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
paulrainer: which is complete robbery and gog clearly support robbery by implementing regional pricing
its a sad day
avatar
Matruchus: Totally agree.
ergo , so should i support robbery of publisjhers by buying pirated games.. by gogs thinking - yes , yes i should
avatar
skeletonbow: Personally I think some companies do this for legitimate reasons and others for greedy reasons and I don't think they should all be painted with the same brush per se. But for one particular example, if I was a game company selling my game for $5 a pop in North America of which I got $2 of that in profit, but in Europe there were government enforced taxes on top of the game price and the retailer had a policy of fixed global pricing and the taxes ate into $1 of that, then either my company that produced the game loses half of our profit (the $2), or both my company and the distributor (in this case GOG.com) split the loss. So at $1 tax, that would leave $4 profit, and with the 40% profit of that coming to my company, we would only end up receiving $1.60 for our game instead of $2. In this case it is the government(s) of Europe which are causing the unfairness. The unfairness is ultimately either going to the end customer the tax is targeting, or the business trying to produce a profit is unfairly getting shafted by it, or the distributor, or some split between the 3. What would people consider fair? Split the taxation 3 ways with the publisher, developer and customer all paying a portion of the tax? Or is not selling the game at all more fair? Honest question for this one scenario only. There are other scenarios in other countries which might be greatly different and each deserve their own question of similar nature. Fairness though needs to be considered from all sides IMHO, and not just the end paying customer. Businesses deserve fairness too.
avatar
GabiMoro: It would be fair if the customer pay the tax. If I don't like it then it's my duty to vote and change the persons who guvern my country with others which promote lower taxes or other method of taxation.

Let's face it, we were spoiled by this "one world, one price". This is not fair for the developer, nor for GOG which have to pay the tax themselves.

On other hand, selling a game at a bigger price than the regular price + tax is an abuse. The australians prices are absurd, I'm wondering why do they bother to buy games.
This makes the assumption that such taxes are applicable to these products given the nature of their distribution and current laws. Given the tax beneficial location of GOG's servers (Cyprus), it would surprise me if such taxes needed to be paid in those countries. Regional pricing was generally understandable when physical distribution was the norm as taxes couldn't be avoided (as well as other costs inherent with physical distribution), but digital distribution negates practically all of these.

That being said, if GOG has an explanation for why regional pricing is necessary in the realm of digital distribution in spite of the above (as in what additional costs are incurred through selling digital goods to different countries online) then I'm sure that it would be welcomed. I would even wager that it could entice a few people to think differently about their stance on this should a satisfactory explanation be offered.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by Professor_Cake
avatar
Matruchus: Totally agree.
avatar
paulrainer: ergo , so should i support robbery of publisjhers by buying pirated games.. by gogs thinking - yes , yes i should
Yeah, well piracy here is as big as in Russia so i really dont understand the pricing range at least for Slovenia.
Would fifty bucks get them to sell whatever principles they have left? Maybe we can have a whip round and get them to sell the lot as a bargain bin lot? An extra ten for their dignity too or did they leave that behind after they crawled out from the last publisher's office?
avatar
Matruchus: Totally agree.
avatar
paulrainer: ergo , so should i support robbery of publisjhers by buying pirated games.. by gogs thinking - yes , yes i should
Or you could wait until it inevitably goes on sale for a fraction of its initial cost.
high rated
avatar
timppu: Probably so that you can't e.g. redeem GOG gift keys bought from another area. But as said, that is still not DRM anymore than having to log into your GOG account in order to download your games. (I know there are some who consider even that DRM, but I find it silly.)
avatar
skeletonbow: Sadly that's because many people who have no idea what DRM actually means/is, who generally don't know the difference between copyrights, trademarks, and patents, and don't know the difference between copyright ownership and copyright licensing complain about everything equally under a random label such as "DRM" to mean "something I don't like".
Gifting restrictions are a form of DRM, because they are technical implementations which restrict the consumer's rights to use the product.


avatar
skeletonbow: Every EULA agreement is legally binding and you either agree to the terms and spend your money, or you disagree with the terms and save your money. In either way, this is the decision of whether or not to enter into a legal contract with someone. It isn't a form of digital rights management or copy protection - technologies designed to prevent the ability to make copies of creative works.
EULA is not legally binding, national legislation overrides whatever and anything that is written in EULA.
If EULA says making copies of the software is not permitted, but national legislation says it's legal, then it's legal.

EULAs have absolutely no legal status, at least not in most parts of Europe, not sure of North America, it can be different there.


avatar
skeletonbow: Call me silly if need be, but if GOG loses a customer over this regional pricing thing, who then decides to "go to their competitor", every competitor of GOG that I'm aware of has terms and conditions far less favourable to the customer than GOG.com does with or without this change.
DotEmu offers 100% DRM-free games, just like GOG.
Yes, they also have exploitative regional pricing, but the thing is, they never promised anything else.

