Sure I even said as much myself - I've got a back-catalogue of games from GOG some of which I may never get to. But like SimonG said, I feel like I am supporting a business whose model I like, so I don't feel too stupid about it. :) And one day I may get to those games ... since they're DRM-free I'll always have them!

Hm, I think you're referring to Structure Surprise: Sequel

Well, if they'd suddenly release Chains of Satinav here despite all that's been said before about the necessity of it being a Steam-exclusive, now that would be some big announcement to get excited about. :P

The games mentioned in the article could already pass off as good old games in my books, since by now most people probably own them or even have played through them already, but it's still nice to see them in the catalogue.

I'm curious about the new price points though (and whether there will be price points or individual prices).

You mean the one they dropped after the customers complained loudly about it?

It's funny because I'm sure that's a lot of their userbase. I certainly barely touch/have touched the games I bought here. I mostly bought them for nostalgia, and because I thought they were worth having a digital copy of, and that it would be nice to have one of those for the day that I *may* want to play them.

Which I never understood myself (unless it didn't generate sales). I dind't like it for my own buying habits but there are people who like to collect games even more than just play them and that sale type seemed perfect for them. Maybe there aren't enough of them to justify its continued existence ...

I usually don't react to much things I read. Especially on the internet, but that really ticked me off wrong. And I've been called a lot of bad things to the face and I don't lose my cool.

For me, they mark a supporter as an idiot. And around a third (at least) of GOGs sales are games that are being rebought by gamers who already own or played the games they buy.

The much bigger gaff is the editorial highlighting of that sentence. Which honestly makes me wonder if they got to check the finished interview, in its published form.

I could be overreacting, but this is a cheap shot from a company I actually like and support. If this would have come from EA, it would have gotten a "meh" from me (and an extra thread from at least six other forum members ;-) ).

Well, that's the thing.

He's human. He either misspoke, or said something that didn't translate well to English. Remember that he isn't a native English speaker, so maybe he tried to say something in Polish that didn't translate very well.

Hopefully we'll get answers soon. I don't think Marcin intended to offend anyone.

yeah, that really put a dent in the Call of Duty sales... oh, wait!

i haven't seen the quote in question but i'm annoyed by the constant jabs at the competition, primarily at Steam. is this necessary? GoG can't compete with Steam. hell, GamersGate has the largest range of digital games available, and they don't have anywhere near Valve's market share. so why constantly try and make yourself look better than the other guys? 30 million PC gamers think Steam is at the very least an alright digital distribution platform. most think it's great. why try and piss off 30 million potential customers? of course, GoG staff don't have Steam accounts, amirite? oh, wait!

You mean like sutting down the website for three days? ;-)

Consider the impact of this statement without the goodwill GOG has earned itself in the past years.

It's nearly midnight in Europe, so I don't expect any bluetext until tomorrow.

Well I think he was trying to say that it is the other companies where the nerds are not back on top are milking gamers not GOG.com, but I do agree that was badly phrased and frankly could apply to any company that ever runs any kind of sales ever (especially since there isn't a try before you buy or return policy on digital games - even, or especially DRM-free GOG ones :P). It was a PR mistake, but not a big one. Sometimes these offhand comments in interviews do get people into trouble but usually only if they feed a perceived pattern about the person: like as you mentioned Bobby Kotick making statements about profits when people perceive him to be a cold hearted bastard who doesn't care about computer games themselves.

It is very good news.

GOG is certainly capable of PR mistakes (though hey it's how I found out GOG existed! :P), I just don't feel this was a big one.

The way I read that MI statement, I thought it was more from the perspective of (indie?) developers who actually want gamers to play, experience, enjoy and cherish their creations, instead of just taking their money (which would be the main interest of publishers and stores, I suppose). Meaning what's good for the store and publisher is not necessarily good for the developers, and maybe not even for the gamer, if their interests go beyond the financial side.

I believe some indie developers actually stated that they prefer a small fanbase who acknowledges the worth of their games to a large profit that comes with the side-effect of a lot of people nagging and devalueing the game and the effort that was put into it. I won't judge if that's an honest concern or hypocritical but some seem to feel this way.

So I think it was just another statement aimed at stressing that CDProjekt and GOG are closer to the people who love games and don't just sell them. Whether that's true and if this statement was a little misleading, clumsy or even arrogant is debatable, but personally I see no reason whatsoever to let it influence my behavior towards GOG. Then again, so far I've only bought games in order to add them to my collection or try out, not because I wanted to do GOG a favor. (That was a beneficial side-effect at best.)