While I hesitate to type this as it might be perceived as viewing a corporation as a friend, the intent matters, and GOG has a different history than the majority of FOMO abusing game companies. Did they identify that this is probably an opportunity to push some sales? Sure, probably. But I am chill permitting them that right when they're visibly working to remove FOMO as a commercial strategy.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Say it with me kids: Corporations are NEVER your friends. At best you have mutual interests, for a time.

Just look back to everyone who was all in on Google because "Do no evil" and "They aren't Apple" and so forth. Unity when they were the underdog relative to Unreal. Reddit when they were the "counter culture" social media. And so forth.

I like GoG a lot and have since they first launched. I also remember the French Monk Incident and so forth.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This is true. But things aren't black and white, there are degrees. For example, there is a big difference between private corporations, and publicly listed ones. The former at least allows for possible decency. Sometimes. Usually not.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago

The underdog is often the one that is most pro-consumer, since that is in their business interest. As soon as the take the lead, the doors to enshittyfication open, because business shifts from getting new customers to not letting them leave. (Of course there are exceptions, but this is the case broadly)