This is absolutely true - I’m a staunch defender of “your store, your rules”, but I do think curation needs some kind of logic and coherence, otherwise you end up in a steam situation where Valve basically censors or doesn’t censor (more the latter these days) based on whatever the fuck they feel like today, and start even more internet drama than if they had clear and defined rules. At the very least, I do think it is a good thing to say why you reject a game, especially when it’s not obvious (I mean, Heaven’s Vault is not a shitty asset flip it’s an Inkle game !). It’s a nice practice and avoids needless controversies. (Had they said, “we reject Heaven’s Vault because it requires cloud saves and we only sell DRM-free games (it’s not the case, but it was an issue with Sorcery)” I wouldn’t suspect GoG of rejecting the game based on the way it looks, for instance, or because of shitty gamer elitism.)
Judging from the list of other rejected games, again, I think they want to avoid game they feel would be too niche, and Heaven’s Vault might look like this. A game like Dex for instance was rejected twice before being accepted.
Good to know, thanks.
I do think there’s a point to be made that GoG’s standards for what is a quality game are still pretty inconsistent - though certainly less than steam’s.