I think retailers should insist on such a clause in their contract with the developer, if that developer wants to sell their games there.

It would have to be a contractual obligation though. I don't think you could reasonably expect legislation putting such an obligation on the developer without it being explicitly stated in the contract.

Oh you can make it legislation. Just state that a product is only complete with all patches and that every customer has a right to a complete product, i.e. granted access to all future patches.

The problems would still be in the fineprint. You could call a patch DLC instead or you could produce different versions (a Steam version, a Retail version, a GOG version) and then produce or not produce patches for each version separately. You would need to define that a game basically comes only in one version and all variants must be kind of equal unless the effort is too high.

I think one should just make such practices public and fortwith avoid this publisher since it is just unfirendly behavior to not fully support your product in all variants. Publishers/Devfelopers should show love to all their children.

You won't, that's just bullshit. Use a proper site like piratebay, look for verified torrents (skull symbol, usually) and you'll be fine - if you don't use verified torrent, just look at bloody comments. If there's a virus, you can be certain someone has already found it. The 'oh my I'll catch a virus!' myth is just bollocks.

But yeah, you should not have to do that when you've purchased a legal copy anyway.

But specifically state that the customer is not obligated to install those patches unless it's a safety matter. I'm thinking more of softwares other than games, like accounting packages, and even applications like machinery and automation, automotive, building controls, etc.

Sucks that this affects GOG too. Looking at Psychonauts and Stranger's Wrath.

What is the problem with them?

There should be a legal contact between the developer and retailer so customers don't get screwed by buying games that can't be fixed with updates.

Latest Pscyhonauts patch is only officially available on Steam. Someone made an unofficial patch for the GOG and retail versions though. (Edit: Steam and Humble Bundle version)

Stranger's Wrath has yet to receive the HD update (which is also suppose to fix a lot of the problems in the port) which came out for only Steam on September 13th. Originally it was going to be Steam only, then they said they would also make it for GOG and other versions, when the release came out, not word.

The Psychonauts situation doesn't make any sense, especially since Double Fine has already updated the DRM free version because of their Humble Bundle!

Can someone maybe tweet DoubleFine or maybe even Tim Schafer? I remember that Tim Schafer replied when someone asked if he'd be open to selling Stacking and Costume Quest on GOG.

Maybe there should be, but that's up to the contracting parties to decide and would be part of the consideration provided by, or bargained for by the parties involved in such contract.

First of all, the developer rarely has a contract with the retailer. It's the publisher who has contracts with both the developer and the distributor. (That said, most indie titles are self-published, so it's not as clear-cut anymore.)

But in general, the publisher funds the development of a patch, and its the publisher's responsibility to send this patch to the distributors. Unfortunately, this often gets forgotten, especially when a game got published on many platforms. The smaller distributors then have to constantly bug the publisher about the patches, which costs time and ultimately money.

Should distributors include a clause in their contracts that guarantees them to be supplied with patches? Well, it would certainly be nice, but it's not realistic. The publisher is almost always the stronger partner in the publisher/distributor-relationship. Apart from Steam, no distributor is in a position to force such a clause on its partners. Distributors are usually happy if a publisher even considers them as a partner, they certainly aren't in a position to make demands.

In practice, however, the problem can usually be resolved. With regard to GamersGate, when a patch is missing there, you can write to to support, and they will obtain it. If you didn't get an answer (as you wrote), try again, perhaps something went wrong with your first ticket. You can also write to the publisher directly, and ask them to send the latest patch to GamersGate.

Usually this will work. There are still exceptions, like King Arthur 1. For this game, for some reason, the latest patch (v1.07) was only released on Steam. People who bought the game outside of Steam were stuck with v1.06. This caused a lot of frustration among players. For whichever reason, the v1.07 patch stayed Steam exclusive. However, GamersGate eventually gave the people who bought the game a free Steam key for it. I now have the Steam-free version in my library (which can be patched to v1.06), and a key for the Steam version (which can be patched to v1.07). That's far from perfect, but at least I have a choice.

The legal obligation is already there. Pretty standard stuff actually. But I guess retailers don't want to risk business contracts by enforcing patching on some 3rd rate games.

You sound awfully sure. Can you point me to an actual law that requires the rights holder of a game to make all subsequent patches available to all retailers of said game?