Gold Old Games closes...no wait!

[Skeptic]

While I can certainly understand people getting upset about this, I also see the amount of buzz the stunt generated and I have to say, "Mission Accomplished". They may lose some customers who felt slighted, but they probably gained about 10 times the number they'll lose.

As for me, I was annoyed but as soon as I saw the words Baldurs Gate, I put down my hunting rifle and just said, "You had me at Bald.".

Gain how? Do people usually flock to unstable companies showing erratic behavior?

I had no interest in them before because I was not interested in any of their products. Now I have no interest in them regardless of their products. They have not exactly improved their lot; it is one potential customer lost.

This sounds almost exactly like Dennis Miller's rant at Obama on Fox News. Won't detail that here because it is political nonsense that has nothing to do with gaming but it was very similar in that someone who was 'not a fan'(to put it mildly) found a justification for his non-fandom that sounded a bit artificial.

I don't like what GoG did but when I first heard about it, the first words out of my mouth were "Publicity stunt?". It seemed pretty obvious by their carefully chosen wording, the known facts of their success, etc. I think that making a huge deal about the poorly thought out stunt, as if they had sold you a product that was less than what they advertised or something, that is at least as nonsensical as what they did.

It's not another 9-11 guys.

[cicobuff]

After this "stunt",

1) I don't trust them with my CC numbers. Maybe paypal is the only way ahead.
2) I will run full virus scans of their games for trojans and spyware.
3) I will only play their games on a machine without network connections.

Also, for those who thinks that their games are without problems,

My ancient copy of dos based MOO works in dosbox just fine but the "updated" GoG copy requires the latest windows patches and has a dependency introduced with their own dll. A couple of other games were like that too. So it's not totally dependency free until someone makes a windowsxpbox.

Like Lorini, I guess I will think very hard about making a next purchase off them. What if they decided to do another stunt, this time a financial one instead of a marketing one?

Cico

Edit: And jeff v is right, this is a niche market. The whole world knowing about them won't help them one tinny bit if not one of the single new potential users have no use for nostalgia and don't spend a single cent on games that are years or decades old.

I wonder how much is the network charges they are incurring now that their past customers are download everything they ever purchased.

[ChaoZ]

I think some of you guys are overreacting.

Was it a poor marketing stunt? Yep.
Does it hurt their credibility? Absolutely.
Do companies make mistakes? Yep.

Personally speaking, GOG banked some pretty good rep with me, and while they're no longer faultless in my book, I think I will continue to shop with them even though they will be on probation for a little while though. It also made me rethink virtual storefronts in general: I will definitely be more diligent in keeping backups in the future.

[PLW]

I bought Betrayal at Krondor today. Loving it.

[Buatha]

Seriously? These games are either unavailable legally or require some voodoo configuring to get working and you guys are that pissed off? So, instead of supporting the last bastion of really old PC games that most companies wouldn't even bother with because they don't have "market viability", you're going to pout because they did ONE little stunt? I put up with that shit from my daughter, but hey, she's six years old.

Personally, I applaud their stunt. You know why? Its exemplifies our dependency on digitally-distributed software. While I have way more Steam games than GoG games, it showed me how much I take any form of digital media for granted...and that may have also been a subtle point they wanted to make.

[Lorini]

Whatever, Buatha. Like I said, if I wanted to be disrespected and lied to, I'd call my bank. Gog is just like any other business, they want to make a profit. They have chosen their way to make a profit, and I've chosen my way to spend my money. I don't see the issue here.

Somehow Buatha, you seem to want people to cut them slack because they are making a profit in the way you like. Fine. But when I get better customer service from Gamestop than I do from GoG, something is wrong. I do not like Gamestop, but at least they haven't lied to me (yet). And they certainly don't laugh at me in a way that I can later hear them. I'm sure they do laugh at me, an African American 50+ year old woman buying games for herself, but they do have the decency not to video it and then send me the video.

