Are we? Take a look at the list and the lists [url=http://www.gog.com/forum/general/completionists_list_of_missing_games_from_gog_series/post1]here. First list is IPs by already signed publishers, the rest are the missing games from series already on GOG. Even if we assume only 10% of those will make it to GOG, that is quite a lot of games.

And the only game that took your fancy this year was SS2? Nothing else of the 41 classics released this year? None of the ones I mentioned in my previous post are games you'd buy?

First question, which are the classic AAA titles, because I doubt any of the classics would be classified as AAA.
Second, the other avenue for GOG to explore is the same they've been exploring for quite some time. Rights to the Back Catalogues of already signed publishers, and signing contracts with publishers not yet here (Disney, Microsoft, Blizzard, Take Two etc). The inclusion of new(ish) worthy games isn't something new to GOG, King's Bounty was released here 2 years after release. The extra thing GOG does is that they do now have day-1 releases, some more succesful than others.

And perhaps that is the best that GOG will ever be able to do with respect to fan-made mods. Maybe even just that type of exposure could motivate those fans to repackage add-on compilations or easier installation interfaces. Baldur's Gate and Planescape already have a great mod community that have done that legwork, but as I previously mentioned there are certainly plenty of games that haven't had the benefit of neatly packaged and easy to install add-on bundles.

Those are indeed some excellent lists of missing games. Plenty on there that I would love to have. The available pool is there, but the rapidity of the all-star releases has slowed. Whether from a lack of available ones to grab or because GoG can't secure the rights. Hence, a ceiling compared to years past. Also hence why GOG "changed" their name. Finally hence why we are seeing more newer, and indie, and day-1 releases.

Maybe I'm mistaken on how I'm utilizing the "IE" in my comments, but SS2 was simply an example, and certainly not meant to be used in exclusivity. I openly admitted that we still see some great older games getting released and have readily agreed with every example that other's have and will submit (IE. Wing Commander, etc. etc.)

At the sake of not arguing pointless semantics and personal opinions, I think we can all agree that titles from say Interplay (BG series, Planescape, IWD, etc.) or Origin (Ultima, WC, etc.) or Sierra (KQ, etc.) or name whatever big selling game/series of yesteryear, are what I mean by AAA titles. Point is that sure there are still some remaining, and GOG has done a fine job getting a large portion of the classics to us. But by and large did they hit the ceiling? Idk, perhaps, as the rate of those caliber of releases diminishes its a fair statement/question.

All examples of publishers with great catalogs of missing games. And I already stated that GOG is doing newer releases and even day-1 releases as an additional revenue stream. You keep voicing your arguments against my comments like you didn't read all of my original post. You're reiterating to me the things that I've basically already said while outlining my case for the true point of the discussion. Which is, what else can be done? What are some other ideas that GoG can explore? I appreciate your comments in defense of GOG, but its not required because I'm not criticizing their past or current efforts.

When it comes to old games, I'm not sure there are any unexplored avenues at this point, apart from the individual cases of tracking down owners who don't know people are still clamouring for their games. Beyond that, owners of old games either know and care and are pursuing a marketing strategy, or know and don't care and are happy to let the titles languish in their IP vaults. In those cases, let them know you want to see the title re-released is about all you can do to change things.

Emulation is viable for bringing other platforms to buyers, but more complex than it first appears. It can be technologically simpler to emulate a console, since it is a fixed piece of hardware to target, whereas a computer may have any number of modifications or iterations. The Amiga is a prime example, as it has several Kickstart and Workbench variants, and different titles run better (or not at under) under different ones. Compounding things is that Kickstart ROMs are still commercially licensed, so this could theoretically add a per-sale cost to every Amiga title released.

I'm not saying these things shouldn't be pursued, but rather that the complexity of some of them can be a deal-breaker. As for new courses of profitability for GOG, I think if they continue to release both good new titles and good old titles, and continue working on improvements to the site, then they should remain steadily profitable. It's the companies that elect to follow drastic stratagems for rapid growth that more frequently crash and burn.

Lastly, one thing that has been mooted before is lower pricepoint games. I could see GOG bringing back some old games at 2.99 and this still being profitable. Some titles I think don't justify a higher pricetag than that, and they make attractive choices for tight budgets or impulse buys. But as I am not privy to the business workings of GOG, it is entirely possible they have done the analysis on this and ruled it out as not feasible.

I really can't see what the "new" is that your thread brings to the table.

