Not even general law. They can be prosecuted by the company or even by the state.

Some companies, including some jv companies, have paid the price in the past.

As in a "modified, limited hangout"?((;--))

Hello Vainamoinen!

May I ask, what issues you have with running "Mass Effect 2" from your disc version?
I do have a retail copy of "Mass Effect 2" from its original release, and it features only a Serial-key on installation and a mere DVD-in-drive check when launching the game. (The disc can even be removed after initial startup of the game-- its presence is not necessary during gameplay!)
Sure, I had never access to the DLC-content of it, and maybe, you are refering to the complete experience.

Of course, I agree with you. I would be happy about a GOG release of the series (in my case preferably the original trilogy rather than the legendary edition) in the near future, too.
I never had the chance to play the first "Mass Effect", yet.


On the topic of this thread:
I get the impression, that many of the bigger publishers only release a single game per franchise on GOG.COM as kind of a bait, in order to lure the consumers interested in more of the same away from DRM-free stores and onto their own platform.
As if they would be saying: "Do you like this sort of game? Well, we have more over (t)here."

It is really sad to not even seeing the other older titles of a series available here, too.

Kind regards,
foxgog

GOG can't bring them if the publishers don't want to bother with GOG. But thankfully GOG is at least still getting some games. And if GOG diiiiieeeesss because they don't make enough money, we'll at least have our installers backed up.

Also Dead Island 2 is brand new.

So we know better than GOG about how to acquire new IPs for sale from AAA publishers on their own platform, and we should have the right to know exactly what goes on behind the scenes in private conversations between companies because... we buy stuff from them. O.o

*laughter*

Dead Island 2? Early 2010s? Take me to that timeline.

With so many sequels and remakes hitting the market I consider this to be a minor mistake.

Btw, wasn't Dead Island 1 meant to be played as coop game? I know it was possible to play it solo, but the strong aspect of it was online coop.

Ever heard the term "low-hanging fruit"?
Well, GOG managed to pluck most of those already.
Getting the ones hanging higher up the tree, isn't quite as "easy", anymore.
That's why those AAA games get only drip-fed into the store while, at the same time, "indie and 'crap18'" games, seem to overflood everything.

Here we go again.
Every couple of months, someone who hasn't been here for a while and then not investigated properly, complains about the lack of new Old Games at GOG, despite GOG still regularly providing. GOG provide different games in waves, so you need to pay attention regularly or investigate more deeply.

Of course, what it often boils down to, is that GOG haven't provided the ones the OP wants.

In reality, GOG are often between a rock and a hard place, where many games are very difficult to acquire due to licensing issues, and they are up against providers who have most of the power and so call most of the shots. In the end it is about making palatable agreements with game providers, and GOG like any business, needs to do what is best for them.

For GOG to survive it is about their cash flow rate. In other words they need to sell XX amount each week or month or year. Just because a game appears on GOG, doesn't mean it sells well. There are many games at GOG that I still want, and would buy instantly if they were a fair price. I've bought a lot already, so I am no slouch, but I refuse to pay inflated prices.

So I don't blame GOG getting games that sell easily and well. That has meant a lot more Indie games, and a bunch of those are erotic and mostly not in my fields of interest, but I am guessing they bring in customers and good profits.

Generally old games need a fair amount of work to be able to run properly on current Windows OS, which is either done by the game provider or GOG. All that is up against games that GOG can provide here much more simply. So GOG would be following an agenda and prioritizing. It is all about compromise.

GOG are not Steam and they cannot promise or bargain with the idea of big profits. And how big a profit it needs to be, is often in the mind of the provider. As GOG grows bigger though, some things improve.

You also need to consider, that while every year we get another round of games becoming Old Games, much of the truly old games, that were easier to obtain have already been here at GOG, and so the ones left are harder to get. And GOG explained to us recently, how much is involved in getting a game and then getting it to work on latest Windows. So in reality it is about a mix. GOG will spend a lot of effort on a few games, while then having to provide others that aren't so costly and hard to provide.