Often DotEmu has been seen as the "bad guys" in comparison with GOG, because they do not treat customers as equally as GOG used to. Now, this has taken a 180 turn, and now DotEmu is seen as the "good guys", as they have never made false promises or lied.

To many people, that makes a world of difference.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by PixelBoy
low rated
avatar
GOG.com: 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.
(using exchange rates at the time of this post)

$5.99
3.49 GBP = $5.81
4.49 EUR = $6.13
199 RUB = $5.52
6.49 AUD = $5.79

$9.99
5.99 GBP = $9.97
7.49 EUR = $10.23
349 RUB = $9.68
10.99 AUD = $9.81

I wasn't going to post something like this because I don't take offense to the fact that GOG has spoiled its European customers by paying their VAT in the past, but with all this talk of 'fairness' and with many residents of first world countries being jealous of good rates for Russian gamers... what the hell, here are the thoughts crossing my mind.

(Do me the courtesy of explaining why I'm wrong, please, instead of downvoting me, if you disagree.)

Wouldn't fair look like:

$5.99
4.32 GBP = $7.19 = $5.99 + $1.20 (20% VAT)
5.26 EUR = $7.19 = $5.99 + $1.20 (20% average VAT)
X RUB (where X need not equal the 'standard' USD but instead reflect local economy)
Y AUD (no comment; insufficient knowledge of actual situation there)

$9.99
7.21 GBP = $11.99 = $9.99 + $2.00 (20% VAT)
8.78 EUR = $11.99 = $9.99 + $2.00 (20% average VAT)
X RUB (where X need not equal the 'standard' USD but instead reflect local economy)
Y AUD (no comment; insufficient knowledge of actual situation there)

Better yet, wouldn't fair entail actually grouping countries into appropriate regions? You seem to be missing that point:
avatar
GOG.com: 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.
Perhaps I misunderstand the situation, but the more damning complaint about regional pricing is that some countries get screwed because publishers lump them into a 'region' with other countries that have very different economies, markets, laws, etc. Shouldn't you be a bit more concerned about some Eastern European countries being unfairly placed in the same region as much more prosperous nations (instead of being placed in the more appropriate Russian region or in their own region)? About Mexico being classed with the United States and Canada? Africa?

---

Whatever the case, I am with you so long as you fight for DRM-free. I trust that you've made this decision in the best interests of that cause, and you have my support. Don't take my critique above as anything but my musings on this situation.
high rated
avatar
Professor_Cake: I would even wager that it could entice a few people to think differently about their stance on this should a satisfactory explanation be offered.
there is only one answer to the regional pricing conundrum and that is greed by the publishers and they know it. You will not get 1 satisfactory answer from gog or any publisher on this matter - just that its "an industry standard" that cannot be changed , which as we all know is BS
avatar
Gabelvampir: To everyone stating "regional pricing is an industry standard":
DRM is also an industry standard. So you would be ok with GOG getting DRM with the same argument.
Maybe you should think about that.
avatar
timppu: I agree with that. Same goes to saying "blame the publisher instead". Sure it is the publisher who ultimately decides it for their games, but GOG enabled it. Ie. GOG has the power to say no (whether saying no is a good idea, that's another question).

So in the end it comes to the question whether one (the customer) accepts it or not. I find it a nuisance, but not a deal-breaker. I allow other people to be more pissed about it, if they really hate it.
Exactly, there are always (at least) 2 parties in a deal. And the resulting deal is something all parties agreed on, so all parties are equally responsible.
avatar
paulrainer: ergo , so should i support robbery of publisjhers by buying pirated games.. by gogs thinking - yes , yes i should
avatar
CarrionCrow: Or you could wait until it inevitably goes on sale for a fraction of its initial cost.
or gog could wait until ithe publishers let them sell it for a flat price worldwide ;) instead of doing slippery deals and getting into bed with suppliers of these games to make a quick buck
Post edited February 27, 2014 by paulrainer
avatar
Professor_Cake: <snip>

That being said, if GOG has an explanation for why regional pricing is necessary in the realm of digital distribution in spite of the above (as in what additional costs are incurred through selling digital goods to different countries online) then I'm sure that it would be welcomed. I would even wager that it could entice a few people to think differently about their stance on this should a satisfactory explanation be offered.
In France, it's an obligation by law to pays VATS on digital buy. each individual is entitled to report; if they don't and are caught : a big fine at least. could be worse with actual law.
I don't know for other european country, but they have similary thinks with VATS, no ?
avatar
JohnnyDollar: Meh, people have been paying regional prices everywhere else for years. DRM-free is the linchpin. We'll see how many customers out there prioritize that over flat price in the next year.
Maybe for you. Personally until GOG and Humble Store started adding flat prices to digital shopping, I just ordered my games via foreign stores that sold me the physical boxes.

