It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Hey Goggers;

As many of you know, we announced on last Friday that we are going to introduce regional pricing for 3 new games coming up on GOG.com soon. Looking at the amount of reactions (over 3,500 comments at this very moment), it is obvious that this change is making many of you guys worried. We must have failed to clearly explain why our pricing policy for (some) newer games will change and what this means as a matter of fact for our PC & MAC classic games, which account for over 80% of our catalogue.

To be honest, our announcement was a bit vague simply because our future pricing policy is not 100% set in stone yet and we were just worried to make any promises before it was. You know, GOG.com has been growing quickly (thanks to you!), and the more we grow, the more we are worried to make some of you guys disappointed. This is why we were so (over-)cautious with our announcement.

We should have just been upfront about why we've made these changes and what they mean for us in the future and what we're planning. So let's talk. To be clear: what I'm talking about below is our plan. It's a plan that we believe we can accomplish, but while it's what we want to do with GOG, it may change some before it actually sees the light of day. Please don’t blame me for talking open-heartedly today and telling you about the plans and pricing policy we want to fight for and eventually achieve. The below plans aren't sure. The only guarantee I can give you is that we’ll do our best to fight for gamers while still making sure GOG.com as a whole grows (because well, we still want to be around 50 years from now, you know!). So, enough for the introduction, let’s get things started.

Why does GOG.com need to offer newer games at all?

We've been in business for 5 years now, and we've signed a big percentage of all of the classic content that can be legally untangled. There are still some big companies left we're trying to bring into the GOG.com fold, like LucasArts, Microsoft, Take2 and Bethesda, but what classic titles will we sign in the future once we have those partners on-board? We need to sign newer games or else just fire everyone and keep selling the same limited catalog. Either we bring you “not so old” releases from 2010+ or brand-new AAA titles, because these will become classic games tomorrow. It’s as simple as that.

Also, well, we want to expand beyond just classic games, hence the fact we have been offering you brand-new indie releases for almost 2 years now. Why expanding? Well, obviously, because the more games we sell, the more legitimacy we have on the market and the more likely it is that we can achieve our mission: making all PC & MAC video games 100% DRM-free, whether classic or brand-new titles.

To be straightforward (excuse my French):DRM is shit-- we'll never have any of it. It treats legitimate customers like rubbish and pirates don't have to bother with it. It's bad for gamers, and it's also bad for business and our partners. We want to make it easy and convenient for users to buy and play games; rather than give piracy a try. Happy gamers equals a healthy gaming industry; and this is what we fight for. Anyway, I am sure you well know our opinions about DRM.

To make the world of gaming DRM-free, we need to convince top-tier publishers & developers to give us a try with new games, just like they did with classic games. We need to make more case studies for the gaming industry, just like we successfully did back in 2011 with The Witcher 2. It was our first ever 100% DRM-free AAA day-1 release. GOG.com was the 2nd best-selling digital distribution platform worldwide for this title thanks to you guys, despite having regional prices for it. We need more breakthroughs like this to be able to show all the devs and publishers in our industry that DRM-free digital distribution is actually good for their business and their fans. And when I say breakthroughs, I am talking about really kick-ass games, with a potential metacritic score of 85% or more, AA+ and AAA kind of titles.

And this is exactly why we signed those 3 games we told you about last Friday. We believe those 3 games can be massive hits for hardcore gamers, that they can help us spread the DRM-free model among the industry for newer games and we did our best to convince their rights holders to give GOG.com a try. One of those games, as you see already, is Age of Wonders 3. We're planning more titles even beyond these first 3 soon.

Alright, but why is regional pricing needed for those (only 3 so far!) newer games then?

First of all, you have to be aware of an important fact when it comes to newer games: GOG.com cannot really decide what the prices should be. Top-tier developers and publishers usually have contractual obligations with their retail partners that oblige them to offer the game at the same price digitally and in retail. When they don’t have such contractual obligations, they are still encouraged to do so, or else their games might not get any exposure on the shelves in your favorite shops. This will change over time (as digital sales should overtake retail sales in the near future), but as of today, this is still a problem our industry is facing because retail is a big chunk of revenue and there’s nothing GOG.com can do to change that. We need to charge the recommended retail price for the boxed copies of the games in order for developers (or publishers) to either not get sued or at least get their games visible on shelves. You may recall that our sister company CD Projekt RED got sued for that in the past and we don’t want our partners to suffer from that too.

