kohlrak: There actually is a trend. I know you don't respect that mentality, becaouse you don't see the issues with the multiplayer and teh like, but that doesn't change that it's there's a trend. GWENT is just the icing on the cake, not the central argument (hence "and").
Timboli: Well if it is just MP related, then yes, I haven't seen the trend, because I don't indulge.
But neither have I really seen anyone complaining here about other games, like they do about GWENT.
That's because GWENT is strictly a non-offline game. People make exceptions for single player if they ahve no interest in multiplayer.
And yes when it comes to mentality, I primarily see GOG as a single-player store, and multiplayer is a bonus. Many games echo that by not even providing MP here at GOG, even though they have it at Steam and elsewhere.
So because it's not something I actively engage in, it is mostly below the radar for me, and at best I can only go by what others say at the forum or in reviews ... which I have a fair handle on.
Well, for some games, it's because of the reliance on the steam API for mutliplayer (epecifically because port-forwarding is an issue for many customers and developing code using sockets as a backend is too much for developers in this gamemaker/unity filled environment). Of course, i blame the devs for not thinking far enough into the future on that. Which, then, makes sense why GOG's trying to make galaxy so strong: they're trying to keep up with steam's API. I'm waiting for steam to take a shot at GOG over forking their API without license. I'm not sure how much merit the case would have, but i can't see steam not taking a shot once galaxy is forced on us (effectively giving steam a killshot if they win, though it would be a hard case for steam to make).
kohlrak: Either way, i'm starting to get some more info on GOG and their shennanigans, and i'm not liking what i'm hearing, but i can't post or talk in PMs about it. Not necessarily DRM, related, though. I really don't foresee gog being here in 5 years without some really fancy product that can score financial support from companies like epic.
Well that's all hearsay right now, and I have said similar in the past as a possibility, because I don't think GOG has been going all that well. Whether GOG fails to stay the distance, because only DRM-Free doesn't pay enough, remains to be seen. They've lasted 12+ years without having to give up their central premise yet, so I will continue to give them the benefit of the doubt. In all likelihood they may move to a hybrid model, where we see some DRM games here, even if only through Galaxy ... that certainly seems on the cards with Epic.
More specifically, my info comes from one of the companies that has delisted a game on GOG. They had a few complaints, but 2 really, really stood out to me. The complaints really adds context to their curation, and their general attitude towards devs, which reinforces my mind to tell devs to avoid GOG altogether (not because GOG's going out of business, but just their attitude). I foresee alot more games being delisted in the near future (and now i see why so many have the past year or so). It's not that DRM-free doesn't pay enough, so much as it costs too much, and it's GOG, not DRM-free itself. GOG's on a highhorse and it needs bucked off, preferably into some mud so they remember how small they really are. I totally get, now, why GOG rated so low to developers in the one survey that was posted some time back.