Yes, but it has no tits, and is not on fire.

Painkiller does not need to be titworthy to be awesome. Tits make not a game great, said Yoda.

Interesting subject as I was thinking about this same thing this morning (Pricing Not Focus).
I understand that the Publishers must tell GOG what price point they want their product sold at on GOG, but they only have 2 choices to choose from: $9.99 or $5.99.
I think there are games on GOG that are in no way worth the $9.99 asking price, but I also think there are plenty of $5.99 games I think should be lower in price as well.
I think if they had a $4.99 price point they may see more sales as $5.00 is easier to spend than $6.00.
The other thing that might help is to reduce prices on some sales to 20 or 30% not the 15% it is always at.
There are more games I would buy from GOG if the price point was a $1.00 lower.

Christ. You people come onto a website for games which has a upper pricetag of $9.99, and you still whine about the prices. You'd buy more games if it was $4.99? That dollar is your pivotal cause for not buying certain games? I don't believe that.
I find it's more YES or NO. Duke3D Atomic for $5.99 is YES. Kingdom: The Far Reaches for $5.99 is NO.
Also, I value the fact that GoG is, and hopefully will continue to, build up a large selection of games. It's the only profitable thing to do - games don't go sour like milk does on the shelves if you take in more than you can sell. More games = more $$, see? I mean, just look at all the junk on Steam. Complaints about Waxworks for $5.99 loses some of it's merit after seeing Steam selling Junkatron 2008 for $49.99.
Also, refer to Weclocks post.

Would $1 difference really make you buy?
I mean, whats a dollar really worth?
If I go out and buy a pint of beer, I would usually pay £2-3, which is about $3-5. For me, a $5.99 game is equivalent price wise to 1-2 pints of beer, which is not much money really for what you're getting.
If you don't have much cash, then I can understand waiting until offers or just restricting your choices to those games which you know you would get many hours of enjoyment from (Fallout or Jagged Alliance 2 for example)
As GOG expands it range of games, there will be many examples of games which will be a steal at either price point. The prices are fine.

I'll just say this: Compare this beta launch with the Launch of Valve's steam.
I'm sure some of you remember that. People love steam now but....this site has had a much smoother transition then steam did.
I *really* feel it is a little to early to have a "Loosing their focus" thread..the site hasn't even been up a year.
A game from 2005 (Which I believe is the "newest" game on here. I could be wrong.) is still 4 years old at this point. That's enough time for someone to be talking about knowing people "back in the day." For someone to go through High School. For a president to serve 1 full term. The Civil War was fought in four years. our part in World War 2 was over in four years. Four years is a long time... I think you can safely call a game released in 2005 a good ol' game, especially since game and internet time tend to work a bit differently then Real World time, heh.

steam wasn't a store at first.

GOG is doing just fine, in less than a year it has a added a bunch of publishers and has managed to get some great titles on the service. The games are cheap with no DRM , what else do you want?

I agree in this respect. Digital distribution platforms offer the perfect chance to make lots of money on low margins and high volume sales - although I've ponied up my fair share of $9,99s on GOG, it's the $5,99 prices which are really attractive - and a hypothetical $4,99 price point would probably do even more to boost sales.

There's been no focus lost and just about every week has seen steady progress, with next week having a shot at blowing the doors off. Prices are good, the site works well, and the whole thing is in beta. All else is just background noise to me so long as the steady stream of progress continues with occasional great leaps forward.

personally, for some of these games I feel GOG could put it at any price point they wanted and still get the same sales.

Steam was always envisioned to be a platform for digital distribution, so I can make a fair comparison. You can look that up for yourself, if you want.

this may be true, but by not being a store but still requiring half-life owners to use steam would create a larger install base upon launch of the store than GOG had upon launch of the open beta. :D

Numbers don't matter: I was just talking about how stable GOG is compared to how stable Steam was when it launched. People love steam now, but they hated it then (and for at least a year or two after.)
My point is: If Steam is something very successful now, then think of what GOG will be given the same amount of development time. In two years we can write a thread askingof GOG has lost it's focus, but right now it is way to early.
Besides: You could always buy valve games through steam, from launch on.