On top of that, you have to know that there are still many top-tier devs and publishers that are scared about DRM-free gaming. They're half-convinced it will make piracy worse, and flat pricing means that we're also asking them to earn less, too. Earn less, you say? Why is that? Well, when we sell a game in the EU or UK, VAT gets deducted from the price before anyone receives any profit. That means we're asking our partners to try out DRM-free gaming and at the same time also earn 19% - 25% less from us. Other stores, such as Steam, price their games regionally and have pricing that's more equitable to developers and publishers. So flat pricing + DRM-Free is something many devs and publishers simply refuse. Can you blame them? The best argument we can make to convince a publisher or developer to try DRM-Free gaming is that it earns money. Telling them to sacrifice income while they try selling a game with no copy protection is not a way to make that argument.

Getting back to those 3 new upcoming games coming up. The first one is Age of Wonders 3, which you can pre-order right now on GOG.com. The next 2 ones will be Divine Divinity: Original Sin and The Witcher 3. We’re very excited to offer those games DRM-free worldwide and we hope you’ll love them.

Still, we know some countries are really being screwed with regional pricing (Western Europe, UK, Australia) and as mentioned above, we’ll do our very best, for every release of a new game, to convince our partners to offer something special for the gamers living there.

And don’t forget guys: if regional pricing for those few big (as in, “AA+”) new games is a problem for you, you can always wait. In a few months. The game will be discounted on sale, and at 60, 70, or 80% off, the price difference will be minimal indeed. In a few years it will become a classic in its own right, and then we have the possibility to to make it flat-priced anyway (read next!) The choice is always yours. All we are after is to present it to you 100% DRM-free. We are sure you will make the best choice for yourself, and let others enjoy their own freedom to make choices as well.

So, what is going to happen with classic games then?

Classic content accounts for about 80% of our catalog, so yes, this is a super important topic. We've mentioned here above that we can’t control prices for new games, but we do have a lot of influence when it comes to classic games. GOG.com is the store that made this market visible and viable digitally, and we're the ones who established the prices we charge. We believe that we have a good record to argue for fair pricing with our partners.

So let's talk about the pricing for classics that we're shooting for. For $5.99 classics, we would like to make the games 3.49 GBP, 4.49 EUR, 199 RUB, and $6.49 AUD. For $9.99 classics, our targets are 5.99 GBP, 7.49 EUR, 349 RUB, and $10.99 AUD. This is what we’ve got in mind at the moment. We’ll do our best to make that happen, and we think it will. How? Well, we have made our partners quite happy with GOG.com's sales for years - thanks to you guys :). We have created a global, legal, successful digital distribution market of classics for them. This market didn't exist 5 years ago. By (re)making all those games compatible with modern operating systems for MAC and PC, we've made forgotten games profitable again. When it comes to classic games, we can tell them that we know more about this market than anyone. :) Being retrogaming freaks ourselves, we know that 5.99 EUR or GBP is crazy expensive for a classic game (compared to 5.99 USD). We have always argued that classic games only sell well if they have reasonable prices. Unfair regional pricing equals piracy and that’s the last thing anybody wants.

What’s next?

We will do our very best to make all of the above happen. This means three things:

First, we will work to make our industry go DRM-free in the future for both classic and new games (that’s our mission!).

Second, we will fight hard to have an attractive offer for those AA+ new games for our European, British and Australian users, despite regional pricing that we have to stick to.

Third, we will switch to fair local pricing for classic games, as I mentioned above.

TheEnigmaticT earlier mentioned that he would eat his hat if we ever brought DRM to GOG.com. I'm going to go one step further: by the end of this year, I'm making the promise that we will have converted our classic catalog over to fair regional pricing as outlined above. If not, we'll set up a record a video of some horrible public shaming for me, TheEnigmaticT, and w0rma. In fact, you know what? Feel free to make suggestions below for something appropriate (but also safe enough that we won't get the video banned on YouTube) so you feel that we're motivated to get this done quickly. I'll pick one that's scary enough from the comments below and we'll let you know which one we're sticking to.

