What's more? As I've said and other people have explained in many previous comments: "fair" pricing is actually NOT fair. People in different regions have different living standards, different income levels, different piracy rates, different disposable incomes, etc. When GOG makes American customers pay the exact same prices as, let say, Australian customers who actually have higher income levels, more disposable incomes, etc, then American customers are actually paying MORE in an economic sense.

What GOG has is EQUAL pricing, NOT fair pricing. What is equal is not always fair. Example: communism supposedly enforced economic equality, BUT it is also very economically unfair. GOG's so-called "fair" pricing is actually extremely unfair because it does not take into consideration of different living standard, different wage levels, different disposable incomes in different regions.

Anyway. I have already chose to buy somewhere else. GOG has certainly made the choice for me - when GOG has lost many titles and not getting any new ones that are worth my money. GOG has only added indie titles that no one cares about... and movies. I wonder just how many people here wants movies. Did anyone ask for movies? I know I won't even bother.

Anyway. I'm done here. Call me when there are more GAMES.

I guess that people are afraid that it will spread like cancer and more and more games will be regionally priced, because all publishers would rather earn more than less money. So they'd rather have less games and a fire barrier that ensures continuing flat prices.

Does someone know if Gothic 3 on gog.com is the Enhanced Edition?

Well, even within a country there are people that earn more than others. A brain surgeon has to spend less time working to earn 100 bucks than a waiter. Do you want every user to send in their tax declaration, so that prices can be adjusted to individual income levels? How about you pay the same price, when buying the same product? Seems fair enough to me.

I already made a proposition to accomodate people who pay the lowest prices because they live in U.S. regardless and want others to pay the highest possible prices the publishes manage to squeeze out of them.

Will you KTCHONG and similar people like you agree to financially profitable change and accept FLAT pricing based on the highest regional price worldwide? That will help GOG stay much more profitable than now, also make greedy publishers happy and will not disadvantage anybody, because we all will pay ripoff prices.

To explain what I mean.

Before with fair pricing we all paid e.g. 20$ for a game no matter which country you logged in,

with current rip off regional pricing, you, proponent of regional pricing still pay 20$, but people from EU pay e.g. U.K. people 28$, Germans 30$ and people from Australia 40$.

You say, you would gladly pay the highest regional prices as it will bring new games and let games of publishers who want to rip off other countries stay. So would you agree to pay 40$ for a game, that cost you before 20$ for the sake of satisfying publishers who want to rip off people on GOG too for no other reason, than that they can do it at other retail venues? That way, we all will pay 40$ from now on and nobody will be disadvantaged except ALL us paying customers regardless of where we log in, BUT we will get games galore here.


I actually think, after I did read few of you posts, that you would loudly proclaim to be ready to pay so much more, because you know, that you will never need to, as nor GOG or any other retailer would dare to ask you such high prices because you all would go berserk if it ever happened, but at the same time, you want others to accept to being ripped off, so you get more games offered here. And sorry, this Union blabla is really not intelligent as it's like comparing apples and stinking socks.

It comes bundled with the community patch although I can't find the reference to that on the "new" game page. I've never heard about an enhanced edition for the regular game so maybe you are talking about the not-so-good add-on then. This clearly says "enhanced" in its title. :)

I'm pretty sure that the guys at GOG looked at some numbers before making that decision.

Yes thank you i meant the Community Patch.

Over a year ago, maybe almost two years ago, when I mentioned in the Steam forums that I also shopped at GOG and actually preferred GOG (at that time, but obviously not anymore,) many Steam users (who mostly had disdain for GOG users) jestingly asked me if I was an "anti-DRM Knight Templar" or "DRM-freedom fighter aka terrorist", and if I was on one of my "crusades" and was going to "terrorize" them over DRM. I did not get their jokes at the time. Now I got it.

23...in that list, but I did redeem 2 my self.
Just to save multi purchases, and the whole cc declined bit :)

It's great that you get their jokes but I think it would be awesome to be called "anti-DRM Knight Templar", sounds like a very honorable title.

Let me correct you, Indie titles you don't care about, many of the indie titles here are awesome, sometimes even better than some AAA titles out there.

Indeed, it's just too bad that he isn't worthy of being called that since he cares more about being able to play the King's Bounty games simultaneously than supporting GOG and the DRM-free movement.
Besides, he obviously doesn't realise that his right to freedom of choice hasn't been compromised in any way as witnessed by the very fact that he is exercising it by buying a lot of his games on Steam.

Ok, I must say I was pretty pissed off when I first read it but now I must admit that I kinda understand that there is no clear-cut "bad guy" here and that this thing quite simply sucks all-around.

There are only so many "Good Old Games" to be revived and the truth of the matter is, GoG had already succeeded in doing that a year or so ago, now adding mostly obscure/less well-known titles that might not really stack up against the alpha-dogs of yore (unless they'd somehow magically succeed in getting the Lucas Arts catalog or the old Blizzard games which would be a happy day indeed).
It was clear that GoG needed to add regional pricing because (a) new and/or AAA games' publishers weren't gonna go for flat USD pricing and (b) a lot of non-US users were clamoring for it, however, when they tried, you had the other users clamoring about losing what they already had (which makes sense really).
So GoG finally decides to take the hit and pay out of their own pockets the regional pricing difference for those said new/AAA titles if it means getting newer titles which will allow them to grow further.
However, seeing as most of the time they are either the biggest or indeed the only ones selling the older games and with profit margins so much smaller, it would make sense that they wouldn't/couldn't afford to do the same with them as well.

For the most part the bigger publishers will look the other way because these games were dead weight that was not bringing them any money anyway but for those that are on many distribution platforms or for those publishers with very few games or mostly semi-old ones, these are their livelihoods and it might not make good business sense.

Now, the truth is, I still don't know how to feel. I do understand Frictional Games' point; with only a handful of games in their catalog, they couldn't afford angering their other distributors (and angering Steam to stay on GoG is just plain mad) but I must admit that I can't really use the same argument and justify Nordic Games for not being able to come into some kind of agreement with GoG, even on a per-game-basis.
I mean, first off, the GoG versions are the least problematic and not only because GoG actually put the time and effort to make it so but also because apparently, the Steam overlay doesn't play nice with many of the games' aging code.
Add to this that, even indirectly, many of their games wouldn't even make it to Steam at all if it weren't for GoG and their revival of old games plus now that they are there, I find it pretty hard to believe that Steam would force them to comply or ditch them altogether since they'd be removing a heck of a lot more than 35 games from their catalog.

I do believe that in their case it was simply a matter of not wanting to bother with GoG's business and the compromises that come with it since they can simply get more from Steam and easier which TBH makes good business sense but also makes them look pretty bad (and I mean, EA-bad) to the gamers which is basically a 180° turn from their previous image.

I have many (1/3?) of the games being removed and indeed most from the entire Nordic catalog (between GoG, Humble and Steam) but still the cost of buying the rest is pretty high for me plus, even if I can appreciate the business side of their decision, I still can't help but feel angered with that stance that I have half a mind to not wanting to give them my money (i.e. my business).

One thing is for sure, if I'm not buying them from here, I won't be buying them period.

(Wow, I didn't even realize the wall of text that I made :O )