xa_chan: Heh, no one of the "this game does not belong to GOG" actually thought that releasing "new old games" was maybe part of the deal with Ubisoft : "we grant you access to our catalog of games, but sometimes you'll have to release the game WE want you to release".
Of course, I don't have the faintest proof of what I say, but that wouldn't be an unheard of kind of a deal.
GOG has kinda said that in an interview before, that it's something of a give and take relationship. But it doesn't mean they'll compromise standards, just probably accept not so universally liked games like this one rather than concentrating on more widely loved titles or any other efforts. Which I don't really see as a bad thing. As I said, it gives those games a second chance. A lot of people still won't like them, but it's good for the people that will.
569874123: I do not understand why people are hating on gog, just because the game is new...
CaptainGyro: I don't get it either, especially the guy who said to get back to the roots. I am fine with playing newer games if they are available.I'm sure it isn't easy landing these games anyway, so this is better than nothing. Just because the site has OLD in the title doesn't mean they have to rigidly stick with older games only. I don't even consider the term " good old" as meaning literally old. Like if you use the term " I'm going to drink some good old beer" it doesn't mean the beer itself is old.
It's all relative. This game isn't new, so technically you could call it old. :P
Obviously we all have different ideas of what is old, so it would help if people were more understanding of each others ideas. :P
