the OpenCritic Rating pic (link i assume?) at bottom of store pages - that have reviews there.

it has been broken for years now? years, right? but even if not, many months...

fix it or remove the link so it shows nothing instead of trying to load some missing picture.
and if, IF, it is there and something on my side is blocking it, no, but just if, then self host it - which you should anyway for many reasons including security. (and of course it would be legal. if they host a pic of a logo of another company they give credit as they would if/when required, and is even better, for if the logo vanishes you still have it and are therefore better than even the real site.)

EDIT:
=====
ya ya, reason is "outdated" browser as pointed out by true helper.

.
.

It is on your side. And it is self-hosted by GOG.

As InkPanther had stated, the image is hosted by GOG (specifically, a gog sub-domain, images.gog.com).

By chance, are you using an outdated browser? If so, I believe that the issue might be with your browser and its inability to load 'webp' images.

Edit: If you are using Firefox, navigate to: about:config Then, locate: image.webp.enabled and ensure that the boolean value is set to true.

I don't know the exact game to check (why it was not mentioned?)

But here is my shot for Disney Classic Games Collection:
https://www.gog.com/en/game/disney_classic_games_collection

There is a picture which says "Mighty". Funny how GOG community gave it 2.4 out of 5 for such a good rated game.

I'm on Win7 (x64), browser: Opera with ad block enabled in Private (or Incognito) mode.

OpenCritic doesn't always match up with if I like or don't like a game. There are games I enjoyed that they consider weak, and games they consider mighty that I'd never purchase.



For OP - Like others have said, the images are working for me.

The only thing I used to believe when it came to the opinions of others in terms of if I would like something was this one restaurant app that was around for iPhone years ago. You'd indicate restaurants that you have been to and rate them on a scale to 1-to-5. As you rated more and more, it would become increasingly accurate as to if you liked a place you have never been to based on people who have similar preferences. There was no judgement on if a place was good or bad, just as to IF I would like it or not.

Really, we could use something like that for games.

Except the GOG community gave it 4.2 out of 5. Some non-owner randos review bombed it, I guess.

Fair point, except that only 3 verified owners were kind enough to post a review. I''m not saying that it means much but it should mean something. I'm a verified owner, I rarely rate games and never post a review, but still.

Four actually (including non-English reviews) :), but I'm pretty sure that the star ratings from verified owners count toward the rating, not just reviews. It seems like they would have to, in fact, given that the review average would be 4.0 stars rather than 4.2. Unless GOG's math programming is borked, which can't be ruled out....

thanks for the initial on topic good replies.
so it is my browser indeed.

what i omitted to add in initial post was;
i did try other browsers too (like different ones) and for whatever reason (privacy setting, blocking?) they did same.
the game didn't matter since it happens with most/all, (or ones that use "webp" images) but as palestine points out, it's the age of the browser.

yeah, i hold out and despise new tech garbage. oh yeah, funny how every browser about 3 years back went the "no single cookies for you" route. just inspecting a single cookie now in most (all?) browsers is a chore and requires extra "skill". they are "batched" together in some b/s "egg" instead of normal single ones, like for past 20 years or so.. yes, i like to see single cookies. they also all removed a lot of the settings or things that made them good. for example one good tool (addon) i use, and no doubt many here do too, is noscript. well, before, always, until browsers made some major b/s change, you know, to "protect" the end user (rolleyes) and noscript (as one example) lost ALL sound, um, options. you could add a sound file (wav) to some noscript actions. i had a very nice one for the block url one. no, it did not get annoying and was, hey ho, optional. i loved that. anytime i went to a new site, beep boop fart (yes, it was a short -and funny- fart sound) i would instantly know the site had to be "approved" by me since it was cross using other domains. i found that an absolutely paramount feature - to have sound queues in noscript. and okay, they changed the way some things worked. and..? they mozilla/whomever can not add a new way to use sound? gtfo..

since i brought it up and this site has some "beautiful minds" (yes, movie pun) -- is there a non "hack" method to add sound back to a current firefox/noscript combo? like before? so anytime noscript blocks something (new) it makes a sound?

aside from this, i am now (yes, just now, and only because "being forced") slowly migrating to win10 use. since i am doing some major changes, yes, i will use a current browser, so started looking. i say started, because on win7 i still (for most but not all things) use older versions. (nah, skip the "safety" concern. i'm ok.)

i used to be a firefox man for a long time, but then years back (around noscript sound fiasco) decided to "freeze" still "sexy" firefox for "secure" sites and normal use. (ie gog, steam, major corporation sites) and use current b/s trash cucked (yes, cucked) browsers for othe rsites if/when needing to visit those. and of course the add-ons still work/update (yes, really) (and i have the older xpi files saved too, so they can not stop me...) and i use other o/s protection, as always. malwarebytes, za (yes, yes), windows defender (yes, two. in that case it is ok and approved, etc) router settings, etc..

what is the best (best, lol) browser a man like me should start using now, in the win10 era. (yes, at the end of it's life i just start using it. and i hate it so much still...) i looked at brave, and it is not as good as it is made out to be. seems another "conspiracy" browsers have adopted (again, for the end user's protection) is to not allow cross use sessions. meaning for "power" users like me, who multiboot on same pc, if you boot from one to another and open the same (portable too - but have not tested all browsers/features, though already understand won't change since the engine, chrome, used in most browsers, do that by default and none forked their way out of it) browser using the same saved credentials, you lose logins. this is deliberate and documented and a "feature". f that. i need/want to cross use ONE (preferably portable version too) browser across several boots. it seems none, allow that now, yet older ones do. you have no idea, how "cool, good, fast,perfect" is to be able to use the same browser across boots and have same tabs open if you re-open browser on different boot, and have everything the same as always.

but whatever, i could fill a tome with my ways...

which browser should i "invest" learning or re-learning time going forward that best suits my needs? and you can already get an idea of that, from above... ;-)

- i would like to have noscript (other add-ons too, but esp noscript) be able to use audio queues again, but without any major and potentially dangerous "hacks" (crazy i am, stupid not)
- allow cross-use session/credential saving without losing your damn logins
- preferably allow (another removed feature all browsers had, no doubt related to castration of above) a pasword manager password. (regardless how secure/un it may be) it is just so there is a password for the initial use of starting/using the password manager itself. (i know current firefox still does, so ther's that)
- obviously officially support the major add-ons (noscript, adblocker, ublock, etc)
- allow true power user features even if using "about:config"-type methods

This is how it goes when Google has a monopoly.

It shows for me (Win 10, Edge), and the link works, too.

This NoScript? What's wrong with it?

Also, doesn't Firefox have a feature that prevents automatic playback?

In my experience, it doesn't always work.

In particular, it still doesn't work reliably on youtube, plus the playback starts as soon as I interact with anything in the video, even if it's a setting other than the play button.

I think there needs to be some way to outright disable all videos and animated images at the browser level (not as an addon, but in the core of the browser, to prevent sites from trying to get around it), where you'd half to click on a button in the toolbar before video would play.

Also, they should bring back the ability to stop an animation by right-clicking and choosing an option there, as well as bring back options to disable images and JavaScript. (Why did they take those options away, anyway?)