It's pre-orders done better, I guess? Pre-orders done right would be GOG giving refunds to people who don't like the game once it's out.

Yup. Let's give away free games and ignore the linux versions of games that won't release here.

But that would obviate their purpose! lol

Pre-orders, in my humble estimation, equal corporate panhandling: "please, kind sir, won't you pre-order my game so I can get a sandwich and a cup of coffee?"

No! Now get back to work and make something that's worth buying, you worthless bums!

"Now, for a limited time only, pre-order this latest piece of crapware and all verified linux users will receive The Witcher 3, FOR FREE!!!"

I can see GOG doing that. lol

A lot of people spend a lot of money on preorders, day 1 DLCs and 10+ DLCs that appear within half a year after the original release. As long as they do so we will see more and more of these.

I think the right way of doing pre-order is the way Strafe did it - as a parody, with a "VV-1N" bonus gun which kills everyone on the level, the player included!

How do you feel about Kickstarters? Are they anti-consumer too? Some kickstarters offer a GOG key for the game, should GOG deny that so that the only option would be a Steam key?

I've pre-ordered one game, The Witcher 3 (from GOG.com). I didn't regret it. Otherwise I am not into this preordering business (nor Kickstarters), so I simply don't participate in them.

The way I see it Kickstarters is a different thing for two major reasons. 1. You are told very much up-front that you are paying for development in order for the game to get made in the first place. This isn't a question of pro- or anti-consumer because if it were then yes they are definitely anti-consumer. 2. I have been pretty much live and let live when it comes to pre-orders up until now. What seriously provoked me about it was that gog.com puts on top of their page (before even the carousel of the newest games) a message about "Pre-orders done right". And no. It isn't pre-orders done right because you can't do pre-orders right. I have never seen kickstarters being promoted this heavily on gog.com and if I had I would have had the same to say about it. Considering that gog.com actually was one of the companies offering pre-orders for No Man's Sky I'd say they ought to have more of an insight into why it's a bad practice.

I think it was dirty of them to promise a Linux version and then renege on that. CDPR is generally better than that.

Pre-orders done right will mean that there are demos prior the release... alas Demos are a mythical beast nowadays.. so mythical that I'm happy when EA says that there will be 10hour trial of their next game available through Origin Access( you know their paid subscription model).

Then again I do my fair share of annual pre-orders(3) and yet to get burn(highly doubt 1-2 burns will change my approach towards pre-orders). So while I dont hate pre-orders I do hate pre-order exclusive bonuses that add some sort of gameplay element.

I think OP does have a point. If this is a 'rant', then why not replace 'general discussion forum' with 'general ranting forum'?

If he believes, in general, GOG has drifted away from its origin and ideals, than this one example does show some of the distance travelled since.

That viewpoint is worth a discussion because - obviously - not everyone shares it?
"STILL many people actually do it and even ask for it. So why should gog not do it (...)?"

You are kidding, right?

There's a distinction that you're missing with this post.

The reason why the "if you don't like it don't watch/read it" argument is a fallacy is because people are entitled to say, "I want to watch/read it, I just want it to be better when I watch/read it". The consumer wants to consume the item but is prevented from doing so because of the complaint which the consumer has with the item, which the consumer thinks can and should be solved.

Likewise, the reason the argument doesn't work with Apple is because, as the author says "those pat arguments apply to operating systems where there is freedom of movement, but not to walled-gardens, of which Apple is the master of creating benevolent Iron Curtains." and "It is inappropriate to fob off someone by saying, "don't buy" - when, inside OSX, Apple is the only one making hardware."

Now, to pre-orders. Pre-orders don't prevent a consumer from doing anything. Whether pre-orders exist or not, the consumer can still wait until the product is released before buying it. Pre-orders don't take away that option. The removal of pre-orders don't add any additional options. The only thing gained by taking away pre-orders is to remove an options, admittedly an option that I have absolutely no interest in, but an option nonetheless.

Likewise, ergo decedo doesn't apply either, as we are not saying "if you don't like it, leave", we are saying "why remove this option when you don't have to take it up and removing the option of pre-ordering will have no beneficial affect on you that not taking up the option doesn't already bestow". Further, one doesn't have to buy the pre-orders and one loses nothing by not doing so and gains nothing by removing them (unlike tax or being affected by the political climate - which cannot be avoided and can be improved).

If a game that you'd pre-order would offer another game, just like GOG does, then I would pre-order every time I knew about that free game, because unlike normal pre-orders, where you take a risk in not knowing if the game's going to be good or bad, you already know about that free game they offer. Oh, yeah, not to mention that you also save some money.

Sadly,money is a lot more important than proper product quality.We have seen it on Steam a long time ago.GOG just follows the classic money trail,as their latest moves showed... As some users pointed out,GOG ain't what it used to be.Just don't support pre-orders and you are good to go.If the game turns out to be good and finished,buy it.Cheers