In that case, then they should update the product's description on the store, as it still mentions that it's Steam-only.

But even in that scenario, Humble Store could theoretically follow the same path as Brutal Legend; offer the DRM-Free version for single-player and the Steam key for multiplayer. Since Brutal Legend was released on GOG before the Galaxy client, the version sold here comes without any multiplayer.

Got this. Been waiting for it since it appeared in the upcoming list months ago. And a second copy for a friend. Woo!

A game having features that depend on GOG Galaxy doesn't make it any less optional.

As far as animal characters go, I do have a little mix of all the games I could find on GOG, but with the exception of Inherit the Earth, nothing really comes close to that same Redwall-like fantasy feeling. and it's sequel [url=http://store.steampowered.com/app/25000/]Overgrowth are about the closest thing that I can think of at the moment.

Although if you're looking for more good reads and into comics, Mouse Gaurd and The Mice Templar are quite similar to Redwall. The Autumnlands is pretty cool, too.

Of course the single player has to have AI opponents, that's not the issue. The issue is there is no proper single player campaign, it's just playing a multiplayer game with bots. That's what it is. Armello was made as a multiplayer game, and even the developers clearly say so. It's not like heroes of might and magic or Disciples or Fantasy Wars, turn based games with proper single player campaigns, or even like Civ and other 4x games, as those are also made wth single player in mind. In Armello the single player is an after though, it's just the multiplayer, played against AI. Now, is that "bad"? Depends on what one wants from the game. Can it still be fun? Yes. All I'm sying is that I think the games page should be clearer about what the game is, as I don't think it explains it clearly enough, and that for me personally that virtual board game to play against AI isn't worth the current price. That's it.

I've had my eye on Mouse Guard for a while now, and on The Autumnlands since recently, but I don't really have the cash right now to start reading even more series. I love comics, but unfortunately it can be a rather expensive hobby.

Ran through the prologue, seems great.

No hotseat multiplayer, sadly :(

There are a *FEW* rough edges*, but overall seems well-done and polished.

*Examples, small things like:
-Sometimes tooltops appearing off the edge of the screen.
-No ability to zoom without wheelmouse (and even then limited zoom)
-Can't disable edge scrolling.
-"Custom" graphics options choice, but no menus for them.
-No ability to slow down/pause die rolls/battles/etc to have a chance to see the results better.
-No ability to speed up movement/animations/etc to focus on the game.

Which is unlikely to change as long as people only complain about the missing GOG key after they have backed a game. ;)

Which does not mean that there are no good TBS games which do have a campaign mode. HoMM, Disciples, Wesnoth come to my mind.

But a good campaign mode can make them even better.

Not at all. It's an "electronic board game". Did you try out the Witcher Adventure game that was part of the Galaxy beta? Just like that was an "electronic board game". (Completely different game styles/play!)
People said that about FTL. (And were wrong.)

Aaaaand here come the bandwagon 1 star reviews on GOG. I love how people depend on metacritic rather than their own personal interpretation of what is good or not.

Well, I haven't played that game (and it's not because of what those people said). :)

I don't depend on Metacritic if that's what you're insinuating. I don't care about ratings, reviews featured at dubious gaming sites and users spouting hyperbolic BS. I simply read with a critical eye.

Appeal to some i guess. Ill pass on it for the same reason :/

If I am to critically assess the quality of a review I have to read all of it (there are links to the full reviews you know). When I visit Metacritic (I'm not a bloody fanatic) I mostly study the user reviews (as in the case of Armello). My own personal opinion is not determined by what others think.

Sure, it might though it wouldn't be the same as playing it myself.

This game tears me up, on one hand it has a fantastic art style with adorable characters, on the other hand it's in a genre I don't even slightly enjoy. :s

I'm so glad you're an expert. Single player was most certainly not an after thought. I was a backer and paid close attention, I beta tested the game and I can assure you that you are judging this unfairly. It's not like 'bots'. It is like playing against the AI in a game just like Civilization. You are misleading other people with your 'know-it-all expert opinion'. Other people have told you that it is like Civ. The game is not the same type of game as Heroes of might and Magic. It is more comparable to the Witcher Board Game, however it is similar to Civ without the city building in that there are different ways to victory. If you don't like, that's fine, but don't like it because you don't like board games, not because you misinterpreted a comment by the dev. The single player game plays just like the Multiplayer game, and is just as fun. The gameplay is varied. Even if you play with another person and computer opponents, or three other people, the computer still controls the King and the King's army.

I have never even played a multiplayer game of Armello, but it's quite challenging and takes quite a few hours to win just one game in some cases. There is also a tutorial which plays like a short story mode. It has multiple mini-campaigns to progress through, telling you the backstory of each faction and lore of the world. It's not going to give you any replay value, but it is fun to start out with that.