I don't understand it. Why releasing the game needs that kind of justification? It's online store, so it doesn't bear any cost - you don't have to physicaly fill your shelves with product that possibly won't sell well enough. Releasing stuff means that you will always gain something and lose nothing.

well we got 140.
I believe this game will be on GOG too once it gets sold well like 140. :P

It is pretty clear there are expenses - Unlike Humble Bundle or Steam, Gog is more than a static upload channel:
Significant man power required to support for the game, QA, testing builds with Galaxy (and without) on multiple Oses and create installers. Some titles also require to be given Fair Price reimbursement if prices differ from US which goes from Gog's pocket.
Gog is a smaller company, even the legal fees required to set a distribution deal with a small Indie may be significant
(I assume steam is holding most lawyers on retainer no matter how many titles they address, while Humble Bundle gets a nice discount due to being partly charity. Other distributes either ride on Stream/Ubisoft/Etc's agreements when only offer keys or have similar problem when addressing direct downloads - which is one reason these are quite rare.)

As I said before, expenses are only part of the reason, as Gog also has a tendency to Spotlight new additions.

Indeed. From what I've seen on Steam reviews the game suffers from significant balance issues in the single-player campaign (somewhat similar to Darkest Dungeon) that the developer can't or won't fix.

I don't want to deny your statement, because indeed part of reviews mentioned about lack of balance.

However, basing on my observation (both of reviews and steam forum, which I've observed almost from game's release) I would tell, that quite a lot of negative reviews were made due to

a)high difficulty level
or
b)units which are constantly missing etc.

However, it turned out (mainly in discussions on forum, but not only), that a lot of players who written negative reviews, didn't know about basic mechanics of the game (which were presented by both in-game tutorial as well as in manual included directly in the game). And with ignoring such things like light/darkness or direction where units (both attacking and defending) are facing game is indeed making impression of unfair etc.

I'm personally surprised, because aside from light and direction, rest of rules seems to be rather similar to those in other turn-based tactic games (e.g. terrain, obstacles etc). Author lowered difficulty level for easy mode, but I would say that it's generally rather oriented on people who already have some experience with such games. It's much easier than Drums of War anyway.

Of course there are still voices (amongst negative reviews), which are mentioning about mediocre replayability (which I can understand), but still - it seems that reviewers who didn't understood basic rules (despite the fact, that game is presenting them) made the final statistic between positive and negative reviews (on steam) comparable to rather mediocre (or "not bad but not great")game.

Just wanted to mention, that I'm defending this game as "intermediate" player in this genre. So maybe looking at it from beginner's perspective, conclusion would be different. Nevertheless, I'm still on position that game is presenting much higher level than "just mediocre game" and totally deserve to be published on GOG :)

Perhaps GOG should put all games that are submitted for approval up for popular vote? We could even have an Electoral College system to make everything fair ;)

deleted

Oh my GOG, was that worse than Fantasy General or what?
Sad news.

Try and sell Warbanners to me. It looks a lot like Battle For Wesnoth but worse, so I'll be using that as a comparison point.

As a sidenote, Wesnoth is free and open source.