BJWanlund

NONE of this is coming to NA?!?!

Seriously, WTF?!

BJ

I'd be interested to get 4 Wii Remote Pluses, that way I don't have to keep track of 4 Wii Motion Pluses and 4 Wiimotes. (I will get 3 nunchuks too, I just want 4 Wii Remote Pluses, and at least 1 of them in white, so I can replace my current white Wiimote). Please, Nintendo, I'd love to have that so I don't have to keep track of 4 tiny WMP devices.

BJ

@Undying Digital IS the future. (Or didn't you realize that when the shelf space for PC games suddenly dried up at GameStop?)

Also, interesting updated statement. Not sure what to think now, but notice the wording of "business and technical reasons".

BJ

@wcarnation Yes, yes it does. I think that they will be taking everything we said during one of their recent GOG.com Question Times into account when creating the new website/service/whatever.

For those of you who are Apple fans, this is actually what they do all the time when they introduce new products (i.e. take down the store and put it back up when they're good and ready).

I wouldn't be surprised if that was indeed what was going on. They now no longer have any more extreme marketing schemes to foist off on the public, so I think they've got some serious stuff up their sleeves for their return.

I may be reading way too much into the lines "GOG.com simply cannot remain in its current form" and "... putting this era behind us as new challenges await", but then again, wcarnation may have also.

Even weirder, GOG.com still has their Twitter account (@GOGcom), and the last tweet reads as follows: "The official statement from GOG's management about the situation will be announced soon. We'll have more details about this tomorrow."

If that doesn't say they're making a new version of GOG at the Polish offices of CDProjekt, even bringing GOG out of the looooooooong beta that the service has been in, then I don't know what would. Especially since they dropped the ".com" from "GOG.com", an interesting omission if you look at that message. It's definitely not that there were 0 characters left on Twitter, I just looked at it in my Twitter client of choice and there are 7 characters left in that message I quoted above. So they could very easily have put the ".com" into their name, but they oddly didn't.

Again, tell me if I have read waaaaaaaaayyyy too much into this, but something tells me that if this marketing ploy DOESN'T backfire in all of their faces (which some negative Nancys have already spouted forth), this could prove to be one heck of a brilliant strategic move.

The plot thickens...

BJ