It was funny, I mentioned this situation to my 19 year old fully nerd geeky video game playing son (not telling him how I thought) and he thought GoG were fucktards. Complete idiots. He was amazed that a company would do that to people. So I know it's not just me (as you've seen in this thread). I just expect more when I spend my money, I guess.

As far as Steam goes, I avoid Steam because Steam is required to run games. That's actually worse than the hated disc based DRM because if Steam goes down, you are hosed and Steam doesn't promise you access or anything else. There's no real point in backing their games up because they have to exist for you to use them. I do buy from them because at least they are up front about the fact that they don't promise you access to their games. I'd much rather a company give me bad news honestly than good news with bullshit. If Impulse and Steam have the same game, I buy from Impulse. Otherwise I buy from Direct2Drive or Gamersgate. Steam is my last choice. I don't play MP, so the community stuff doesn't mean much to me. I could certainly see Steam being the download service of choice otherwise.

[Zurai]

I think some of you guys are overreacting.

+1. I can fully understand not wanting to buy from them again, but saying they're "lying to me and laughing at me" or implying that they'd steal your credit card number/install malware is just excessive overreaction.

[Buatha]

In all actuality, I'm not saying that you have to support them, but I guess I have a great respect for what they offer in this day of DRMed books and computer games. As a gamer dating back to C-64 days, I've got a closet full of old PC games that are simply painful to get running. Hell, I own a physical copy of most of the games I purchased on GoG. Independence War alone is a godsend since getting that game to run can be a hassle. Granted, you can probably hunt down fixes, fan-made patches, and workarounds to get some of these games running on today's machines. However, as a 40 year-old father of two with very limited gaming time, I'd rather pay $6 for a non-disk version that has been fixed to run for me. So, while I understand GoG offended many people, I'd rather think it was a marketing asshat and not the company as a whole. It's also possible that I'm less inclined to be upset right now with GoG because I'm currently dealing with an identity fraud issue with DISH Network and that is on an order of magnitude far greater than a PR stunt.

Lorini, I'll now pay more attention to you now that I know you have been gaming longer than I have

[JonathanStrange]

GOG's "little stunt" was to remove their entire business from the Web. Sure it was only for a few days this time, but next time? Maybe next time it will be weeks or months or accidentally screwing around with their customer's credit card numbers. It's all in good fun, right? They'd be the "bad boys of digital media" and imagine the publicity and business they'd get if they did that!

I'm not angry with GOG. But it's not childish shit to be wary or irritated with a company that doesn't respect its customers or itself enough to act in a professional behavior. It's not - as others have called it - an overreaction or comparison to 9-11 to think "Hmm...do I really need that 20-year-old game that I played when I was 8? Do I need it from this company or at all?"

I'm not going to applaud their "little stunt." They didn't do it to teach us not to rely on digital media - I can't think of a more self-deluding rationale than arguing that. That's like applauding a company for not providing its service - whether it's electricity or access to our checking account - because it taught us not to rely on them or technology when the reality is more likely that they're just not reliable.

[Daehawk]

I'm not affected in the least. I'm just happy they are are still here for me to buy more stuff from.

[silverjon]

I think speculating that a company might go from doing something foolhardy to something illegal is more than a bit of an overreaction, honestly. I'm not saying that it's right or wrong to decide you don't want to deal with them anymore based on their irresponsibility alone, but don't overstate it.

[Zurai]

GOG's "little stunt" was to remove their entire business from the Web. Sure it was only for a few days this time, but next time? Maybe next time it will be weeks or months or accidentally screwing around with their customer's credit card numbers. It's all in good fun, right? They'd be the "bad boys of digital media" and imagine the publicity and business they'd get if they did that!

This is clear over-reaction. Go back and read the initial press release. They didn't lie (EDIT: use misleading language, yes; lie, no). They didn't take the site offline for the purpose of the publicity stunt. The site was going offline with or without the stunt because they were changing things around. They decided to do the stunt because the site was going offline, not vice versa.

