url=http://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/discussion/146521424/792923683675464016/]combines the content of the originally planned episodes, but the evidence speaks strongly against that. The GOG customers are not alone with this impression of incompleteness, as you can see on the Greenlight page and in this independent review.

The situation is further exacerbated by the fact that the game card still contains no warning about this - in fact, the game description still talks about a "building on top of Montague’s Mount" that doesn't even exist in the game, you have to buy the sequel to go there. Furthermore, reviews which inform about this discrepancy, and which have been submitted more than 40 hours ago, still aren't published on the gamecard.

I'm a huge fan of GOG, I don't really want to make a fuss about this, and I certainly won't yell silly stuff like "RAAH, YOU LIED, GIMME COMPENSATIONNNNN!!!!!". However, this _is_ getting rather awkward and messy now, and I think this really needs to be cleared up. If I can help by providing more details, just send me a PM. One of the reasons why I hold your marketing in high regard is my feeling that I can trust you, you know?

Especially with your (understandable) "no refund" policy, I think it's really important that the information you give us about a game is correct and comprehensive.

I've just found this post on the Greenlight forum from one of the devs (after a customer complained about the lack of ending):
"Hi miraQix,

Our apologies you feel like you haven't had a good experience with the game, we would like to take the chance to explain the end.

Montague's Mount was always conceived as an episodic indie series. We have combined those episodes into Montague's Mount as it is today. We potentially have more story to tell, but we don't know whether Montague's Mount will be a success and if people will want to know more. We have tried to leave it on a cliffhanger and stir up some interest in a further game; we are waiting to see what the response will be.

Kind regards,

Mastertronic / PolyPusher"

So...yeah...wow. It certainly seems like the guys n gals at GOG were told otherwise. And the fact that they actually combined three planned episodes into one and it's still only a five hour game is just ludicrous. I'm glad I didn't pull the trigger on this one, but I'm sorry that others have.

I do give them credit for publicly acknowledging customers' concerns, though.
( http://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/discussion/146521424/792923683675464016/ )

EDIT: to provide link to referenced post

The more I think about this dev's reply, the angrier I get. "We potentially have more story to tell, but we don't know whether Montague's Mount will be a success and if people will want to know more." This isn't the genre to try a partial game on. So, what, if enough copies don't sell, then nobody gets the answers to the questions the game itself posits? That's just a slap in the face of your potential customers. I get it if your game is a shmup or something without a plot...wait, actually, no I don't. Finish your game before trying to make a profit! After seeing this unfold, and after my own experiences with the Cognition series, I'm definitely put off of ever buying episodic games again.

I don't have idea what's the problem with Montague's Mount story, but please note that even Syberia is not finished, and te story continues in Syberia 2.

I hate to intrudge on your conversation but, seriously, Syberia 1 is absolutely a complete game. It didn't require a sequel. The open ending makes the whole narrative stronger, more meaningful and fits the game perfectly. Everything that mattered was concluded in a satisfactory way.

By all means _do_ intrude. I never played Syberia myself (yet ;) ), I only have second-hand information about it (like SLP2000 has about Montague's Mount), so I definitely welcome statements from people with first-hand experience of the game. :)

But if the story of Syberia 1 really provided closure for at least some of it's story arcs, then this is already a fundamental difference to Montague's Mount - because there, literally nothing does. There are three main story arcs, of which two are left hanging completely, and the third has one important detail revealed at the end of the game. And after revealing that (which raises more questions than it answers, actually), the narrator tells you "I need to find out more. I need to go to Montague's Mount". And then the outro starts and tells you that you need to buy an as-of-yet unreleased and unannounced sequel for doing so.

I haven't seen the ending of Syberia, but I'm confident that it's not on _that_ level. ;)