I hope that this explanation has helped ease your worry a bit and help you keep your faith in GOG.com as a place that's different, awesome, and that always fights for what's best for gamers. If you have any questions, comments or ideas, feel free to address them to us below and TheEnigmaticT and I will answer them to the best of our abilities tomorrow. We hear you loud and clear, so please do continue sharing your feedback with us. At the end of the day GOG.com is your place; without you guys it would just be a website where a few crazy people from Europe talk about old games. :)

I end many of my emails with this, but there's rarely a time to use it more appropriately than here:

“Best DRM-free wishes,

Guillaume Rambourg,
(TheFrenchMonk)
Managing Director -- GOG.com”
avatar
TheGreenFairy: live in Europe, Hungary, and those 55 dollars exceed the 10 percent of my monthly income.
Well $55 is 1/5 of my monthly income .
avatar
Selderij: To anyone claiming that GOG's DRM-free makes a huge difference compared to Steam.

Your GOG games are just as account-bound as your Steam games are. Have you tried selling your GOG games to anyone lately? That's right, you don't really own them here either. The DRM-freeness becomes a real difference only if the distributor shuts down completely, and even in Steam's case it's probable that you'll get your games to safety, at least according to what they've said. Otherwise DRM-free is all about the image, and it seems some people buy a bit too much into that when there's no real difference for them. Mind you, I'm not talking about the draconian extra DRM by Ubisoft or the others.

Excepting a few legitimate (though not common) scenarios involving very limited internet access, Steam lets you play your games in whichever way you want, unless that way includes giving free copies to your friends so you can have a right jolly time in a multiplayer session. Being averse to the Steam client (which does its job with minimal fuss and maximal functionality) is a deliberate personal issue, not a practical one.

Also, Steam has automatic updates. It's a pain in the ass to manually update a new game with n patches still on the way, so GOG loses there by default: its only advantage in new games was the flat pricing model.
No. Just no. The DRM-freeness means that I don't need to have additional software running on my PC (worse with Steam, which is proprietary, and thus is capable of being used for spyware and such – their subscriber agreement even had reserved the right to do that). Then there is a very real applied difference with regards to game loading times – Steam games load longer because Steam has to check with the servers (which is annoying to no end when even the level editor has this DRM applied). Furthermore, it means that I can install the game to wherever I like it to be installed, not where the DRM expects it to be (which means I can store large games on an HDD and not on a small SSD, have nicer reinstall experience etc.). Lastly, once you store a DRM-free game, you can install it whenever without any third-party tools and it will work as it did last time. These things make a real difference.

And automatic updates are horrible. Patches are software, and software has regressions. Case in point: Unreal. For the longest time, the best patch for playing Unreal was 225f (the latest, patch 226f, broke several important things and hardly fixed anything). But the best patch for server use was 224v (because 225f servers don't support 226f clients and vice versa, while 224v supports both). Now? There's an unofficial patch, 227, which solves all of these problems and adds a lot more to the game. But it's unofficial, so you probably wouldn't see it offered as a patch in the autoupdater to begin with!
avatar
Nalkoden: It's not about the price, it's about the fact that they have gone back on one of their CORE values for no good reason (other than more profit).
avatar
vojtasass: In my opinion development of DRM-free digital platform is VERY good reason.

avatar
Nalkoden: People see this as a sign of things to come. And by "things" i mean DRM.
avatar
vojtasass: If people don't believe them now, then why did they get all those freebies and awesome promos? GOG said: "regional prices for some of the new games AND everything DRM-free". If you don't trust them, then probably there's no store on Earth, that you could trust.
You do realize that the letter announces that regional prices are being introduced for the whole catalogue by the end of the year? Only with a smaller price difference (for the time being, as they have said, this might change when the contracts run out). I do think "the whole catalogue" is a bit more than regional prices for "some of the new games".
avatar
Trilarion: Btw. if you continue this concept of regional prices the end should be personal prices. Basically like on a bazaar but without haggling but a computer algorithm which will determine the price that is offered to you. It might revolutionize how economies work.

Okay this might be 10 years ahead of its time. Just wanted to mention it already.
You do know this is what Amazon has been doing for a while, right?
avatar
StormHammer: Yes, I remember TeT posting that, which is why I'm concerned. They are treading a fine line, because if they do implement region-locking, that is a form of DRM, and then their DRM-Free mission statement above becomes essentially meaningless.
avatar
Sslaxx: *There is NO way* the big publishers will not let them have big titles here without region locking, *regional prices or not*.
At this point you are correct, there is no way. In the future it's possible (in a very optimistic future) but GOG would need to have more clout than they do no in order to be able to offer that.
I have been using Gog.Com for my source for older games, for the sole reason that the price is same for everyone.