Seriously, some of you people sound like you wear tin hats to keep the Illuminati from mind-controlling you.

[Buatha]

They didn't do it to teach us not to rely on digital media - I can't think of a more self-deluding rationale than arguing that.

I'm not saying it was their intention, but it made me realize how much I expect my digital media to be available at all times. It didn't even cross my mind to download all of my GoG games (which I'm doing right now ) because I've just become spoiled/accustomed to their presence. However, unexpectedly on their part or not, it got people to think about the nature of digital media and what guarantees we have other than the hope that Valve would decrypt your games at their closure. I've always thought EULA for software is just so much bullshit that we are merely licensing the game and don't "own" it.

We're all different and the effect of their stunt has obviously affected us in different ways. I was just as nervous as everyone else thinking that the site was gone and I'd be losing my purchased games. I guess I'm just more relieved than irritated and that's just me. I don't get upset about religion or politics, and I just can't maintain being upset now that they're back online.

[Buatha]

They didn't take the site offline for the purpose of the publicity stunt. The site was going offline with or without the stunt because they were changing things around. They decided to do the stunt because the site was going offline, not vice versa.

Yeah, that's pretty much how I felt about it...but it's more like a "Hey, man, that shit isn't funny" joke instead of the "Haha, good one!" kind.

[Zurai]

Yeah, like I've said, I definitely think it was a stupid, irresponsible move on their part. I can absolutely understand (if not agree with) people choosing not to buy from them ever again. I just think some people are going a little too far past that point. It was a dumb publicity stunt, not a malevolent plot or a signal of impending virus invasions.

[cicobuff]

I don't see the over-reaction here. What is the baseline for an "over" to exist?

Sure we cannot believe that unprofessional businesses can inject malware or steal credit card numbers. Like the same way we cannot believe a professional business can shut down their business without warning as a marketing stunt. End sarcasm.

[Greybriar]

Can't we all just learn from this experience of being slightly inconvenienced and act accordingly?

I am just glad that Good Old Games is back.

[hepcat]

I don't see the over-reaction here. What is the baseline for an "over" to exist?

Comparing a company holding a dumb PR stunt to 9/11?

(this was a meta response within a response)

[cicobuff]

I don't see the over-reaction here. What is the baseline for an "over" to exist?

Comparing a company holding a dumb PR stunt to 9/11?

(this was a meta response within a response)

Nice baseline. But I can see that you are not responding to my question.

Found it ironic that "childish" was used to describe people who "pouted" when they decided NOT to encourage the grown-ups (cough) executing an (hmmmm what shall I call it?) infantile prank/hoax/stunt by voting with their wallets.

And IRL, I have had my cc no. misused by File Front when a yearly subscription was charged to my CC even when I only subscribed for 1 month (non-recurring) some years ago (after the 1 month ended). I tried to file a ticket/write to support etc etc but did not get a reply and the dispute got nowhere because my CC company claimed that my emails were insufficient evidence that I had been cheated. I had to resort to canceling my credit card (to kill the CC number totally), pay for the dispute charges and the subscription. I just don't want to be in that position again if I can avoid it.

[LawBeefaroni]

I do not like Gamestop, but at least they haven't lied to me (yet). And they certainly don't laugh at me in a way that I can later hear them. I'm sure they do laugh at me, an African American 50+ year old woman buying games for herself, but they do have the decency not to video it and then send me the video.

That's too bad, sounds like you have a crap Gamestops. My two locals are great (and one is managed by an African American 30+ year-old woman).




I've never used GoG but have followed this whole...incident...with interest. Ironically my over-gaming in the past has probably saved me from GoG in the present. I've played most of the games they have that I'd be interested in.

[dbt1949]

When I first started reading this thread I was a little alarmed but only had a couple of their games and so just decided to blow off GoG.
Now after reading four pages of opinions I feel the same way.(except GoG is still there)
With the doses of Prozac I take it's not surprising.
Sounds like some of you all should join me.
This from a 61 year old fat boy with way too much hair on his face.

