Money reasons?
It is weird though, almost feels like they're getting paid to do so. :P

The publisher decides if a game is going to have pre-order bonuses, not GOG. The publisher decides what the price of a game is going to be, not GOG.

Might be as simple as GOG employees like it.

I cannot speak about others who do that, because I am was buying and I am still buying games on GOG. Of course it's sad that GOG went off its way and left its principles in pursuit of money/better games/survival or whatever is the reason. But from my point of view it's important that I get good games, with standalone installers (no DRM,yay!) and at reasonable prices. As long as GOG delivers that, I will always be supporting them with my money (unless some other store appears that would do it better!).

Isnt this trend going to become so intense as to completely reveal the game before release? :D sort of like a cheap sl.. :) i mean, where are good old times where you buy a game, dont know anything about it, and bam! you discover everything on your own.

Now its just no way to people resist to watch these clips..

Edit: just watched the clip. Game is awesome! Must buy :)

Yeah, I guess maybe since I'm American I don't get screwed over the way others here do. And I can understand how people feel frustrated that GOG won't encourage "fixed prices", especially with indie devs. I guess it comes down to what you (as in any GOG user) would prefer: fewer games at a fixed price, or more games with different prices.

I suppose if you are voting with your wallet, it *is* important to post *why* you aren't buying a game (feedback).

Some people here sound just way too hard to please. As long as Gog sticks with the no DRM, I am sticking with them. I would even rather pay more here at GOG for something I actually own and have complete control of.

Speak for yourself, not this mystical "we".

I still buy games here - and steam is not even an option in my view.

If you don't give a rats as about DRM then off you go - c u later.

But if you *do* give a rats ass about DRM, this is where I find it best to buy. That's my strong reason to prefer GOG - and it continues to stand.

So please don't presume to speak for "we" as if "we" all hold your "don't give a rats ass about DRM" stance. Some of us, at least *do* care about no-DRM (AND no-steam client, no steam spyware, etc).

Thank you


Regarding this game NMS - the 20 min vid makes it look pretty cool. I like that it was (afair) continuous gameplay, not a 20-minute long series of edited scenes.

I'll await the actual release, so I can learn about any unmentioneds or surprises, but if it doesn't have any negatives in those departments, I *might* buy it - though it is pretty expensive. Maybe wishlist it. We'll see..

(+) for you, thx. :)
Always assumed its either a cooler version of sad smiley or bad hair day smiley.

Again, DRM that only affects multiplayer is still DRM. You can play other GOG titles with multiplayer enabled and no DRM or centralized verification. Starbound, for example. (Which I bought here, which has superior support (i.e. more frequent updates) on Steam, so I requested a refund and got a week-long run-around in which they somehow couldn't assign me store credit in spite of presumably owning the place and having offered it to me.) Totally can play Starbound multiplayer on a private network without phoning home. That does not appear to be a possibility for this game.

So, you're welcome to speak for yourself, but maybe you should inform yourself first.

And as bad as the Steam client is (and holy god, it is bad), at least there's a Linux version. We've been promised a Linux version of Galaxy for well over a year now but mysteriously no such thing has yet materialized.

Was "flat price" the main reason you used to evangelize GOG , or what was?

Nope. I was just an anti-DRM and anti-verification/online requirement (the latter essentially being a particularly nasty form of DRM that locks you out whenever Comcast does) partisan.

Well, since I don't "do" multi-player, I'm not going to "avoid GOG" because of the ongoing debate about whether "needing" a client for it is DRM or not. I do sympathize with that position, in that it would cause me grief if I did do multiplayer, since I don't care for clients in a general sense.

But, since I don't, it would be silly of my to avoid the main thing I do care about - DRM-free single-player releases.

Since GOG is well-able to fulfill that preference of mine, I'll spend dollars here.

Kind of like a political candidate - I may not agree with all of a candidate's positions; but I will consider their position on topics important to me.

Same with GOG - maybe the need of their client for multi-play in certain games is, or isn't, a form of DRM (it seems to be an ongoing debate) - but I can't simply capitulate to that sentiment and go to Steam instead - because Steam does not offer what I seek - DRM-free single-player.

I understand if you do prefer Steam because, if you're going to have to choose a client - that sounds like the one you prefer - but that's the "we" thing I was talking about. It isn't "we"; it's a set of "you's". That was my point.

In before people are shocked and start burning GOG:

NMS is an always-online game. And yes: It is a form of DRM. Deal with it.