I agree that it sounds horrible if quoted like that, but it's also taken out of context. From the post you linked to I gathered that they might have contacted GOG about the game only shortly before its release, putting the pressure on GOG, and in this context it doesn't sound like "we generally wait to see how the games do on Steam" but more like "this is bad timing for us, sorry". Without knowing anything about the game and just looking at its Steam page, I could also imagine the price being an issue. You also have to take into account that GOG's customer base is much, much smaller than Steam's, so while it may appear that GOG is the better place for niche games, I'm not so sure it really is, as Steam reaches a lot more potential customers. And how many of you would actually be ready to pay 20 EUR for a game like Mushihimesama, unless you're die-hard fans of the genre?

I admit I know next to nothing about running a store like GOG, but how much expenses does it take really to bring a new title to GOG? I can see in a physical game store, a number of titles would be an issue because of limited shelf space, but with a digital store I can't see the issue of having as much diversity in your library as possible. I can't imagine GOG would need to sell that many copies of a game to make it profitable. Or am I missing something? Why even bother with how much Steam is selling?

That really depends on your reasons for not buying from Steam in the first place, doesn't it? If you don't buy from Steam simply because you want to support GOG and GOG aren't giving you the chance to do that, then fair enough. But if you don't buy from Steam because you don't like Steam, why does buying it from Steam suddenly become a good idea?

Thank you! I won't buy it right away, but probably before Christmas.

So you mean that if every member would click on anything in the wishlists so all games got ten thousands of votes it would be considered?
I am not protecting anyone or favoring anyone, but ...
I dont really believe it works that way, cause Shadow Watch did not had that much votes, yet it got released on GoG before other games that had thousands, i also think that the wish has gotta be possible and reasonable to get it here, cause you can only wish for everything , and hope it might arrive here.

Sometimes a game with less votes might be easier to get on GOG because the owners arent that picky, usually the bad boys in big publishing know they have the power and these people are often very tough negotiators.

What very top brand new EA games do we have now, drm free? fifa? i dont see fifa, nor sims, i guess some
very profitable games loaded with shiploads of nasty DRM wont be released DRM free that soon, maybe in 10 years when the games arent hot anymore they have a chance.
But do i want to play fifa 2015 drm free at my 80st bday? i guess not :D

So i think the otherside, the companies/devs of the games are the big bad boys, they decide what will be released , when how and where.



regarding steam:

Its very amusing to read all the user posts in the steam forums, most of it is nonsense, but it is very entertaining.
and the games they greenlight, awesome shites, most of it is shites :D
So strip all te crap and i guess they have maybe and thats a maybe 2.000 good decent titles of the so called 7.500 or more.
Also remove all the alpha craps, games that need cash and are bought and dont even gurantee they will ever be released or completed thats wasting money all the way, you would be better off burning the cash or flashing it down the toilet or the drain.

So in the end steam is mainly good to have a laugh and to brighten up when things are not so bright, when you feel sad, had a bad day at the office or had other problems, just go to steam and read the forums there :D

You know that GOG thoroughly test every game they put up for sale, in all the supported OSes and versions, right? I can definitely see certain costs involved in adding a new game to their catalogue, and I can understand them being cautious if they aren't sure they can recover the "investment" in QA prior to a new release.

I certainly don't want GOG to become just another digital store that uploads whatever they're given by devs. Devs who, for all we know, may not even have bothered to check whether their builds work or not.

I'd like to think that people who decide whether a game is good enough for GOG or not could actually read this thread and opinions of the community. In case they don't read (most likely) or don't care, here's a little wishlist feature which includes this thread + list of games we know so far that got rejected by GOG.

http://www.gog.com/wishlist/site/gog_stop_with_rejecting_good_games

It doesn't work this way for old games (where we often have a complicated situation with the licenses) or for AAA games of big publishers that are unwilling to do business with GOG. But here we have a game where the developer is willing to release it on GOG and GOG thinks it's too niche. I'm pretty sure they will reconsider if the game gets a lot of votes in the wishlist.

Favouriting this topic for future white knighting.

+1

I have unresolvable ethical issues with Steam as a service, and as such a release on it is worth nothing to me.

Degica has said they'll go to Humble if they keep being rejected, so if this place doesn't want my money then they won't get it, ironic really as I'm actively trying to give it to them.

So players shouldn't be able to play the game they want to play because some stupid DDs refuse entrance?

Dragon Age 5 won't be on Steam, because Steam refused it (DA2 and its following series), so I shouldn't buy it on Origins just because Steam rejected it?

This is why GOG lunatics are stupid as hell. They can't comprehend simple logic at all.

You're calling someone "stupid as hell" when you haven't even properly understood their post. SirPrimalform isn't saying that nobody should buy from Steam as an alternative when GOG doesn't carry a game. In fact, he explicitly said that doing so is fine for some people. What he's saying is that that doesn't work for those who are unwilling to use Steam in the first place.

And I don't want to use Origins (although it does not do any harm) if I could.

My point still stands.

If I want to play a game, then I'll do it even for platform I don't like. No use hatin' on platforms/DDs etc whatever you call it. What matters me most is I want to play the game I like.

Diablo 4 on Battle.Net and not on Steam? Fine. I'll buy it - have been playing for 3000 hours anyway (D3, priority).

Witcher 3 on GOG only and NOT on Steam? Fine. I'll buy it when it's on discount. (less important)

These two examples should help explain what I wanted to say better.

And I wrote 'lunatics' which is plural. I wasn't pointing at him exclusively. If he belongs to that group then so be it.

I think I get what you mean. You think it's dumb to pass on games just because they're exclusive to one platform or another. That's a fine opinion to have, and of course you should do whatever works for you. However, there are some people, on Steam, GOG, and probably other platforms as well, who have platforms they aren't willing to use. Plenty of GOG users won't buy games that have any form of DRM, and there are many Steam users who have a "no Steam no buy" policy. In the end, it's simply up to personal preferences, and individuals should do whatever is right for them.

I agree with all of you that GOG needs to lighten up an start releasing more smaller indie games. There are a lot of games available DRM-free elsewhere that I would love to buy here. But I can't and that's a shame.