Quoting: KlaasIt's hard to say if that is good or bad.

Depends on what Kiciński intends to do with this. You don't spend that much if you're not expecting your purchase to be profitable. For CDP it very well could have been a side thing used for marketing (and up to a point a distribution platform) and positive PR more so than for profit. I'd say that based on what's been disclosed publicly... as of the dumping GOG no longer maths as a business.

Unless Kiciński truly just wants a pet company that basically and barely funds itself, and doesn't really make anything... for the good of game preservation? Uh, yeah, sure.

I've been expecting something like this for a while now, the signs have been there for years, and while I do hope this is good news... I know better.

Of course, there's still the remote chance the new owner has a solid plan that's going to work out and that GOG will continue somehow. Perhaps as a legitimate Steam competitor in some way. CDP fumbled GOG and past a point was clearly disinterested in trying, even if they pretended otherwise, so maybe this is actually preferable to closing GOG down. That would've been... not great for CDP(R)'s image which I'm sure they are acutely aware of.

Also, let's consider a scenario in which CDPR adds a store to its launcher - which they've been laying the groundwork for for years now - and GOG ceases to be the default distribution platform for CDPR's games. Steam is a bigger slice of pie overall, but whatever traffic that generated disappearing from GOG (even if GOG still keeps selling the games which it will) is probably going to hurt the platform that's a bit too close to breaking even to call it a stable venture.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: xavi

Quoting: suchOtherwise, I liked what I played of Hollow Knight and will get back to it someday, but I'm not that into the idea of a harder sequel so I have zero interest in Silksong. I do really like the devs, though, so if I do finish Hollow Knight and feel up for more...

I've 100 % Silksong and... yes! it is more difficult than Hollow Knight. But the standard end (end of act2) is not very difficult. If you want more then you start act 3 and it gets lot more difficult.

When you see an area is difficult or it could be a boss... better do another route if you are not prepared. Encourages exploration that is very good on this game.

Now in my second run I'm 90% and I continue enjoying it a lot.

Note in my first run some Act 3 bosses needed 20 tries... and now with 2-5 tries it is enough. In 2nd run I'm with Reaper crest that makes everything easier.

Yeah, I'm not the type to play a game several times in quick succession, and I don't care for maxing games, achievements etc. That said, I usually do want to experience what I can reasonably presume is the entire game, so I would feel compelled to continue in this case.

Not a soulslike fan, either. I largely do enjoy exploring in those games as well as the design outside of combat, but the whole package there just isn't satisfying for me to overcome the bits I don't care for.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: StellaI should get through my massive backlog before buying anything new 😆

Especially since at least some of these will be cheaper next year. No rush.

Unless, of course, there's grounds to expect a "remaster" which is in fact a downgrade that also involves the superior original release getting delisted. Curious times we live in, yes?

That said, I grabbed Kingdom Come 2 when I still need to finish 1. That's a "support the devs" case for me. Unique voice, hope they make more games.

Otherwise, I liked what I played of Hollow Knight and will get back to it someday, but I'm not that into the idea of a harder sequel so I have zero interest in Silksong. I do really like the devs, though, so if I do finish Hollow Knight and feel up for more...

Expedition 33 just doesn't look appealing to me with its absurdly high concept idea and silly art style, and the combat system isn't helping its case. Also, I'm now sick of it just by existing on the Internet. Wouldn't be fair to the game if I played it in the height of the furor. Maybe a 70% off for me, but I'd need to run out of games to play AND be starved for jrpgs (of which I have a healthy - and growing - backlog) even then.

Dispatch - don't care.

The shooty thing I already forgot the title of - ...

Basically what I'm saying is that I seek to incur the wrath of the Dorito Pope.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Neat(h).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'm tired (of cards), boss.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: walther von stolzing

Quoting: CerberonDonate? To a store??

Putting this type of work under a dedicated 'game preservation foundation' would've at least looked better, I guess.

They're in the business of selling games, but it so happens that because of their early focus (from before the KFC-like rebrand) a good chunk of their catalogue is old, i.e. the preservation part needs to happen if they want to keep selling functional product. That's not even a knock against them, that's just business.

A GOG game preservation foundation would certainly be walking the walk. I'm not holding my breath, they're in no condition (basically breaking even, probably cutting costs to keep it this way) or position (they're public) to make that happen.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Tethys84I really wish all remasters would be given to Nightdive. No one comes anywhere close to their quality. Aspyr, of all developers, doing remasters is nuts. They were exclusively known for porting games to Mac all the way back to the 1990s. I don't know when they started doing projects like this.

Blade Runner: "Enhanced" Edition would have a word with you. That one is a proper disaster. MVG damaged Nightdive's (and his own) reputation singlehandedly there. This is basically THE reason I'm not going in blind with Nightdive. The most recent Blood: Refreshed Supply apparently does Blood's already sloppy prior remaster history justice.

Overall, they seem to be the most competent remaster house around, sure, but they've had their share of sloppy work out. Speculation on my part, but it looks like it largely depends on who's looking over their shoulders. Microsoft/Bethesda? You're getting solid work and proper fixes, and community communication, and probably a free upgrade to boot. Atari? Abandon all hope. Disney? Mostly fine, but you'll be paying a premium no matter what happens there.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Good decision. Why damage the brand further with this... thing?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Looks very much like those Java DOOM and Wolfenstein rpgs.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

So, not that long ago Sarandos openly complained the theatrical model is outdated. Then, around the time of the WB bid he softened and started saying it'll be preserved at WB. Right after the confirmation he began threatening that changes to the release model are coming... and after this recent Paramount bid he's back to keeping the theatrical model at WB, because it works.

Needless to say, consolidation is never good, and Netflix isn't a good fit for WB. Possibly the worst there is as they clearly don't get movies, aren't interested in movies - just content and slop to sell subscriptions - and they will run what's left of the studio into the ground.

What's even more concerning to me are the archives and the potential physical releases.

Paramount is perhaps marginally better from this standpoint.

View this comment - View article - View full comments