If this becomes yet another 1$=1€-pricing scheme, I am taking the rest of my money elsewhere.

Regards, a GoGer with 319 titles on his account.
avatar
StingingVelvet: Good letter, very blunt and matter-of-fact. Business realities are business realities.

I support GOG for simple DRM installers. Until that changes you have my support, and I am glad more new games will be coming.
Meh, this sums up my thoughts.
avatar
HypersomniacLive: That the stuff I expected the letter to address, not to rehash TET's replies with a bit more controversial info thrown in.
I'm actually curious if they're going to address any of it in this thread.
I hope they do but I have a nagging feeling that they feel the issue is settled
Post edited February 26, 2014 by Rusty_Gunn
avatar
Khalaq: Sure, it would be nice to buy AOW3 for 10 Euros, but you cannot reasonably expect that price in the game's first month.
avatar
silentbob1138: That's a strawman argument.
In what way is it a straw man argument? Did I say that it's wrong or silly to disagree with GOG's pricing policies? No. Did I say that people shouldn't be either disappointed or upset if they have to pay a higher price than they used to pay? No. Did I say that GOG hasn't made any changes to how they conduct business or that they will not make any changes in the future? No.

What I said was that, as far as I can tell, GOG's motivations and ultimate goals (fairness in pricing and value for money spent) seem to be the same. I also said that people should vote with their wallets. You may choose to disagree with either of those opinions, but neither of them is a straw man argument.
avatar
Selderij: To anyone claiming that GOG's DRM-free makes a huge difference compared to Steam.

Your GOG games are just as account-bound as your Steam games are. Have you tried selling your GOG games to anyone lately? That's right, you don't really own them here either. The DRM-freeness becomes a real difference only if the distributor shuts down completely, and even in Steam's case it's probable that you'll get your games to safety, at least according to what they've said.
They never said that. That's an Internet rumor. But when GOG folds, DRM-free games will still be shared with others if they cannot be sold anywhere else (much like the heavy "abandonware" sharing that was going on not long ago (and probably still continues -- I just don't look at it much since GOG)).

As for this regional pricing snafu, I would just simply recommend boycotting the regional pricing games and let folks know why you're not buying them.

That, or be sure every last one of us VPNs to Russia. That would also make a great statement.

I really think that GOG has worked hard to be as fair as possible. I think the statement has to be made to developers, and our almighty dollar in conjunction with our words is the only thing that CEO/CFOs listen to.
avatar
vampiro13: You do realize that the letter announces that regional prices are being introduced for the whole catalogue by the end of the year?
I do. Difference is so small, that I don't see any problem for residents of rich countries like Germany. On more serious note bank takes a fee for exchanging € into $, yes?
high rated
According to the geography lesson of GOG Europe consist 4 parts :

- Russia
- Poland
- Switzerland
- " Land of the rich people "

edit : my prediction : GOG will lose at least 1/3 of it's customer base by the end of this year
Post edited February 26, 2014 by ne_zavarj
avatar
ne_zavarj: According to the geography lesson of GOG Europe consist 4 parts :

- Russia
- Poland
- Switzerland
- " Land of the rich people "

edit : my prediction : GOG will loose at least 1/3 of it's customer base by the end of this year
Don't forget Norway...

If only their regions made some sense...
avatar
silentbob1138: That's a strawman argument.
avatar
Khalaq: In what way is it a straw man argument? Did I say that it's wrong or silly to disagree with GOG's pricing policies? No. Did I say that people shouldn't be either disappointed or upset if they have to pay a higher price than they used to pay? No. Did I say that GOG hasn't made any changes to how they conduct business or that they will not make any changes in the future? No.

What I said was that, as far as I can tell, GOG's motivations and ultimate goals (fairness in pricing and value for money spent) seem to be the same. I also said that people should vote with their wallets. You may choose to disagree with either of those opinions, but neither of them is a straw man argument.
No one is asking for 10€ for AOW3.
avatar
silentbob1138: That's a strawman argument.
avatar
Khalaq: In what way is it a straw man argument?
You argued that we can't expect the game to cost $10 in the first month. Which never was the issue. The regionally different prices are, not the fact that the game costs $40.