Maybe they didn't. If they gave their publishers exclusive rights to distribute the game on Steam then Red Candle might not have a say in putting the game back up there - especially since one of those publishers was a Chinese company shut down by the government. Don't really know since those details aren't public.

That was an outstanding post, bravo!

I keep hearing conflicting stories about that. Someone else said it was the Chinese publisher of the game (not the Taiwanese developer studio) that pulled the game from Steam, trying to save their skin and keep their license to do business in China... and now the developers can't allegedly publish the game themselves on Steam because the agreement with the publisher prevents that.

I think that last part was just his assumption though, trying to come up with some explanation why the developer doesn't re-publish the game on Steam, if Valve has claimed they have no objections on the game being on the store (who knows for sure...).

I forgot to comment on this, but I think it's time I do so. That's saying a lot. I'm noticing that some movies are doing better in China than in North America. Examples I can provide include two of the latter Transformers films(Age of Extinction AND The Last Knight), both Pacitic Rim films, Warcraft and Terminator: Genisys. Even more so, I believe that the video game marker is far bigger in China than in America, Japan, France, Germany and Britain COMBINED! Mainly it's through PC gaming, Mobile Phones and Browser games. And it's all through the power of Capitalism.

I am betting 99% of the people who say they are leaving GOG will still buy games at GOG.
Just a bunch of drama queens making a huge show of taking a stand which they know they will not have to live up to.

Not really. Got a pending ticket for account closure, so no access to the games I own (not many, have little time to play them) via there website, am now dependent on own backups. I lost 60% of my gaming library anyway years ago (including old fashion store hardboxes and directly bought at publishers) when I moved to Linux, because I didn't agree with Microsoft/Apple policy's.

I will fail from time to time. But I try to be consistent.

Even if its some politics, real talk once in a while because this thread seems fitting. I believe that GOG simply doesn't want this game on here because there is too much correlation with real and loaded political strife. It was just too politically loaded to appear on the store. Once the dust settles I'm sure that Detention and Devotion may appear on the store, or maybe not since I still remember the Hatred controversy (different context of course). And lets not forget that Cyberpunk 2077 is at least as buggy and error ridden as The Witcher 3 was. The Witcher 3 turned out fine due to its many updates and hints towards their policies (free minor DLCs, etc). I'm sure we will see a similar thing with Cyberpunk 2077, which is way more ambitious than the last CDPR game anyway so updating it until its done it may take longer. I'm excited for 2021 though regardless. Cyberpunk 2077 is actually kinda living up to the hype, at least for me because I was mostly unhyped and neutral. Didn't even knew that they put Keanu Reeves into the game, apparently they revealed his role years ago. I pretty much went into the game unspoilered.

Regarding any political talk, I thought that gamers are all like "keep politics out of mah games" and the general reaction I'm seeing on here really is opposite of that, albeit that reaction had to be expected. I bet that most of the people who're really pissy about the move of GOG and CDP don't usually care about politics as well, at least stemming from their very own biases. Thats simply a educated guess though. I know for sure that GOG labels itself as a "store for gamers by gamers." and at least they're true to that saying. I would wish CDP or GOG-staff would communitcate it that way.

So if a game reaches the point where its more known due to political controversy rather than the game or the gameplay itself then I would feel that not selling it on here is well justified. After all, thats staying true to their approach of leaving politics out of video games and keeping a neutral stance. The problem I see here, again, is that GOG does not communicate it that way. From an outsiders perspective, it seems that GOG is siding with the Chinese government instead of being neutra. And being neutral (game is more knows regarding controversy rather than the game itself, such reactions are not very gamer-like) would put GOG in a much better position than what they're doing now thats for certain. I believe that they're way past that point but I still wish they would release official statements.

IMHO but I'm sure most agree is that GOG-staffs messaging, or at least their ability to communicate to the public, is pretty much catastrophic here. They're seriously not versed in this sort of thing, which is some of the easiest things in the world to do. Which is exactly why I wonder the inability of GOG to release such statements.