[RunningMn9]

At the end of the day, Baldur's Gate is running flawlessly on my installation of 64-bit Windows 7 Ultimate. And that's really what GoG.com is all about - not stupid PR stunts.

[Reemul]

I'm not affected in the least. I'm just happy they are are still here for me to buy more stuff from.

+1

Way more important things to worry about than this.

Buy, don't buy we all have the choice however some of the stuff on here is unreal, glad there is a big ocean between some of us

[hepcat]

At the end of the day, Baldur's Gate is running flawlessly on my installation of 64-bit Windows 7 Ultimate. And that's really what GoG.com is all about - not stupid PR stunts.

have you tried (or even want to) the mega mod patch that allows for widescreen and a bunch of other goodies? i was looking for it last night with no luck, although i didn't have a lot of time. razgon swears it's the bee's knees.

my copy of BG is installed and waiting for me to roll up some characters tonight after work.

[silverjon]

have you tried (or even want to) the mega mod patch that allows for widescreen and a bunch of other goodies? i was looking for it last night with no luck, although i didn't have a lot of time. razgon swears it's the bee's knees.

http://www.gibberlings3.net/widescreen/" target="_blank
I'd stand behind anything G3 has released. They do quality work.

[hepcat]

Thanks silverjon!

is that the mega mod razgon was talking about? or just a widescreen mod?

[silverjon]

There has been more than one mod that's tried to yank the entire BG series into a seamless install, and I don't know which one Razgon might have recommended. Historically, they've been clunky and buggy, and I stopped paying attention to them several years ago, being far more interested in smaller mods providing new content. In that time, it's entirely possible that they've come out with a new and improved model.

http://www.shsforums.net/forum/399-mega ... e965a470c3" target="_blank
http://www.shsforums.net/topic/29916-th ... d-project/" target="_blank

You'd have to ask him which one it is that he likes. BiG World seems to be a relatively new innovation.

[Buatha]

Found it ironic that "childish" was used to describe people who "pouted" when they decided NOT to encourage the grown-ups (cough) executing an (hmmmm what shall I call it?) infantile prank/hoax/stunt by voting with their wallets.

Okay, okay, maybe pout was too strong of a word. I'm currently going through a "pouting phase" with my daughter, so it's a popular word for me right now.

Since everyone is taking this so personally, I apologize if I appeared insensitive. I'll just say that I disagree with some of the intensity of the reactions and not their source.

I'm just not one of those people, and I know many of them, that spurn a person/company based on one bad instance. Now, if this happened all of the time, then I'm all about going somewhere else.

[RunningMn9]

Have you tried (or even want to) the mega mod patch that allows for widescreen and a bunch of other goodies? i was looking for it last night with no luck, although i didn't have a lot of time. razgon swears it's the bee's knees.

I remember seeing something that allowed you to run BG in the BG2 engine, but I haven't tried that here. What I really want is to have Baldur's Gate. I don't mind it looking like 1970s-era Pong.

[silverjon]

I remember seeing something that allowed you to run BG in the BG2 engine, but I haven't tried that here. What I really want is to have Baldur's Gate. I don't mind it looking like 1970s-era Pong.

That would be BG Tutu (BG1 to Two, see?). It should also be compatible with Widescreen. The Megamods would all be using the BG2 version of the Infinity Engine as well. Tutu maintains BG as a separate game, without trying to finesse a transition into the BG2 content. I'd trust it more than I would the various offerings from Spellhold Studios, if only because there's less to go wrong.

http://www.pocketplane.net/mambo/index. ... &Itemid=98" target="_blank

As for how the games look, I haven't played around at all with Widescreen and higher resolutions, though I trust the work of the people who make them. The painted backgrounds in BG1 remain gorgeous at any resolution, in my opinion (maybe not quite as fine as the original IWD).

