https://rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/legends-of-amberland-rejected-by-gog.128058/

Old-school RPG gaming, DRM-free, is why I game on PC. I have to say, I really don't understand this new rejection anymore than the Grimoire rejection. For folks who are distressed that the rejections are done by formletter, there was actually an interesting post in the linked thread about how GOG gave additional feedback to this particular dev (e.g., that the game doesn't have shadows).

Personally, I do support curation in general, I just want more clearly defined curation that makes more sense. As far as I am concerned, GOG is(was?)the place to go for old-school RPGs. SO continued rejections of these particular games raise eyebrows. Another post in the thread, and I'm paraphrasing, is that GOG used to be the store for old-school RPGs while itch.io was for hipster indies, yet now that trend is reversing.

Your thoughts?

GOG obviously think it won't sell enough. Either they are right or they may change their mind. Would you buy the game if it comes to GOG?

I would buy it if it comes to GOG and I would also buy it if it came to itch.io or from the developer's own site I suppose. Apparently it is also DRM-free on Steam (for those who can hold their nose long enough to purchase). I do not plan to buy it on Steam.

I don't think that it's "obvious" GOG thinks the game won't sell enough. I'm more interested in observing patterns and behavior, so even if GOG came out and said "we think it won't sell enough, that's why we rejected it", I would still be a bit skeptical.

It is very weird to me how old-school dungeon crawler RPGs are consistently the games getting rejected. It leads me to believe GOG is not interested in satisfying the customer base with these RPGs even if they would sell ok. What some refer to as "hipster indies" appear to be a CLEAR priority over any old-school dungeon crawler, based on observing the patterns and behavior of GOG/curation.

My thoughts are that yes, of course GOG should let good old school / retro RPGs on the store, just as they let good old school platformers such as Shovel Knight.

That said, I can't tell whether LoA is good. I can say for sure that these screenshots on Steam alone are not enough to sell me a Windows-only early access game for 21 eur. No way. Maybe after testing it, GOG came to a similar conclusion?

That is, if you believe in curation in the first place. As a matter of fact, I'm not a huge fan of curation. I'd prefer to decide what's good for myself..

Here's clarry's link - https://store.steampowered.com/app/873890/Legends_of_Amberland_The_Forgotten_Crown/

I'm almost surprised because GOG brings a lot of RPGs, but I do think it's a bit expensive at that price, and while I don't enjoy criticizing art styles because I know good art can be tough, those chunky pixels are a bit rough on the eyes imo. I do appreciate how colorful it is though and the art style is consistent. (I'm guessing GOG likes a higher price because they got more money but too high and it won't sell enough to be worth the effort to bring it.

Here's the wishlist link too - https://www.gog.com/wishlist/games/legends_of_amberland_the_forgotten_crown

Maybe when the game is out of E.A. it'll have a greater chance of being un-rejected.

I see profile features limited and only singleplayer. No multiplayer, no controller support, no other nooks and cranies people get to see on profile features. It probably didn't sell enough.

I don't have a strong opinion pro or contra curation or pro or contra this game. Obviously I haven't played it, and it does seem somewhat appealing to an oldschool crowd.

That being said, I like the portraits and inventory screen better than the 3D view, which does have kind of a "cheap" look for a $20 game, considering what other games you could get for that kind of money (like M&M1-6 for only half the price). And while I don't mind retro-games, I don't really know any popular games that looked like that back in the days. I can relate to the dev wondering about some curious criticisms of GOG, like the opponents not having shadows; that's not something I would have thought of in an oldschool game either. But thinking about it now, maybe the lack of shadows actually does add to this impression of "cheapness".

Quote: "There is no way I'm adding shadows, this would totally destroy the oldschool feel of the game, same for excessive animation." -> now look at the attached screenshot of an actual oldschool game ...

This is, of course purely speculative and based on the GOG's bestselling lists, but they do indicate that modern retro pixel games don't really sell all that well in GOG. On the first 10 pages arranged by all-time best selling, there are 10 or so modern pixel games. The best selling list has a few more, but all in all, they are overshadows by either actually old games or games with bit higher production values.

Then again, GOG does seem to try push visual novels as well and they seem to sell even worse.

Pretty gross looking pixel graphics... Stop trying to sell games with bad graphics as nostalgia. Pixel graphics were used in the best games at the time because it was the best graphics (or at least comparable) at the time. Now there are much better options for 2D games. Look at Hollow knight as an example. Stop muddying your game's appearance to disguise how bad it looks.

Are we kickstarter now ?

Would you fund or buy anything branded as an "old school rpg" ?

No? Then, that's called curation.

Personally, I thought Serpents in the stagland and age of decadence were very poor games. I wouldn't put any kind of trust in the codex, in particular regarding their tastes in rpg.

Aye, theyve not even faked shadows via adding them to the sprites (which honestly need some cleaning up - the outlines are jaggy and a bit lazy looking) and even some simple idle animations wouldn't be too hard to implement rather than just having them bounce, but it would make a big difference to the feel of things.

Agreed. There's old school, and there's lazy. This feels like so much the latter.

im guessing theres a bunch of different artists work in the game because the portraits dont look so bad and some of the environment bits (such as the little castles) seem to have more to them. either that or its one persons work as theyve improved over time and it needs a revisit.

Just because it tries to be old-school doesn't make it good and judging from what i've seen so far i'm not impressed. in fact the vast majority of games that tries to recreate classic games fails horribly to understand what made them great in first place especially in level design, world building and depth in rpg mechanics which they rarely do well in modern indie "old school rpg's".

However more often than not i would prefer GOG to take a wait and see approach until the games are finished before rejecting them.