I would not blame GOG for that if even the official 1996 bundle release made the same mistake. The description in the article sounds like it was never officially confirmed knowledge that the game would become unwinnable if cracked incompletely.
replyHow would you check for something you don't know about? They probably tried the game and when they couldn't win they ascribed it to insufficient skill. Even if they searched for information online, they probably (like OP) found discussions where some people complained about the game being unwinnable and got "you just suck!" replies.
Honestly, it was a dumb thing to do by the original developers.
QA should be playing these games to completion. At least one of the events in the game was completely unwinnable.
replyDevs then and now use poison pills like this to discourage dishonesty, and I don't fault them for it. It's hard to make a living producing digital content that's easily replicated at almost no cost.
A lot of people back then didn't realize that there were these secondary checks, I wouldn't blast GOG.
replyA lot of people back then weren't accepting payment for a faulty product, except the also clueless publishers of the 1996 version.
reply