GOG.com to start offering more new(er) games!

After a successful trial offering The Witcher 2 in addition to the old games GOG normally sells, GOG will be offering more games that are fewer than three years old in the future. It doesn't sound like they'll have a bunch of new releases, but it sounds to me like they'll start getting a glut of one-year-old games and selling them for under $20.

Report: Good Old Games to offer Good New(ish) Games | Joystiq

I'm immensely excited about this. GOG is my favorite online retailer of games. I prefer it over Steam, and I *definitely* prefer it over Origin. The interface is simple, the games load quickly (with Steam, there's always that delay as it connects to Steam), and they're not crazy psycho like Origin, who denies you access to your games if you get banned from their forums.

 

I'll buy Witcher 3 from GoG

 

DRM Free > Everything else.

Love buying old games that actually work on modern Windows OS.
Looking forward to see what new games the might sell there.

 

I want, no, I demand Red Alert 2 on GOG .

 

I would buy in a heartbeat all the older Codemaster's racing games like Colin McRae 3, 4, and 5, GRiD, DiRT, DiRT 2 and 3 as well as there Race Pro games. Please don't get the idea I like racing games cause I don't.

 

I love GOG.com! It my favorite online digital retailer. I am glad I did my part to expand this company because I bought Witcher 2 from there!

Please sell the battle for middle earth II, i want that game so bad!

 

While this is ridiculously harsh- stopping someone who paid for a game from playing it...if someone gets so stupid and bent out of shape that they get banned from a public forum, they need to seriously reevaluate their priorities and be sentenced to a day tied to a chair while being pelted with spitwads by a 10 year old. Just sayin

 

I dunno, I've been banned from an internet forum after losing my cool in a personal dispute with a moderator. It's not like I posted pr0n or threatened the President or anything. It was just a personality conflict that got out of hand on both ends. If I lost the ability to play games I had paid for because I got into a fight with a mod on a forum, I'd be furious.

 

I got banned twice from the WoW forums.

 

It wasn't my finest hour, but I was generally pretty well regarded. The nubs just didn't take kindly to being classified as such.

 

If that ever happen to me, I would sue the company or contact BBB to get my money back.

 

I totally agree with you.

 

And I bet if someone pushed it, they'd win. It seems like a breach of contract to me. When you purchased X game, you never agreed that you could only play X game if you stayed in good standing on some internet forum. Instead, you bought a copy of the game for yourself to be able to enjoy, no other conditions.

But how many hours of their time would they waste trying to get $50 back? That's the problem with an abuse like that. Steal small enough sums from large enough groups of people, and it's not in anyone's self-interest to stand up for their rights. It's just economically sensible.

But enough about Origin and their craziness...this is about GOG.com, which in my opinion, is the unsung hero of online game distributions. No DRM, easy to download games, easy to re-download games, plenty of bonus content provided with the games (from PDF manuals and reference cards to soundtracks), reasonable prices...GOG is a dream come true. If they start selling one-year-old games at $20 or even $30, they'll probably become by #1 source for buying games (since I play primarily single-player, I have no problem with waiting a year and then picking up a game once the price has gone down and the bugs have been fixed).

 

I agree that being banned from the forums shouldn't equate to being locked out of your account - it's just another egregious example of EA's "customer last" mentality - but I suspect that if they're doing it, it's part of the EULA for the Origin client and possibly the games as well, so you probably wouldn't have a leg to stand on unless you could argue that it was unfair or unreasonable for you to be banned on the forums. I haven't read the pertinent documents, but they're a huge company and they're not going to risk a lawsuit over something silly like that.

 

I've always been suspicious of the enforceability of terms hidden away in an EULA that you don't even see until after you've purchased the product and broken the shrinkwrap. In Oregon, someone generally can contest the enforceability of a contract provision by asserting that it's both substantively unconscionable (and losing the right to play a game you purchased for conduct on an internet forum unrelated to the game strikes me as substantively unconscionable) and procedurally unconscionable (and buried in an EULA that you cannot renegotiate and do not even see until after purchase strikes me as procedurally unconscionable). I haven't done any research into how this general rule of contract law applies to EULA terms, but my gut reaction is that you could fight it, even if the EULA on its face says you're SOL.

 

EULAs aren't the word of God. If you signed an agreement saying you agreed to let me kill you, the courts wouldn't be like "welp, looks like he... signed his life away (sunglasses)"