Anything that has not been covered in a current PC Games magazine in a review in the last 6 months is old. Anything that does not require the most current hardware for full details is old.
Good is subjective, too. I very much dislike some games others regard as superior classics, and would very much enjoy some things others would regard as utter crap. It's ok, there is space for all of us on GOG's servers. And hopefully enough demand so all of us get more releases, faster :)

They can either put Two Worlds on GOG now, or in X years, when you think it's old enough to qualify. What's the difference, other than being able to get it earlier?

Honestly, why is this a big deal?
If all you want is 'old' games, then just buy those here. There are plenty now and likely plenty more to come. I don't understand why every time a 'new' game is released here there has to be a bunch of posts asking what the definition of an 'old' game is or complaints that GOG shouldn't be releasing a particular game. Just enjoy what they offer. If the game's too new for your tastes, then wait for the next old release.

So long as it's DRM-free, inexpensive and I can download it as many times as I like I'm good.

Some times I wonder if at least some of the people who whine about newer games released here, work for companies that sell games and don't like the competition.

I don't care if it's old, if it's DRM free it's welcome. I find it great that modern developers are looking to make their game DRM free.

It's topics like this that make me wonder if people have even heard of the phrase "The good old days". If they had, then perhaps they'd actually have a better understanding of the site name...
The perhaps all the complaining about what is "good" and what is "old" would finally stop.

Pretty much sums up my thoughts. The only reason I I am slightlly disappointed when a newer game is released, is because my pc is a piece of crap and won't run it. But that's a problem on my end, not gog's

My local Best Buy and Gamestop both have the "epic edition" in-stock, actually. Since Gamestop carries about 4 PC games total at any time, that is actually an amazing thing.
That said, I don't really care about GOG selling Two Worlds. It's an overlooked game that had annoying DRM at launch, so now people can pick up a nice patched version DRM-free for $10. Seems like a deal.
They should sell Gothic 3 as well with a forum link to the fan patch.
Actually they should make a point of advertising games that sucked at launch but were later fixed.

also comepletely agree with that.
I just don't get the complaint at all

I just don't care about old games, if they use GOG's installer then I almost give a game 10x the amount of thought on whether or not to buy instead of just defaulting to 'don't buy' mode.

Enter me in the camp of people who don't get why this is even a big deal. Who cares?

We already have not-so-good and not-so-old games on here since the beginning of open beta. I still faintly remember how people compained that GOG included Lionheart as one of the first few games on the store.

At the start, a great deal of games were added to draw people in but after that, they mostly remained true to their name. What they shouldn't do, however, is add recent AND mediocre games. A mediocre old game may still have retro appeal and a good recent game won't see anyone complain really but adding a mediocre recent game is what will hurt their reputation.