Sure, our first 3 games The Cat Lady, Samaritan and Downfall got onto GOG because a GOG employee fan (Jeremi) of Michalski's games approached us and lay the groundwork on GOG's end. If it weren't for him, I doubt GOG would have taken Samaritan. That's the game they asked for some changes so they would definitely distribute it. Maybe those changes helped, but I still don't really like random distributors trying to make changes to games they ultimately had nothing to do with. TSP has actually been quite successful. Not to the level of Cat Lady or Downfall, but for a niche 2d point and click that isn't very casual, it's done pretty well financially.
So yeah, I honestly think there was a slightly special reason there - that we were "lucky" - especially with TSP, cos we had a contact at GOG that supported our work at the time. If it weren't for that, I have little doubt they would have deemed it unprofitable and not wanted it. But that's a while ago now, 4 or 5 years, so I don't remember the specifics. EDIT: Oh another fun fact is that TSP also skipped Greenlight. It was our only game during the time Greenlight existed that got pre-approved (though I can't remember why again specifically, talking to the right person again I suppose). So ultimately, TSP had a lot of random luck on its side.
I'd imagine they will likely take Whispers of a Machine (and hope they do too) because that is 2 devs they do stock (TSP and Kathy Rain) working together. But if they (petter and joel) haven't been approached and will be submitting it themselves, those guys will still be up against the GOG review teams' opinion of hand-drawn art (which they seem to....not like very much at all). But again, they are so tight lipped, no-one knows who this team of decision makers are, whether they are the same people from one week to the next, what the bullet point criteria list is that GOG decision makers follow (though there clearly is one) and how much personal preference/enjoyment comes into the approval process.
What I do know is that on Steam it costs 80 quid and the press of 1 button. And you can even be Midian Design and be invited to have your game on store...lol. Humble appears somewhere in the middle. They won't accept rubbish, but they will accept some of the smaller names that GOG won't.
EDIT: Finally, I do still respect what GOG do and that they allow some of us indies onto their store and sure as a customer there is a good selection. But ultimately, I'd like to see them take more of a gamble on the indie scene than they currently do, because they clearly are interested in the market of new original games as well as games from 1985, so a gog.com/indies or something. Because there are some great devs, making great games (all genres I'm sure but point and clicks included) and they are not making it onto there when really they should be, as they are just as high if not only marginally lower calibre to what's already there. But hey, these are just my opinions and insights. Don't make the mistake I made of assuming your game will get on GOG, it was F'n stupid. is all. and I see more developers are aware that there is no guarantee, but rejection is rejection, it's not a very nice thing and "Oh well, it's just business" is still cold lol
Failing that, just be more transparent about their expectations of games, and then devs, like Midian, like all of us really, can build the better games that they will be happy to host. That would surely only lead to more, better quality games which doesn't seem like such a bad thing. Devs can incorporate this early in the process and at least know where they're heading on the possible rejection/approval front. The secrecy of the approval process does no-one any favours, not even GOG when you think about it... Okay sorry this went off topic. But wanted folks to have a realists view on why Oz Orwell isn't and probably never will be on GOG, but picking it up elsewhere will really help the little guy in this situation.