You say you want people to pitch ideas for but then you ask people to I'm having a really hard time understanding how it's even possible to discuss ideas of potential revenue streams for GOG without taking into account the feasibility and the relevant logistics of any idea.

Forgive me, but it seems to me that the point of your thread is to discuss your (and others?) ideal GOG - all the stuff you'd like to see GOG do, regardless if it's realistically doable or not. Within this context, the thread title isn't doing GOG any justice.


It also seems to me that you're not doing much reading on this forum as #1 and #3 have been discussed in length before. You could always join the efforts of GOG fans in #2.

Well so far in three pages there have been 2 suggestions:

1) Repackaging fan-made mods/add-ons for classic games. With an alternative suggestion that GOG should just do more Mod Highlight articles rather than go down that rabbit-hole themselves.

2) Emulate legacy platform/console games. Still seems to be a reasonable possibility despite obvious third party (Sega, Nintendo, Sony, etc.) licensing hurdles.

Notable mention and credit to the commenters who posted links for missing IPs and especially the thread for users to chase down abandonware copyright holders.

Do these ideas exhaust the brainstorming possibilities?


I certainly can understand how Amiga or Commodore or Atari (computers) would all be relatively more challenging then say a console emulation. But its still hard to believe that none of the emulated port possibilities are viable or doable? But perhaps it is too complex, still a good wish list item and within the spirit of playing classic games.

It's impossible to run out of old games, but it may be hard to get them to run, to regain publishing rights etc etc.

We had a few oldies released lately, and we will have a few too.

It's not only doable, but already done. I have the Amiga Forever emulator and it runs all the Amiga games I care too. The question is not of possibility, but practicality. Does GOG want to (a) license the Kickstart ROMS, (b) tweak the emulator so that it runs each game optimally, and (c) provide marketing and technical support for the results. This is on top of whether the games will make any money for GOG.

Other emulators are less or more complex, on a case-by-case basis. It is up to GOG to determine if the outlay justifies the return. At the end of the day that is the prime consideration. Not whether it can be done, but whether it can be done profitably.

Yes the idea was to pitch whatever outlandish idea that pops into someone's head. Obviously at some point the reality of ideas could be discussed. I would prefer if logistics do get discussed, it would be from an angle meant to solve hurdles rather than just shutdown any given idea without further consideration. As for the thread title. I think its fair. Did they? If they have, or will at some point in the future, what else can be done? That is the context.

I don't doubt that they have been discussed. There have probably been other ideas as well. I'd love to hear them. I'd love to really hear ideas that haven't been voiced. The more ludicrous or unlikely potentially the better.

That's the "new" that I hope to generate.

Well let's assume that it can be. You've already pointed out that Amiga Forever and Kickstarter have laid the groundwork. You have a product in place that's already done half the battle for you (ala what Dosbox also did). Would tweaking that Amiga emulator be realistically harder than it was to get a lot of these older DOS games to run? Almost all of those other platforms and consoles had more standardized hardware than DOS-based PCs.

And yes GOG would have to assume the liability for technical support, they already do this with all of their currently released games, its really no different.

Profitability, I don't know what the reasonable price point might be. Can the games be sold individually? I imagine that would vary. Newer consoles with "larger" games like say a Playstation title could probably easily be sold as a standalone. Titles from something older like an Amiga. Well it might be more practical to do combo packs from a particular publisher who released multiple titles on that platform. That's really a case by case basis. In principle though, there isn't much difference between what GOG has already done with PC games than they would need to do for other platforms/consoles. The X factor is admittedly on what legalities you might run into with those platform or console owners.

I had to check that to believe it. Yes, it's true, I didn't find and good old games written anywhere on the site. It makes me sad.

You can always look for real owners of your favorite good old IP and write them a letter how much happy you would be to pay $6 for their game on GOG.

EDIT: I guess it's not the answer you're looking for. I think wishlist is the best potential customers can do. Plus, buying good old games a lot to show they are in demand.

Even if the emulated games doesn't make much of a profit or even generate a manageable loss it would be a big marketing/advertising/viral and so on gimmick which could potentially generate a considerable profit by that alone.

Imagine the buzz it would create on the net.

GOG ran out of old good threads.

Alright. Let me kick-off another idea. What about the possibility of GOG being publisher for sequels or spin-offs to classics? Take Origin's Ultima series. It's essentially dead. What about financing or assisting with the financing of retro sequels? Maybe that's a bad example because EA owns the IP, but there has to be other copyright owners who have IPs that might benefit from this treatment. I would pay for a new Ultima Underworld 3 without brand spanking new state of the art graphics, etc.