[hepcat]

I'm looking forward to playing BG and Shadow Magic this weekend. It's like I've gone back in time to a simpler era where games were games and men were playing those games in an effort to be kids again.

[ColdSteel]

I bought the original Age of Wonders from GOG this morning and am looking forward to it. Love the Michiel van den Bos music so much and looking forward to being able to expore ruins for goodies on the tactical map again.

I have had AOW:SM on my drive constantly since the unofficial 1.4 patch removes the need for the CD. I have the AOW1 disks but didn't want to mess with the DRM again so bought it from GOG instead. That's what I love about GOG. I'm just glad it's back and I could care less about a stupid PR stunt gone bad beyond the initial sadness and anger (not to mention panic) of thinking they were gone for good. Long may they thrive.

[Skeptic]

After this "stunt",

1) I don't trust them with my CC numbers. Maybe paypal is the only way ahead.
2) I will run full virus scans of their games for trojans and spyware.
3) I will only play their games on a machine without network connections.

Why play their games at all if you believe this nonsense to be true?

Also, for those who thinks that their games are without problems,

My ancient copy of dos based MOO works in dosbox just fine but the "updated" GoG copy requires the latest windows patches and has a dependency introduced with their own dll. A couple of other games were like that too. So it's not totally dependency free until someone makes a windowsxpbox.

If your copy worked just fine then why did you buy the GoG version? And you seem to be in a rather tiny minority here. I'm just saying...

Like Lorini, I guess I will think very hard about making a next purchase off them.

If you have had all of these problems with them I am wondering why you kept buying their games in the first place and why you will continue at all? I think you are just letting your emotions get the best of you.

What if they decided to do another stunt, this time a financial one instead of a marketing one?

I think this is as unlikely as any conspiracy theory but if it happens then I guess you guys will then have justification for your paranoia.

[cicobuff]

Found it ironic that "childish" was used to describe people who "pouted" when they decided NOT to encourage the grown-ups (cough) executing an (hmmmm what shall I call it?) infantile prank/hoax/stunt by voting with their wallets.

Okay, okay, maybe pout was too strong of a word. I'm currently going through a "pouting phase" with my daughter, so it's a popular word for me right now.

Since everyone is taking this so personally, I apologize if I appeared insensitive. I'll just say that I disagree with some of the intensity of the reactions and not their source.

I'm just not one of those people, and I know many of them, that spurn a person/company based on one bad instance. Now, if this happened all of the time, then I'm all about going somewhere else.

I am going through the exact same phase with my daughter too . But the lesson I took from the experiences with both my daughter the marketing ploy is that I should never encourage behavior I do not like.

People who choose to continue to use GoG and those who chose to walk away are both right in their respective perspectives. What is needed is less remarks about the character of each other and just stick to the ongoing discussion, which sometimes do bring up the character of GoG (yes yes more irony).

After this "stunt",

1) I don't trust them with my CC numbers. Maybe paypal is the only way ahead.
2) I will run full virus scans of their games for trojans and spyware.
3) I will only play their games on a machine without network connections.

Why play their games at all if you believe this nonsense to be true?

I do not understand the "strong reactions" against basic precautions. Which of my 3 precautions are not easily accomplished by a 1 button click? The first 2 should be done anyway from sources you don't fully trust (which is true for GoG in my case) and the 3rd is a simple 1 button click.

Also, for those who thinks that their games are without problems,

My ancient copy of dos based MOO works in dosbox just fine but the "updated" GoG copy requires the latest windows patches and has a dependency introduced with their own dll. A couple of other games were like that too. So it's not totally dependency free until someone makes a windowsxpbox.

If your copy worked just fine then why did you buy the GoG version? And you seem to be in a rather tiny minority here. I'm just saying...

I bought from them precisely because I thought they were cool and wanted to reward them for their efforts. I had not expected them to break my trust. I had bought about 10 games from them and would have continued buying from them if they had behaved professionally. Truth to be known, the Monk video was the one that turned me. I thought it was badly written and made. A formally and professionally written apology on the main site instead of treating it like a joke would have had a much better effect on me. Shrugs.