There are only so many hours in a day and financial resources and competent staff etc.
I personally believe GOG are trying their best.
But as a I said earlier, GOG are between a rock and a hard place, where game providers call most of the shots, including pricing. And DRM-Free is a hard sell to game providers, and even a lot of gamers.

Fair enough. Especially them zombie games. At one point I was confused between Dead Island and Dead Rising.

"We have approached a major publisher this week and asked them whether we could release their hit series of the last decade here, and they said they weren't interested at this particular moment. We will ask again in eight months."

I keep wondering what you would do with these kinds of blurbs. I find it utterly uninformative. What I really don't want to know is what kind of "advice" people would "give" on the basis of those shredded info bits.

GOG has people who spend most of the day nagging developers to release on this platform. The idea that we could tell them how to do their work properly just won't fit into my head.

They certainly didn't get Skyrim or Return to Monkey Island last year because they sat on their asses until they were square. Of course I hope that as of right now, they're asking EA for Mass Effect and RiotGames for Sea of Stars until their respective ears bleed.

The only thing I can do in addition to that is to signal my interest for a GOG release to the publisher/developer directly. Let GOG personnel do their job, and do mine as a fan of DRM free games.

To be honest, I googled "Mass Effect 2 on Windows 10" and got a big fat nope from the net. I didn't yet try to run it. But, yes, the DLCs kind of made the experience complete and in my opinion would have belonged in there from the start. Some great characters, a new game mechanic, a post-end mission to tie the game to the third part. Can't really go without that.

EA needs to put the complete version on GOG.

Vote with your wallet people. Buy the AAA and AA-games that actually do get here if you want to increase the chance of future releases.

Notice something in common there?

ALL of these games you mentioned require services and/or client-app nonsense - Dead Space 2 and 3 require Origin; Dead Island 1 and 2 require Steam; DA2 and DAI require Origin; Res Evil 4 HD Remaster and Fallout 4 requires Steam; and Rayman Legends requires UPLAY aka UbiSoft Connect; and many recent NFS's require Origin.

Let's also keep in mind that Origin and UPLAY now have monthly services on their own stores that they are trying to get gamers to subscribers.

To get onto GOG: ALL of the PC versions would need to be re-worked to work without ANY of those 3rd party services and work offline without DRM; have all of their server-junk likely pulled; and some of these might need GOG Galaxy support for Multiplayer, Cloud Saves, etc. That costs $, time, employees, resources for dev's and pub's to want to put it onto a service like GOG.

As much as I want all games to wind-up when they get old on GOG for obvious DRM-FREE reasons - we can dream on a lot of games coming here when they all (pub's and dev's) like to support their own stuff first.

Agreed on ME2 that Complete Editions are the way-to-go.

Same goes for ME3, DA2, and DAI - as key stuff is purposely left-out and put over on the DLC's...which are basically are important to the games, wrapping up some stuff w/ story and characters; and especially set-up for the next game.

Some really stuff will or won't happen in ME3, depending on if you played ME2's DLC's. ME2's Shadow Broker DLC's real important in particular to Liara.

Omega DLC and Citadel DLC in ME2 are important for many reasons; Omega DLC's important to Aria and Citadel's got a way better ending to its experience than the ME3 ending could ever provide.

In DA2 - you need to play Legacy DLC, as it's VERY important to the Final Part of DA: Inquisition.
DA:I Trespasser DLC adds more into to DAI base-game's abrupt ending, sets up stuff likely for DA: DreadWolf.

BioWare's been doing this tactic for years even before EA: a lot of fan-service type of Epilogue stuff with wrapped-up story & character stuff is in BG2: TOB expansion and NWN2: Hordes expansion.

Yeah, I think one of the biggest potential misapprehensions in this conversation is that GOG simply doesn't want the games here or doesn't realize that users would want them.

True. When it comes to Zombie games we reach a whole new level. Let's just be glad, that Dying Light has no "Dead" or "Death" in it's title. And of course ther's all the I-look-like-a-Zombie-I-act-like-a-Zombie-and-I-smell-like-a-Zombie-but-I-am-no-Zombies from The Last of Us and all the other dead or dying games without Zombies.
Wenn you look for "dead" on GOG, you get about 90 game titles, "death" results in 150.