I am noticing that the concept of a "GOG" seems to have changed.
At one time, people would refer to what games should become GOG's as if to say that it is an honor to be included, sort of like the Criterion Collection of DVD's.
However, with releases like Constructor 2, Bloodrayne 2, and VR Soccer, I wonder if that's still the case.
I read in an interview that GOG often includes games due to publisher pressure in order to get other games...should GOG perhaps abandon this philosophy?
My ideal GOG would be one where you could largely buy games on faith, if you liked a particular genre.
I woudl also like to see Amazon-style reccomendations based on other customers buying behavior. The current system seems very vague.
Thoughts?
BTW, remember, this *is* Anjohl, so no rational responses allowed. Just follow your kneejerk isntinct.

wat? I*love* bloodrayne 2!

planet Earth is blue and there's nothing i can do...
Also, BloodRayne 2 is [edit] awesome.
Edit: Swearing removed for the sake of the youngsters we keep around for...why do we keep them around again ?

GOG should get as many games as it can.
Each game will bring people here, and the more downloads the more likely GOG will be able to get those big name games that we all really want.

At this point, we already know that the concept of "old" is open to interpretation around here, there's no reason the rest of it couldn't also be interpreted differently. What you consider to be a "good" and what I consider to be one could be two completely different things. Heck, there are tons of "games" already here that don't fit my personal definition of what a game should be (key to the definition: a game should be fun, point and clicks and RTS are not fun to me). GOG hasn't lowered its standards at all, its just open to standards that might suit the widest variety of potential customers.

Different people like different games...what is a train wreck to some IS a great game to others (and the Bloodrayne games are a good example of that). Also, it's pretty likely distribution deals have a 'good with the bad' aspect to them. "Oh, you want that game? Okay, but you also need to take this one."

We've had this argument before. I'm certain because I had to google to find out what the hell a criterion collection was. If I remember rightly, the general consensus of the replies was "to each his own"

Not possible, unless you make the selections yourself. There is no such thing as a universally good game. Someone will always hate it. Although I do believe there is such a thing as a universally bad game, I don't think there are any of them on GOG. I don't recall seeing any release here without someone going "Wheee! I love this game! Fantastic addition!"

This topic has been raised a few times. With the release of Bloodrayne for example one guy stated how he felt the title was unworthy of inclusion into the GOG library.
Where do you draw the line on what is a good game? Even on games considered 'good' opinions will still differ. If GOG was more stringent on which particular titles they sell then i think they would only mean a drought of new releases.
And for a nominal sum of money even a dodgy old shooter or slash 'em up becomes a lot of fun, for a short while at least.
I guess i would rather have the choice than not. And i simply won't buy what i don't like.

Thats taking things out of context...
Far as I can tell everything they release at least some people love.
The real issue is bugs.

#1.) I agree with Wishbone and others. I would love to pick up POR2 if GOG had it (I love this game, even though it is on the top failures of all time lists sometimes), and then someone else would come along and be like.. oh.. an RPG.. lemme get that... and then be like WTF did I just buy. One mans trash is anothers treasure.... :-)
#2.) What is nice about GOG is that there are other user reviews to go by. If a game has some dubious reviews, then perhaps it is best to do some reasearch first before picking it up.

GOG's standards are:
XP & Vista compatibility
DRM-free
Same price for everyone
That's pretty much it. I've never seen anything about the quality of the games, save for from the community. Yes, a lot of the chaff from yesteryear won't wind up here, but unless it's broken and isn't worth fixing then there's nothing to stop lesser titles finding their way here.
I while I would assume that a game on GOG is more likely to work than a game on Steam, I wouldn't assume it was going to be of higher quality.

Well, I recall reading somewhere on the site that the games have to be considered GOOD to be included, at least as an unofficial policy. A lot of the games of "dubious" quality around here do have cult followings - and let's not forget the vast amount of adventure games for sale. :P

Ever since their closed beta, GOG already have a few of not-so-old, not-so-good games, so I don't think this is a new trend.

Exactly. They talk about a game being "definitely worthy of becoming a "Good Old Game".