As someone playing it now, I don't consider myself unlucky, as the base game plus the official expansion is plenty, especially considering the price. Having third-party expansions here would be ideal, but they're not necessary to enjoy the game as it is.

wut a bizarre person. they sound ancient

Seems like the request should be for the clause to actually be enforced. But when GOG gave up on their principles to just get more games, how can you expect them to risk their numbers over such a thing as update or content parity?

What would be the penalty for breaking that clause?
Will the penalty be instantly triggered if e.g. Steam gets an update today but GOG doesn't?
Will the penalty be the same if it is some non-critical or even irrelevant update (e.g. an update to Steam achievements)?
etc. etc. etc.
These are the questions that would instantly raise in developer's or publisher's mind when they hear about such clause. Many of them would probably just feel it is not worth it to try to decipher such vague clause, waste of time, better to concentrate on Steam which doesn't have such clauses.

In severe cases, GOG has already removed games from the store, apparently because the publisher has abandoned the GOG version and is not willing to update it anymore.

yeah wouldnt getting paid through steam constitute collecting money on the internet?

If various update requests have been ignored\denied and the game is still outdated since N weeks (max 3-6 months?), then the only way to protect customers (and the store's reputation) from bad devs is to remove their title from the store.

Exceptions or longer delays could be made for achievs, workshop-only features, etc (but these missing things should always be clearly reported to users).

It's not rocket science.. if devs are immediately too lazy to understand such clauses, maybe they don't belong here in the first place.

And again, the exact solution is Gog's job.
Ours is to report the problem and maybe suggest something.

Yeah, years after that feature wishlist was created.
And others severe cases still remained.

rimworld missin' both ost dlcs 'n' name in yo' game dlc
id love once if gogie just... HAD everything on launch, rather than offer inferior products from teh get-go

dont even care 'boot teh game per se, but i like to buy osts because of my hearin' probs an' gogie had plenty o' time to uuuh negotiate rights then

its such backwards processin' on their part; their synapses arent all firin'
i just read it as: i am scared of teh internet an' even though i could be makin' m̶u̶c̶h̶ more $$$ for my pet bills i cant be assed

im not sure but there might be a bit more to collecting money from sales on gog then there is steam. with steam its hyper automated, but with gog there might be another step or two to actually recieve your money. again, i could be wrong.

Just for your information. I am pretty sure that such clause already IS part of the contract. I remember a tweet or post by a dev who complained about said part in the contract. If I am not mistaken it said something about not longer than a month after Steam has been updated. HOWEVER the question is not what's in the contract the question is what GOG will do whenever these things are not fulfilled. In most cases GOG tends to look away, warn them, give them second and third chances just to keep them and to prevent scaring customers away ... at least that is my impression. If you want to know for sure I can ask a befriended dev of mine if he would be willing to confirm fo me if such clause exists or not. Not sure if he is allowed to do so or if he will tell me - but I can try.

Hey, I've added another post after that with more details.
One month is (sadly) too short IMO for an ultimatum, expecially for small indie devs.

Btw if Gog doesn't enforce its own contract, then what's the point of adding a clause? (and since when it has been added?)
Please do ask your dev friend, even if I doubt s\he'll dare specify much.

Here is the quote in question, by Lars Doucet, creator of Defender's Quest:

https://twitter.com/larsiusprime/status/1062947901314424833

This seems to be the tweet I remembered to have seen. So this clause seems to exist and the requested timeframe is even shorter than I remembered.

Come on, this is childish. It's more complex than you folks are making it.

Taking the third party developer Catacomber at her word, and the main game developer RedShift at his word, it's not looking likely for us to get any of the third party expansions to the game here. I explain why I think this is below. Keep in mind right off the top Catacomber specifically said they did not see themselves selling on GOG because GOG is DRM-free. Catacomber was cordial and took the time to post here, though I too was unsatisfied with the answers.

The way I understand how things are laid out, Catacomber is the developer of third party expansions, which are put out under the Zarista Games banner, all of which is a separate entity from RedShift. RedShift makes the main The Quest game as well as the particular DLC that is available here on GOG, but the third party expansions are better thought of as "paid mods" rather than official content.

Catacomber has her own basic site with a forum type layout but the third party expansions themselves are sold on Scheme or on the separate Zarista games site (on which not all of them are compatible even with the Scheme version since they originally started with mobile version expansions). Zarista Games site is someone else's, not Catacomber's. Per Catacomber's post, that other person is busy and doesn't really maintain the Zarista games site.

So, while we see other developers sell games DRM-free and direct from their own sites (like Din's Legacy), this does not appear feasible currently for Catacomber since they don't comfortably have a site to do that on (? This is at least how I understand it). On top of that, Catacomber does not want to use PayPal like other developers. I think because it reveals first/last name in the transactions, at least that's how I took their post to mean it in the game forum.

Meanwhile, RedShift apparently is not agreeable to selling the third party expansions under RedShift's own banner. I think the reason they and Catacomber have said so much about how there is no Scheme Workshop equivalent on GOG, is because there is not a way for GOG to sell something like a "paid mod" from a third party when the main game has its own developer. Please correct me if I'm wrong on this point.

I think the only way those third party expansions could come here DRM-free is if both Catacomber becomes agreeable to selling them DRM-free AND RedShift would have a change of heart and sell them under their own RedShift banner. For reasons I don't entirely understand, RedShift apparently refuses to do that, even though they did apparently sell the Catacomber/Zarista stuff under the RedShift banner for mobile originally. That part is baffling.

Anyway, it seems to me that they would both stand to make money by selling the third party expansions under the RedShift banner. Even if all of the expansion money went to the third party developer, this would increase the lifespan of the game so the main developer would also benefit from additional sales of their own. But what do I know, I'm just a fan of DRM-free dungeon-crawling :)

I think The Quest is an ace game and wish both sets of developer well, though I personally refuse to buy any of the Catacomber/Zarista expansions given Catacomber's previously expressed stance regarding being against DRM-free. Again, I have pieced all of this together based on the posts so far; so please correct me if I have anything wrong.

48h is asking too much.
They should try to keep the updates (DLCs included) like under 10 days, then start with the reminders, followed by warnings after 1 month, and finally remove the game after 3-6 months.
Exceptions and delays would be still acceptable with communication with devs and users.