Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

gog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 574 posts

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#441

Post by nottorp »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #189
rantallion wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don't because too many people pirate games to make that a viable business. This is what we've been told since time eternal but it seems more likely that those pirating are those that wouldn't be inclined to pay at all.

people are commenting in this HN thread like piracy hasn't been thought about, deeply, by many thousands of people for ages in the games industry. i could link to numerous people writing very wise things about it - the CEO of a certain competitor to GOG and Steam comes to mind, he basically wrote the Luther thesis on games piracy - but then i'd be downvoted.

If it's Epic, they went the predatory free to play route and are financed by gacha money from Tencent.

If it's EA or Ubisoft, they make boring design-by-commitee "AAA"s - lately with IAPs thrown in - and I don't even look at what they release.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#442

Post by BadBadJellyBean »

tracerbulletx wrote: post #92
fooqux wrote: post #47

I used to love gog. I purchased a bunch of stuff back when they were talking a big game around supporting Linux with their Galaxy client. But while gog was talking, Valve was actually doing . Building an actual Linux client. Making multiplayer actually work. Not to mention all the work they've done with Proton and upstreamimg graphics drivers. I hope gog succeeds. I just value Linux gaming support over not having DRM…

I think it's perfectly realistic to think there is a substantial risk of losing library content you've bought on Valve in the next 20 years. Don't know what the odds are, but they're greater than zero.

I will pirate every game I have in my steam library that I want to play if that is ever the case. Without the a moment of hesitation. I payed for it.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#443

Post by nottorp »

SpEd3Y wrote: post #430
georgeecollins wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually honestly a really good point. Things are changing. In real dollar terms games are getting cheaper and the size of the market has grown so I don't know if maybe a DRM free store will soon support premium games. I can't think of a game available on GoG that sells on Steam for > $20. I am sure one exists, but in general these are older, cheaper games. You could also point to games that the Epic store giv…

> I can't think of a game available on GoG that sells on Steam for > $20. I am sure one exists, but in general these are older, cheaper games. Fair point but I think there are quite a few of those: Baldur's Gate 3 comes to mind. Expedition 33, Kingdom Come: Deliverance II even Cyberpunk, but it's true that nowadays Cyberpunk is a ~20$ title. But not sure these were on GoG day 1. Or they added them after ~1 year after…

>even Cyberpunk, but it's true that nowadays Cyberpunk is a ~20$ title

Newsflash: Witcher and Cyberpunk are CD Projekt Red titles. CD Projekt Red was the initiator of GoG and owned it 100% until 2 days ago.

Every CD Projekt game was available on GoG from day zero.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#444

Post by nottorp »

Ekaros wrote: post #69
apetresc wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand your figures. What is "32 thousand PLN", surely their entire annual profit for all of 2024 was not literally 32K PLN (approx. 9K USD)? Is this measured in millions? And whatever they're measured in, surely 32K to 910K in the span of a year is considered excellent progress?

No it was actually just circa 9 thousand Euros from GOG.COM. And it seems there was period of having potential loss of million PLN as well in Q3 of 2024 I think. So it looks quite variable based on which products release. See: https://www.cdprojekt.com/en/wp-content/uploads-en/2025/11/c... Starting from page 28.

You mean they're not charging from some Luxembourg subsidiary any more?

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#445

Post by ManlyBread »

carra wrote: post #385
ManlyBread wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GOG is no different, you're still renting licenses and GOG still has the right to revoke your license, effectively making your "offline installer" no different from a game downloaded from myabandonware or a similar website.

Pretty different, actually. You don't have to worry about possible malware, and you get to support the developers of games you like (aka "vote with your wallet"). Also even if you get your license revoked it's not such a big deal as in other stores, where in some cases they may even delete the game from your devices remotely, without warning. The offline installer is a guarantee for you as a consumer.

Malware is easy to avoid if you know where to download from and if you engage in the herculean task of uploading the .exe to something like virustotal.com in case of any doubts. Not like it matters much anyway seeing how there are examples of GOG games using cracks from the internet anyway.

Supporting developers is a weak argument considering that GOG's claim to fame is that they're selling old games where the development studio no longer exists or has been bought out by a corporate entity like EA.

Revoking my license isn't a big deal? I paid real money for the game.

The offline installer is about as much of a guarantee of anything as a pirated ISO is.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#446

Post by Hamuko »

GaryBluto wrote: post #53
aeyes wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What game was a colossal flop? Cyberpunk was released too early but they kept on delivering patches and then the players game. It's their highest earning title.

IIRC they fixed various bugs but they didn't fix the broken promises. The biggest problems with Cyberpunk were architectural, things that would basically require redesigning the game to match what was promised.

>The biggest problems with Cyberpunk were architectural, things that would basically require redesigning the game to match what was promised.

86% of all-time Steam reviews for Cyberpunk 2077 are positive, and if you only look at recent reviews, it's 94% positive.

I don't think the game has architectural problems that prevent it from being a massive success.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#447

Post by slfnflctd »

Shacklz wrote: post #348
prmoustache wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are the first person I hear that seems to care about that.

I typically think of myself (and try to act like) a rather rational person. The amount of hours of my life that I've done silly, mindless and occasionally annoying things because some Steam achievement required it is something I can't quite square with that. There's something oddly satisfying about getting them. It's certainly not a primary purchase decision factor but I've not bought games because they did not come…

I can take them or leave them, but maybe because I don't care much I feel like I get net enjoyment from them. Especially the funny ones (e.g. dying in an unusual way).

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#448

Post by fc417fc802 »

sokoloff wrote: post #406
BrenBarn wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say you or me, I said anyone . They need someone to believe them, otherwise no one will care when they complain about lost sales.

That’s my point: they don’t need people to care. They just need law makers to support IP/DRM laws that allow them to continue to operate. (I made games for a while at a small studio; I understand some of the pressures that studios are under and don’t support piracy of games.) And they can get that support without publicly releasing detailed time-series sales data.

It doesn't add up though. If they were actually dependent on DRM as described then broad public support would be a massive benefit to them. Yet seemingly none of the many studios out there publicize such data. And this comment section is full of hand waving about "well I can't provide actual data but I talked to someone who said ..." it sure looks like BS to me.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#449

Post by ManlyBread »

squigz wrote: post #435
ManlyBread wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It amazes me that people nowadays know so little about piracy that this is somehow touted as a solution.

GP wasn't being serious.

I've seen this sentiment repeated enough times on reddit that I no longer can tell the difference.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#450

Post by fc417fc802 »

nottorp wrote: post #436
mindcandy wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My source is first and second hand reports from management of game companies having worked in the industry for decades. But, they don’t make numbers like that public. The best public report I can find is https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S18759... which shows a median difference 20% of revenue for games where Denuvo is cracked “quickly” but also no significant difference if Denuvo survives for at…

> which shows a median difference 20% of revenue for games where Denuvo is cracked “quickly” but also no significant difference if Denuvo survives for at least 3 months. So how did they measure the difference? They released one title with Denuvo then erased everyone's memories about it and released it again without? Because if you compare different titles I don't know what you base that percentage on.

Clearly they didn't. If such definitive data existed they would publicly release it because it would be in their own best interests to do so.

Notice that GP amounts to "well I can't actually provide any evidence, but if I could then here's what it would look like".

Post reply on HN