This gamesindustry.biz article is offering less info and context than the press release it is cribbed from.

https://gog.prowly.com/375292-gog-joins-european-federation-of-game-archives-museums-and-preservation-projects-efgamp-expanding-its-game-preservation-efforts

I’ve never heard of EFGAMP, have they weighed in on the Stop Killing Games campaign?

If two platforms share compatibility then developers can choose to target the weaker system and release on both.

For some games this might involve a bit of compromise and cause resentment with the owners of the more powerful system, but for other (simple) games it might not involve any compromise at all.

Either way there are a lot of Switch consoles in the wild and there will be some publisher support for the Switch for a few years yet.

As an example from the other side of the fence ps4 is still getting titles:

https://opencritic.com/browse/ps4/last90

I just had a look at their offer and it has a few issues.

• Customers can’t resell a game license until 90 days after its release day and 7 days after their purchase (whichever is later).
• The option to list a license for sale may be revoked if the publisher delists the title
• The resale price is 100% of the current store price for the title but the reseller recieves only a 25% “resale commission”.
• This commission can be paid as store currency “IRON” or credited to your original payment method for a fee. If your original payment method has expired then only IRON is available.

https://help.robotcache.com/hc/en-us/articles/360029179691-Resale-Policy

So they keep 75% of resale revenue, the purchaser doesn’t see any discounts, and it can’t be used to access delisted games?

Its a bit of a monkey paw.

Any platform that offers transferable digital licenses will get a lot of customer loyalty but is likely to have mainstream publishers boycott it.

It could be structured so that everybody wins e.g. the purchaser pays less than the “new” price, with their payment then split as cash for the original publisher and store credit for the seller.

That way:

1. the purchaser gets a discount
2. the publisher gets a cut of the sale
3. the seller gets credit to spend on new games,
4. the platform gets that credit spent on their store (plus any additional money that might be required to complete a purchase)

As a customer I would find that attractive but I think most publishers would consider it a slippery slope.