But dreams can come true, especially if you squeeze your eyes shut tight enough, and cross your fingers on both hands...

Maybe they will just package it with emulations like some publishers did with games on GOG and steam. If GOG wants to port games, then more power to them.

You'd certainly have to consider that in light of a number of other things they have done or haven't done.

Cost cutting for instance, seems very apparent ... cloud saves, servers, etc.

It probably isn't their fault either, as Epic's continual free games would be one of those factors that would have hurt them a lot, and is ongoing. Prices have risen for a lot of old games too, which many of us aren't happy about. I purchase games from them regularly, but my wishlist still continues to grow at a faster rate now.

In some ways, GOG seem a victim of their own success, and it is a sucess to still be around after 16 to 17 years.

For the one hundredth millionth time, gog.com said a long time ago I think it was like in 2018? There was a video about some preservation thing and gog.com themselves in that video, which if I can ever remember the name of, which you can find on youtube.com, you can see gog.com said that when they are working to bring the classic old abandoned versions of PC video games to sell on gog.com that they will try to also work on bringing video games that never had PC versions either.

.

I wouldn’t say they are desperate, but they recognize the need to change their marketing strategies to attract more customers to purchase games on GOG. It has been demonstrated that bringing older, popular games to PC can generate substantial revenue. Therefore, they might decide to focus more on that strategy rather than trying to become a second Steam.

I believe their recent changes to the wishlist feature were beneficial. By making it more prominent, users are reminded of its existence. Sometimes, I even forget we have a wishlist! If they can encourage more users to vote for games, it will show publishers that there is a significant number of potential buyers for those games on GOG. Not sure why people act like marketing is bad thing.

Way to long for the average user to remember.

Presumably it wouldn't be GOG's job to port a game but the publisher's. The idea would be that if a game gets enough votes, the publisher would realize they're leaving money on the table by not porting a game, but how they do that would be up to them - a proper port done from source code, or just wrapping it in an emulator? I think there are precedents for both, although not too many.

What a company said in 2018 is completely meaningless, as is what a company says today. Words are worthless, Marketing & Advertising doubly so, as they are but the buttocks of Management.

If GOG was serious about this, we'd be up to our eyeballs in open source source ports along with using every modern tool availed to us. (Such as Dosbox Staging which actually uses a modern build toolkit.)

Read what andysheets1975 said in his comment above yours. That is how gog.com will do it.

Yes, that's still somewhat magical thinking or we'd have a wrapper version of Black & White now. Or a source port. GOG could give a gentle nudge here or there to say, "We'd love to see this game too, but in the meantime, why not check this out" and just quietly mutter the names of projects like this.

Good point I forget to remember :p

Honestly, this is 101 stuff that should have been done ages ago and all along. The fact that they are just finally doing it now, is a big indicator of something, especially when you consider the other things I hinted at.

And let's be clear, the only difference now appears to be these promotions, which are an improvement. But are GOG really doing anything different other than that?

@Johnathanamz - Most here would be aware of all that, perhaps except for the last bit about games without a PC version. Once again, it is about keeping their customers in the picture. It is not sufficient to rarely ever mention something that encourages greater support and customers etc for GOG.

I read an article about GOG that was published recently. It states that the head, who was put in charge of GOG in 2016 is responsible for many of the poor decisions made during that time. This was from sources they talked too about it. The article suggests that this manager was inexperienced and lacked the necessary skills to effectively lead the company. But at sametime said he was passionate about his work.

But maybe he realized what he was doing did not work. And going back to that made GOG. . Sorry little off topic

That was this guy here - https://www.gog.com/forum/general/gog_in_the_mediainterviews/post423

Man was a flight traffic controller by training, no idea how he ended up at a PC digital distribution store.

Where did you get the idea that bringing back retro games was profitable?

Out of all the quarters I've analyzed, GOG makes the most net profits when new AAA games get released. e.g., TW3, CP77, and their respective expansions.

They said he climbed the ladder some how. Yeah, that's the same article I read.

It's obvious bring popular retro games are bring in profit but seem GOG also spends to much. So end up not making much revenue every year. It might not be much as their AAA games.

Edit: To be honest, he should of been forced to step down by now.