What is also a big deal is the kneejerk reaction by gamers who wish to burn GOG to the ground because of this one game. Its not really a good look for anyone. Meanwhile, the Chinese Government probably doesn't even notice this entire controversy if it wouldn't benefit them. They're just letting the dices roll as they're fully aware that they always get the best dicerolls. Like capitalism, Chinas growing properity put them in a position where they're simply too big to fail. The only losers here are us and Red Candle Games. Hell, I bet my ass that the Chinese Government could easily twist around praising themselves while making us look like animals from the eyes of the Chinese population, such is the nature of propaganda. We're pretty much shooting outselves in the foot perfectky in regards on how China could use this outrage to benefit them solely.w

Lets say GOGs reaction regarding this game leads to GOG going out of business because as many are simply fed up about them. This pretty much looks to me that the Chinese Government may see controversy as a perfect weapon to destabilize Western electronic businesses worldwide. Just rail up fake controversies in order to look weak and the dices roll again. Some of the Chinese people probably laugh their asses off which is business as usual. Even if we point our fingers laughing at Chinese Government for being too thin skinned because of some minor reference regarding some Chinese politician who looks Winnie the Pooh, they're obviously having the last laugh to all our expenses. I couldn't care less, I just want the games damnit.

Regardless of me not caring about the political nature, I'm still amongst the most pissy person about any of this since its so easy for GOG and CDP to come clear so the dust settles much faster. This leads to people forgetting about this and China doesn't have any possible ammonition to use against GOG or any other business. Just phrase a neutral message about the reasons why Devotion is not released and perhaps promise to put both games at a later date. If people really like the game without taking any political stance (they like what they see, so to speak) then I'd say that putting it on the store is at any case well justified then people reacting like its some sort of smoking gun, which may lead to even further problems. Many games that deserve to appear on the GOG storefront may thus never appear, which is a shame. I wish things would be different but alas they are not. I support GOG because I know that even if GOGs hands are bound they do try to make up for it in other ways.

That or perhaps GOG and CDP really are siding with the Chinese government for whatever reason. Just kidding, the reason starts with m and ends with oney. The Chinese market is gigantic and a company like GOG probably benefits hugely from at least attempting to get into such a market. I've heard however that China has their own storefronts and sites where people buy games and that the chinese population isn't allowed to purchase from western stores (am I wrong?). IMHO GOG should stay true to their core principles whilst being as neutral as they can. They just need proper and consistant communication about any of these topics the minute they're brought up. No discussions or what not, just well written official statements that stay true to the core principles of their business on how people see them.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that I was so unhyped about Cyberpunk 2077 that I didn't even knew Keanu Reeves was having a role there a few weeks before the games release. Didn't even see those CDP promotion videos about the game. All I knew that the game was going to be most likely a homage to Deus Ex role playing games.

That's my stance on politics in games. If Devotion had been released without a fuss, I would have ignored it. That obviously doesn't mean I want to see it banned from distribution, which is what this effectively is.

Mine too, which is exactly why I've stated the things I've stated, with the exception that I would've bought the game. I do like these types of well-made video games. Though I can see myself not completing it and just watching a uncommented playthrough.

Nobody does want to see it banned from distribution though. They should simply elaborate and clarify their stance as there are always nuances in decisions like that. I fail to see complacency on the GOG-side of things. Ignorance or inability to communicate in regards to GOGs PR can be subject of debate, however. I don't even think that GOG wants this game banned at all, after all, they wanted Detention and Devotion to appear at the store at some point.

If neutrality is their stance, GOGs twitter could've just released a statement akin to "Hey guys, this game right now is a political hot-topic. Due to our keeping-politics-out-of-VG rule we've decided to not bring this game to our store for the time being until the dust settles." I know nothing about twatter, just make multiple posts if the message is too long.

EDIT: I'm also implying that these dramas on GOG usually seem to be about GOGs inability to be diplomatic or their regular PR-mismanagements. If I would be working at GOG-staff and have the capacity to coordinate resources I would spend an hour on this forum writing up a to-do of what will be fixed on GOG, such as focusing on the offline installer aspect as much as focusing on Galaxy 2.0. Every part of GOG needs love and not just Galaxy <3!

The idea of keeping politics out of a game seems untenable to me. There's 2 very simple and fundamental reasons for this:

1. The nature of politics is X telling Y whether they're obligated to do Z, or are obligated to avoid doing Z. Therefore, if there is an avenue for compulsion, there will be politics, no exceptions. Even sex and dating is political, anymore, at the racial level, believe it or not.

2. Symbolism and anything of meaning can not only become controversial for it's intended meaning, but can also becontroversial for meanings that were not intended. See the Buddhist Swastikas in pokemon, for example.

I think the idea of censorship is obscene. Fundamentally, in the west, we have concluded that sunlight is the best disinfectant: instead, we should promote the consumption of bad ideas so as to prevent the streisand and occult effects, but instead so everyone can understand why the ideas are bad.