Like Lorini, I guess I will think very hard about making a next purchase off them.

If you have had all of these problems with them I am wondering why you kept buying their games in the first place and why you will continue at all? I think you are just letting your emotions get the best of you.

I am wondering. Prior to this trust-breaking marketing stunt, what were "these problems" you are mentioning that would have kept me from buying from them? Would you like to list some? But I guess you are right. I wont make any more purchases from them. You have just convinced me that I shall never purchase from them again.

What if they decided to do another stunt, this time a financial one instead of a marketing one?

I think this is as unlikely as any conspiracy theory but if it happens then I guess you guys will then have justification for your paranoia.

If File Front can charge to my CC without my authorizing them, I have no confidence that any other unprofessional firm will do any better. It is just a standard practice I adopt against untrusted firms and sources. A conspiracy yes. A theory? I guess your theory about the theory is already debunked by the very real actions performed by the companies I trusted.

[Giles Habibula]

I overreacted when it happened.
I'm over it already.

I like the new site.

[Skeptic]

GOG's "little stunt" was to remove their entire business from the Web.

Every business on the web has done this. Most have done this MANY times. Every time they upgrade some important aspect or their product content and/or delivery drastically changes they go down for a day or two to get things squared away. The only difference here is that GoG made a little joke using wording that you guys should have been able to see through but your butthurt rage seems to have prevented this.

Sure it was only for a few days this time, but next time?

Oh yeah, because they are doing so well that they were able to do a drastic upgrade of their whole product they cannot be trusted to not suddenly drop out of sight taking your money/CC numbers/etc. and leaving you with nothing.

That makes sense.:rolleyes:

Maybe next time it will be weeks or months or accidentally screwing around with their customer's credit card numbers.

That is just plain stupid. I am sorry but there is no other way to put this. This is totally conspiracy theory-ish thinking.

It's all in good fun, right?

I can't tell if this is a false dilemma or a false analogy? Maybe a bit of both. Just because they went down for a few days and had a little fun with you guys who were prone to falling for such does not in any way = 'Maybe next time they will rob us and vanish!'.

I'm not angry with GOG.

I believe "butthurt" is the more appropriate term.

But it's not childish shit to be wary or irritated with a company that doesn't respect its customers or itself enough to act in a professional behavior.

It is childish shit to act as if they do not respect their customers and cannot be trusted because of a joke they pulled on the most gullible people on the net.

It's not - as others have called it - an overreaction or comparison to 9-11 to think "Hmm...do I really need that 20-year-old game that I played when I was 8? Do I need it from this company or at all?"

It is entirely analogous to conspiracy theorizing and certainly is overreacting. You guys are positing that GoG is on par with Bernie Madoff because of a joke they pulled on you...and it wasn't even a very bad joke(in the way that pissing in someone's beer or calling them and telling them their wife/child has been in an accident to lure them to a surprise party or some such)!

I'm not going to applaud their "little stunt."

Few people are. I don't either. But there is a rational grey area position here between "I am not going to applaud..." and "They cannot be trusted!"

They didn't do it to teach us not to rely on digital media - I can't think of a more self-deluding rationale than arguing that.

Straw man nonsense on your part.

That's like applauding a company for not providing its service - whether it's electricity or access to our checking account - because it taught us not to rely on them or technology when the reality is more likely that they're just not reliable.

How is GoG not reliable? Did anyone pay for a game that they suddenly were not offering any longer? Did GoG rip someone off? Do their games not work almost 99.9% of the time?

[Skeptic]

After this "stunt",

1) I don't trust them with my CC numbers. Maybe paypal is the only way ahead.
2) I will run full virus scans of their games for trojans and spyware.
3) I will only play their games on a machine without network connections.

Why play their games at all if you believe this nonsense to be true?

