any game devs that refuse to patch there game that are buggy should not be allowed to sell there games here, there needs to be a strict policy on updating games on GOG so there actually playable, relating to t he new patch for saints row 2 deep silver said there only gonna patch steam so anyone who bought the game on GOG wasted there money

its stuff like this which is making me thinking piracy is a good thing, why should i support devs who dnt giv e a shit about gog customers but still willing to take there money. shows how the gaming market has changed, in the 90's devs actually cared about making good games and caring about its user base, now its all lets do little work and just t ake there money.


i hope people support piracy cos 1. it will stick it to DRM and 2. it will show the devs people wont take this shit, its not about playing games for free its about taking a stand against big corporations and DRM

fuck DRM and fuck these greedy devs

Agreed, it's infuriating when developers treat GOG-customers like stepchildren. If I know beforehand I'm going to get an inferior product here I'll take my business elsewhere.

I mostly support your reasoning.

Sadly, I'm pretty sure most publishers will choose to take the wrong lesson from it and decide they should only release on steam because "they don't pirate our games" (ha! As if)

Also, "we need stronger, more intrusive and annoying DRM"

And so the developers will perpetuate their circle of dickery leading to customers refusing to support them leading to them being even bigger dicks to customers...

finally moobot makes a post that isnt stupid

+1 man.

OP, didn't you make this very same thread a few months ago? A couple of people definitely did.

The only fair answer is still the same now as it was then: no, GOG should not prohibit devs from selling games that lack patch parity between Steam and GOG... unless GOG is also and with equal measure going to prohibit the selling of games that lack Achievement parity.

Otherwise, if GOG does as the OP suggests, then GOG will be condemning one form of mistreatment of its customers whilst turning a blind eye to another and thus implicitly endorsing that other.

And why should one form of mistreatment of GOG customers be privileged over another and deemed as worthy of attention, but another be completely ignored?

That's not fair to customers who would rather have GOG address the Achievement mistreatment which is a much larger and more widespread problem than is the patch mistreatment.

Because Achievements are not game breaking. If you are lacking a patch that fixes game breaking bugs, then the game should not be sold. Who cares about achievements? Every ten seconds or so in a game just say one of these at random: "Bling: You killed an enemy!" "Bling: You jumped over a pit!" "Bling: You killed a boss!" "Bling, You scored 80,000 points!" "Bling: You finished act 1!"
EDIT: I'm ok to fix game breaking bugs or even patch disparity even if it means cheevos go away all together. Just fix the games. Then we can worry about pointless vanity accessories to the game.

You keep insisting on this utterly stupid point yet every time you're replied to you don't give any counter arguments. Makes me think you don't have anything to support it other than your personal preference.

And personal preferences are a funny thing, everyone has their own. Why should yours be followed instead of someone else's?

Come back when you have arguments to back your position. So far I see no reason why lack of achievements is anything to picket fences for

You heart seems to be in the right place, but if I may respond:

1st bit: Games can and are often playable without the latest version, sometimes a newer version breaks things or makes a game unplayable for some, sometimes an update just adds fluff like correcting some spelling in game text that was barely noticeable or similar minor things, etc.

Of course, this isn't always the case, but it is one reason why I don't think Gog shouldn't sell games that aren't updated to the latest versions/drop rights holders & games. I also think people should be allowed to play any game or buy any game if Gog choose to sell it and removing devs/games for various reasons should be for very serious infractions/a last resort if done by Gog at all.

2nd bit: Piracy can be good to preserve & play games no one sells, but the problem you notice with devs sadly happens with many companies(even the older ones we grew up with)....i.e. they get too big and start caring more about maximizing profits. This can also be the result of their duty to any shareholders to do so(profits maximization is one thing you sometimes are required to do when you have shareholders in some countries).

3rd bit: Pirating won't get them to stop DRM/other bad practices. They will just point at the stats and use them to justify more drm/such measures, or at the best nothing will get done. You need to vote with your wallet and promote such games online/irl whose devs do good to get the biggest bang for your buck(financially and promotionally speaking for said devs)

4th bit: Agreed, except all devs usually get greedy over time....it's a part of business/getting too big.
=================================Achievements are nice, but not needed to game like some patches are(to fix some bugs that make some user's copies unplayable).....to me, they are just a flash-in-the-pan trend like other gimmicks, even if I do like them a bit & don't mind collecting them on occasion.

Lol... achievements more important than patches, so funny!

To be fair, they should still be on the list of things they should keep parity with(for those who like them).....albeit a decent bit lower than patches & updates.