But, hey, then it becomes obvious you either don't trust people to have two brain cells to rub together (thus you most likely don't believe in individual sovereignty, which leads to totalitarianism), or your ideas are so bad that you want to hide the more reasonable competition.

Haven't you ever heard about the message "Keep politics out of video games"? Otherwise your message seems totally off because we're talking past each other. The stuff you're telling me is fairly common knowledge at any case. The core principles classic Individualism and Egoism (18 century) vs sociétaire and classic (18th century) social criticism which accelerated things. I don't care about that stuff on a video game forum so I just nod without burning any calories and acknowledge you. Who would've thought that many political systems regardless of their position would become more fragile as time goes by. The larger the populous and more complex the time, the more complicated and/or extreme the systems have to be to accomodate said ideas. Also fairly common knowledge, at least coming from my dry ass analyses.

And as you correctly implied. If that doesn't work, just burn books because otherwise people may see the truth and object to your ideas.

Many people on this board adhere to the core message of "Keep politics out of video games" for years and GOG praised itself quite often to be politically neutral. With that in mind, their PR must be sweating bullets right now, thats what I've meant. I was just giving advice on how to stay neutral, because that what GOG should be doing.

If it tells you anything on just how neutral GOG wants to be. If you ever written a review on GOG a message even tells you to not be politically loaded in your review and that you should focus on the contents of the game alone.

Personally and I often wish that this could be applied to each and every comment writting on the forum, at least people would've had more fun while being a bit more friendly. On the other hand, this may be one of those things you thought about while writing the last sentence ;)!

Of course it's dry and common knowledge. Sometimes people need to return to the basics, because it's amazing what we can convince ourselves when we add complicated "exceptions." Sometimes we just can't see the forest for the trees (or do we fail to see the forest 'cause we're looking only at the individual trees?), 'cause we just create this massively complicated system. But, here's the thing, to even attempt to be politically neutral, there's only 2 possible methods.

1. You can ignore the bits that are perceived to be currently political.

2. You can say that everything is welcome.

GOG obviously takes to 1, because that's the corporate stance of the day. The issue is, even the social media companies have realized at this point that this is absolutely untenable, for the reaons i've described above. Say that "annoying orange" became a meme to refer to a particular president? Are you going to retroactively delete all posts and possibly issue bans for "annoying orange for president" if there was a skit back in 2008? Ok, maybe not bans, but then how do you deal with the userbase who posted those comments? What about the "remember this?" stuff on facebook, or, say gog forums, a necropost? Say you say it's ok, don't delete it, and allow even contemporary posts as long as they reference the old ones. Now you're half-assing method 2, and making annoying orange fans have exclusive immunity.

Method 2, creates fighting and argumentation. However, we can also see that this wasn't always an issue. Prior to the American Civil War, people were able to disagree on huge fundamental issues, without hating each other, just getting sligthly unfriendly on certain topics. Sure, there'd be a brawl at a pub, but, well, how's that any different from now? I'm sure you'll find some famous cases of dueling, but, well, we rightfully see that as an improper way of handling disagreements, and most times we know of seem to be more about power by other means than by politics. Some people i can talk to, disagree with strongly, and they don't want to kill me afterwards. Some people now i can have a minor disagreement with, and they want to kill me (this is rare, but it happens). It would appear that policy 1 is at fault: we become increasingly polar and are increasingly fragile to criticism and disagreement, because our skills of debate and disagreement are not honed, we come to see these things as existential threats (microaggressions).

Now, by all means, we can talk about what is historically been done on gog, but then we do have to bring up which system is smarter and healthier, and if it's the latter, why is "doing what we always do" more important than change? And, well, this is weird coming from a conservative, but, then again, history shows we've went from system 2 to system 1, so maybe i'm just ultra-conservative. Either way, you just aren't going to truly avoid politics in games: it's going to happen inevitably. The question is whether or not you let politics control the games.

I'm still interested in GOG but it priced itself out of my range unfortunately for a couple of years. If in the past the prices were reasonable, now GOG games are more expensive than literally any other store on the web, with or without discounts. Apparently, GOG prefers to focus on more lucrative markets like US or Russia but not smaller ones.

What is this DRM that is on Cyberpunk 2077 on the GoG version?

I had ONLY heard that it was Denuvo placed upon copies that went out to reviewers prior to it's release.

I had heard nothing about GOG's version currently on the store having any sort of DRM. What DRM is there?

I was under the impression that you could still download the backup installers and install it independently and offline on a computer if they wished to void of any verification checks and such if one actually wanted to do that.