Guys, publishers forces you to take such crap like 2worlds and parallel lines so you would be able also to take some good old games? Cause i don't see any single reason to have 2007 game on good old games shop...

What's your problem? Nobody is forced to buy this game *shock* And maybe the alternative to the release of Two Worlds was "Nothing". Sure... "Nothing" is the oldest game in the history of mankind. Nearly every woman wishes "Nothing" for birthday, wedding anniversary or Valentine's Day. But every single women is disappointed if she gets "Nothing". So it's just an old game, not a good one ;-)
Seriously: I don't think you are authorized to tell the whole world what's a good game. And an old game... What is old? How old are you? If you are 15 or something nearby, Doom 3 is a very old game to you. If you are 25 (like me), Master of Orion, Fallout and Homeworld are old. If you are 35, you start to name titles from C64... Again: What is old?
Sure... Two Worlds is not old. But I think it's exactly, what GOG stands for:
____________________________________________
So what's with this DRM thing?
DRM or Digital Rights Management is a kind of copy-protection technology used by many companies to limit the usage of digital media. Although created to stop pirates from creating illegal copies, in reality the only people who are hurt are the legitimate consumers, stripped of their fair use rights, such as the ability to make backup copies.
We believe that a DRM-free world would be a better place and that's why you won't find any DRMs or other intrusive copy protection in games available at GOG.com.
____________________________________________
CLICK
I was interested in Two Worlds, a few months ago. But I decided not to buy it, because I heard something about its copy protection. Now it is on GOG, without any DRM and I wishlisted it and will buy it as soon as I have finished Fallout. And I hope many others will do so (as well with other games in the future), so that publishers start thinking.

I have checked to see if the copy protection was removed from this game every 8-9 months, obviously it never was. I am quite happy to finally see it DRM free.
I don't care that the game isn't that old, if GOG only dealt with old games then they will become redundant in the years to come and disappear. Releasing some newer games will not only generate new interest but will also stop them from disappearing when the supply of really fantastic old games dries up (which it will).
As for the matter of whether it is good, well that's relative to the player. I am coming in to this expecting shoddy voices, ugly fmv's and average skill trees. I am also expecting to be able to overlook these things and hopefully find a highly unpolished gem.

As real.geizterfahr what is good and what is old varies from person to person. Back in my school days any game than month got "Thats soo yesterday" comments :P
Currently it seems 3 years or older is what GOG staff considers "old". As for good, I don't mind what they offer as long as they don't offer those utter rubish games (we had a review of a game that scored 0 in local games magazine years back :P) or if they do, at least offer it free so we can actually see what utterly horrible game looks like :P *grin*

GOG's name isn't literal, it's a reference to the expression (e.g. "the good old boys", who may be neither old nor good but are still called this). GOG is probably willing to add any half-decent game they can squeeze into a $10 price point.

I agree that they should steer away from crap, but I would prefer that they err on the side of letting the users decide. After playing two worlds a bit, there is nothing obviously terrible about it.

Actually, you're wrong. It's quite literal:
"Feeling nostalgic about the good old days where gameplay reigned supreme? Longing to spend some long, passionate nights with your favorite games of yesteryear? We’re proud to present GOG.com, the site where it's all about Good Old Games and the people that play them." (http://www.gog.com/en/about_us)
That said, another clear part of the GOG philosophy (I believe I read this in one of the paragraph-long blurbs they write whenever they acquire another game) is to give games that got a bad rap the first time around a second chance. Two Worlds fits this model exactly, and I think they were right to get it. It got horrible reviews, but it seems to be a fantastic game so far (I'm a little over an hour into it on a couple different characters). It hadn't been patched yet when it was reviewed, and now that it has, it deserves another chance.
-Gammix