overread: In my mind if GoG were to offer newer game titles the number of releases per week would have to increase in order to allow the new titles to come out without impeding against the re-releasing of older titles on the service.
As for newer titles in general I'd far rather that publishers got their titles onto GoG earlier rather than later - at some point all games become good old games so its in GoG's interest to get as many titles in as early as possible; that way you are preventing the inevitable ever growing backlog of games to be added to the service as time advances.
I do not believe there would be a massive jump of newer games being released to GOG's No DRM mantra.
Yes they might snag some, but not a lot.
(Ubisoft did try and snag gamers with prince of persia; even if it was a very thinly veiled ruse to a)improve uptake of a substandard game [not likely as DRM is a base limiter not an added feature] & B)a closed attempt to justify a harder stance on piracy)
For those not adept at debate, persuasive writing or good old political/corporate manipulative speech i will explain what i meen by a closed attempt for a harder stance.
If a drug company tests another companies product in a non-standard or outright biast way;
or via likening a similar product they create to discredit the value of a drug, in order to boost a more profitable one, what would this meen?
You would be, as someone not savvy to the critique of work or in the assessment of validity in a study be unable to access an informed opinion, though you would still have one.
This means you would make wrong decisions as to your stance on the products in question.
The company would thus be able to keep you unaware of the motive of profit (over benefit) effectively removing informed choice & the widescale outrage that would force the more expensive product out of the market once it is shown to be an attempt at extorting said market.
Not a very good example i know, but a relevant likenning.
The use of a bad egg (prince of persia) with the aim of creating a numerical basis to justify a step towards more draconian DRM isn't that much different.
They discredit the viewpoints that would be raised against them by utilizing a study that they themselves have orchestrated, having created (not naturally generated) the data themselves.
They coerce your viewpoint towards theirs by taking advantage of your inability to get to the facts of the matter, thus making you unable to form a well reasoned opinion and as such one that can be more easily quashed.
This would lead to polarization on the issue that would tie up people who would (if they could make a properly informed opinion) be against the move strongly enough to dissuade it.
Lastly by taking a short term hit on a title with diminishing returns they can attain their long term goal or controlling more tightly the product, meening they can effect things like resale and product pricing as they see fit.
You can relate an argument of validity towards The Witcher 2 as this polarising effect can be used by the market (End Users) to try and effect the issue (trying to get more games non-DRM by forcing a success of a substandard title [no offense but i did not enjoy the witcher 2 though realise i paid so much because it meant something to me to have a non-DRM AAA title succeed]), so you can say we do NEED more non-DRM newer titles for there to be informed decision both in the market and on the corporate level;
but it would not at least in the short to mid term be taken up at the corporate level so enthusiastically with the direction the industry has already picked up momentum in.
Your second point that all games become good old games is entirely wrong and in fact there are a number of games (not the majorative to be fair and honest) on GOG that are not 'Good' as community rating proves and some games that were 'Nice', though not quite good accepted by the community because GOG transcends the difficulty of getting them working on modern operating systems (games you might at least google but wouldn't learn how to write .bat files or program in dos to get working).
An example of a game i personally consider 'Good' is flying carpet 2 that i went and modified the configs and .bat files for the GOG release of magic carpet 1 to play (not everyone will do it, but for some it's worth it).
Similarly not all new titles are hits, in fact there is a lot of not just stagnation in first person shooters today, but quite commonly the dodging of improvement as it may be too expensive to garner the rights to for example include deformable terrain (though this may simply be a function of our horrendous IP laws effectively newtering the natural snowballing of technological advancement [as in one cannot build an improvement when the foundation cannot be bought]).
To Summarize companies will not release a land slide of newer titles because the movement of the industry is on securing their god given right to extort the user base (consolizing for control and killing off the second hand game industry).
So GOG releases will not be overwhelmed and pushed into non existence.
Secondly not all games become good old games; because not all games start off 'Good', or even with the care of the companies (releasing patches and editors) become 'Good'.