I'm not even all that opposed to DRM, as long as it's reasonable. As long as it's not uPlay or Securom or worse I don't care. I just refuse to pay almost two times what a 'Murican pays for the same game.
avatar
CarrionCrow: Or you could wait until it inevitably goes on sale for a fraction of its initial cost.
avatar
paulrainer: or gog could wait until ithe publishers let them see it for a flat price worldwide ;) instead of doing slippery deals and getting into bed with suppliers of these games to make a quick buck
And if the publishers don't? What happens then? GOG keeps going on indie games that are miss and hit while leaning on people to keep on buying the older games they have the rights for? What happens when the market becomes saturated? What happens when the sales we all love turn into failures because the user base has grabbed everything of interest and there's no expansion to bring people back to the checkout page? It's already happening. Check around for the "man, I thought everyone and their mother had already bought this game/bundle" comments for certain items. GOG can't stand alone forever as some utopian bastion exempt from the realities of the world around it. Making deals and getting into bed with suppliers is how you manage to hang around long enough to build up your power base.
avatar
MoP: But again, is that really on the even remotely visible horizon? Personally I'm mostly interested in adventure games, so just a very random stat - MobyGames has 1721 DOS & Windows titles in the adventure category up to the year 2000. Of course that's an exaggerated, unreliable number, there's bound to be duplicates, errors or other "false positives", many won't be "worthy" of reviving, many won't be attainable. And it's obviously not just a matter of picking it up, lying on the ground (but that's like, gogs job and stuff).
But that's a number to start with, only up to the year 2000 (without other potential platforms). In one genre alone. GOG has 92 if I counted correctly.
...
"You have bigger dreams than that". Grow, live long and prosper, I wish You the best of luck.
But 1629 potential adventure games and I_can't_be_bothered_to_count_other_genres_on_MobyGames potential games from other genres, along with the "aging" line of when a game becomes a "classic" as dirtyharry50 put it, and other potential platforms like Amiga, and indies, and the newer games You wouldn't have to bend over to release, are not enough for You to prosper and continue Your holy crusade? There was no other venue to sustain You, that You had to go for regional pricing, breaking another aspect that got many people here in the first place?
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: The challenge here is that:

1. Many of those games you're talking about are rubbish. Our back catalog of classics isn't just old games.
2. The ones that aren't rubbish are exceedingly difficult to sign, or else you would see them here already. Trust me, we've been trying.
Of course, I acknowledged many will fall off for various reasons, "not worthy of reviving" (my PR speak for "rubbish") and "not attainable" being among them (that didn't stop the MoO3's coming here, but I guess we can pass that off as "infamy"). But I find it very hard to believe that the vast majority of those thousands of titles are rubbish, or that You've indeed researched the vast majority to come to this conclusion. Maybe I was clinging too long to the unreasonable idea that You guys would actually actively search for hidden gems, instead of just relying on "metacritic" (so to speak).

Then if You indeed were on top of this game for these past 5 years, seen it all, and in Your eyes the well is indeed drying up... how on earth did Night Dive beat You to System Shock 2 (the Nr1 on the Wishlist for ages), I Have No Mouth, The Wizardries? Those are not exactly obscure titles; one would think with the years of experience, constant growth and reputation for starting this "old game revival movement", You'd have enough clout to at least get hot stuff like that before a "newcomer" snags them?

I'm guessing You're just content with "outsourcing" (so to speak) as much of this "smaller fish" work as possible at this point, while You shift gear into focusing on the other stuff?
(as mentioned before, maybe I'm talking out of school here, and You've been working together on this somehow, or "paving the road" for others to "seal the deal" now or something... and most of this You probably can't talk about, especially in specifics, but in general about the amount of focus and resources going into it?)

Do You think, once the well literally dries up, You'll be able to disclose which titles You had pursued, which You discarded as rubbish, and which turned out unattainable? I'd be mighty interested for one.

Well, either way, thanks for indulging this, as I know it's not exactly the "crux of the issue" for most people here, and You've got Your PR hands full. I find Your lack of faith in hidden treasures of the past disturbing, Jedi Monks, but what can You do, I'll shut up and get back to ebay I guess. Good luck with the Disneys and other big boys.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by MoP
avatar
paulrainer: or gog could wait until ithe publishers let them see it for a flat price worldwide ;) instead of doing slippery deals and getting into bed with suppliers of these games to make a quick buck
avatar
CarrionCrow: And if the publishers don't? What happens then? GOG keeps going on indie games that are miss and hit while leaning on people to keep on buying the older games they have the rights for? What happens when the market becomes saturated? What happens when the sales we all love turn into failures because the user base has grabbed everything of interest and there's no expansion to bring people back to the checkout page? It's already happening. Check around for the "man, I thought everyone and their mother had already bought this game/bundle" comments for certain items. GOG can't stand alone forever as some utopian bastion exempt from the realities of the world around it. Making deals and getting into bed with suppliers is how you manage to hang around long enough to build up your power base.
The problem with the release of AOW3 is that there are no publishers for this game. The developers made the pricing for this and GOG went with it.