There is nothing I wouldn't do.

Are you Jim Carrey? ;)

Honestly, if they released it now I would say that the situation would be the reverse. Pressured into releasing a game they don't want to. There is no evidence whatsoever that they rejected it due to content or fear of controversy.

If they released it now 90% of the people in here bitching wouldn't buy it! All we'd hear is, 'it's too expensive' or 'I hate shooters' or 'I can get it cheaper on Steam' or ''why doesn't GOG sell good old games anymore!?'.

For the sake of clarification:

1) If the decision is inconsistent because of the content, then it's probably not the reason GOG rejected it. A lot of people (not just game review sites) have said it's buggy. I am 99% sure GOG didn't release it is because of lack of polish. Yes, there are games that are rough around the edges already on here, but they either fall under one of two categories: a) they're old/classic, or b) GOG is assured that there will be continued support for the game (i.e. patches). Since the dev said they would close down if Hatred didn't sell well, it's difficult to be sure that there would be fixes for the game (at the point the decision was made).

4) I watched one of Anita's videos and thought "Well, that's something to think about". Apparently, she has a lot more which are about the same old shit every time. If people keep saying the same thing everyday without adding to the argument, it just gets old and people lose interest. At worst, it becomes annoying and people get angry.

Yeah, I think that in the meantime, there's a pretty sensible theory around as to why GOG couldn't sell Hatred.

"Could not" as in "we can't".

Good luck finding that theory on one or two of those 127 pages. ;)

Do I really need to explain this one?

Do you really think it would make a difference if you did? :P

You mean they released a highly advertised product of their sister company that they use to push Galaxy? Let's take a look at a bit more interesting example, and some sale/gameplay numbers. Grabbing Pillars of Eternity as it's a similarily buggy game (Steam stats, Steam charts and Steam spy, as there's no way to get GOG data - just take all the numbers and multiply them by 0,05, should give you roguhly the right results), during first 2 weeks upon release, it sold over 200k copies and sales were going up. Hatred only managed around , and sales are stagnating at best. That's why GOG would put up with support of something like Pillars of Eternity, yet has no reason to give a shit about Hatred. Then again, the average playtime of Hatred and its concurrent players on Steam would suggest that just about nobody is playing the damn thing, so perhaps GOG would not even have to bother.... (funnily enough, Pillars is still played by [url=http://steamcharts.com/app/291650]over 2000 players daily in average, over three months after release, that would be what, 5% of owner base is still active even after this time? Hatred is hardly out for two weeks and its active player base already dropped to about the same level.) I'd say that when the game is established and fixed up, it might actually come to GOG - but it might also get completely forgotten by then.

Seeing that my optimism is waning, no. Fenix beat me to it anyway :P

Metacrititic rating 45% :)

I bet it is Phil Fish and his SJW's behind this!

Given the circumstances, I don't think most ratings, user and professional, are going to be particularily trustworthy. Then again, it really does not look like a great game, so... Idunno.

He could at least try. So rude.

It's not rude to avoid kicking a dead horse. :P