I do not understand the "strong reactions" against basic precautions. Which of my 3 precautions are not easily accomplished by a 1 button click? The first 2 should be done anyway from sources you don't fully trust (which is true for GoG in my case) and the 3rd is a simple 1 button click.

I do not understand your response here as it does not seem to relate to my question above?

Also, for those who thinks that their games are without problems,

My ancient copy of dos based MOO works in dosbox just fine but the "updated" GoG copy requires the latest windows patches and has a dependency introduced with their own dll. A couple of other games were like that too. So it's not totally dependency free until someone makes a windowsxpbox.

If your copy worked just fine then why did you buy the GoG version? And you seem to be in a rather tiny minority here. I'm just saying...

I bought from them precisely because I thought they were cool and wanted to reward them for their efforts. I had not expected them to break my trust. I had bought about 10 games from them and would have continued buying from them if they had behaved professionally. Truth to be known, the Monk video was the one that turned me. I thought it was badly written and made. A formally and professionally written apology on the main site instead of treating it like a joke would have had a much better effect on me. Shrugs.

"Monk video"?
And I think there are gradations of "unprofessionally" that you need to keep in mind here.

If a business is "unprofessional" in that they repeatedly break promises, have continual problems with delivery of service, their product is sketchy, etc. then they deserve people refusing to use their service at the very least.

If a business is "unprofessional" in that it made a small joke using wording that the gullible would find misleading then they MAY deserve some "that was lame!" type commentary.

See the difference here?

Like Lorini, I guess I will think very hard about making a next purchase off them.

If you have had all of these problems with them I am wondering why you kept buying their games in the first place and why you will continue at all? I think you are just letting your emotions get the best of you.

I am wondering. Prior to this trust-breaking marketing stunt, what were "these problems" you are mentioning that would have kept me from buying from them? Would you like to list some?

Well we can start with the emboldened portion of your above quote which I will re-post here:

"Also, for those who thinks that their games are without problems,

My ancient copy of dos based MOO works in dosbox just fine but the "updated" GoG copy requires the latest windows patches and has a dependency introduced with their own dll. A couple of other games were like that too. So it's not totally dependency free until someone makes a windowsxpbox."

I was going by what YOU said guy in your own posts so don't act like I just pulled something out of my imagination and started drilling you about it.

But I guess you are right. I wont make any more purchases from them. You have just convinced me that I shall never purchase from them again.

LOL! I am calling bullshit on this kiddo. I am totally sure you were actually thinking of getting over it until you read my post...:rolleyes:

I do not work for GoG BTW.

What if they decided to do another stunt, this time a financial one instead of a marketing one?

I think this is as unlikely as any conspiracy theory but if it happens then I guess you guys will then have justification for your paranoia.

If File Front can charge to my CC without my authorizing them, I have no confidence that any other unprofessional firm will do any better. It is just a standard practice I adopt against untrusted firms and sources. A conspiracy yes. A theory? I guess your theory about the theory is already debunked by the very real actions performed by the companies I trusted.

Yes that is an excellent point...if we were talking about FILE FRONT!

And also you do not seem to have any idea what the terms "Conspiracy", "theory" and "conspiracy theory" mean. And they are ALL completely different terms for entirely different things.

[hepcat]

While I think some folks are overreacting to gog's stunt, I also think skeptic is overreacting in his defense.

[Skeptic]

While I think some folks are overreacting to gog's stunt, I also think skeptic is overreacting in his defense.

How so? My "defense" has been entirely without emotion(save for a bit of chuckling). I just feel compelled to debunk bad arguments when I see them is all. I could not care less that anyone might not use GoG. 'It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg', to borrow from Jefferson. Your point here seems to be that my saying "You're overreacting..." is on par with the over-reaction itself...?

[The Meal]

While I think some folks are overreacting to gog's stunt, I also think skeptic is overreacting in his defense.

You're just butthurt, kiddo. :failedemoticonusage: