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
Ichwillnichtmehr: The publisher now decides prices, and GOG.com does what the publisher says:
http://www.gog.com/forum/age_of_wonders_series/post_your_regional_price_for_aow3/page1
avatar
ElarionAbendglan: What means the publisher "now" decides prices? They always did. If you make them an offer to bring their shiny new game onto your platform and the deal just doesn't cut it, they say "no thanks". That's what it's always been in every business worldwide. This one is no exception.
GOG.com made the rules for prices for their platform, and these rules included $1 =/= €1

Now the publisher makes the rules for prices on their platform, and the publisher wants $1 = €1

You said "They don't even aim for 1$=1€ so what was the matter here?", and I pointed out that it is now irrelevant what GOG.com is aiming for, as they have abandoned their rule of "$1 =/= €1"
Post edited February 27, 2014 by Ichwillnichtmehr
avatar
nasorna: Hello! First of all I would like to make clear that I don't have anything against more recent games appearing on gog, but I found the argument that after signing up the games from LucasArts, Microsoft, Take2 and Bethesda, the fountain of old games would dry up, and people would have toi get fired. Altough I have to say I don't really favor this kind of discourse, I'm pretty sure (at least this is what I hope) that TheFrenchMonk did'nt mean it in such absolute terms.
Just concentrating on the games issue I would say that there must be thousands of games from the 90's and 80's (and 70's) left to optimize and sell that don't belong to any of these companies (perhaps they were even made by just one person). I hope that the site doesen't stop bringing us more and more games from past eras.
They don't plan to stop. Just in the past few weeks they released more than 10 games from the 90s. But a lot of the easier games have already been signed. There are many games left. But a lot of them are bad, or have difficult legal issues attached.

I think that GOG could have expanded into newer games without regional pricing, and that not expanding was also a viable choice. They chose this method of expansion. We'll have to see how it plays out.
avatar
Liljna: This thread is so long so I gave up figuring if someone already said this.
But not all European countries have the Euro as currency, but they still have to pay in Euros because of their geographical location.
So they don't save any fees, because these customers have to pay a fee no matter if they pay in Dollars or Euros. So if the Euro price is higher compared to the Dollar price (translated to their own currency of course), it will be a price hike for them.
avatar
HGiles: Someone did already point this out.

I don't support regional pricing. I can see why GOG agreed to this though. No pricing scheme works for everyone.
To prove to publishers that DRM-free can sell as much as DRM. The end goal for GoG has always been DRM-Free.
high rated
I feel betrayed. Why should i pay more than an american if my salary is around 1100€? And salaries in eastern europe are half mine, so it's far worse for people living in those countries. This is an open door to piracy and I am seriously considering not buying more games from GoG.
avatar
Huinehtar: Oh well...
Age of Empires II, Freelancer => Microsoft
Half-Life, Portal => Valve

All, DRM providers which don't want to sell their games without DRM.

Seriously?

Choose better examples, those are the worst of all.
avatar
dhundahl: I'm pretty sure Freelancer has no cd-check, meaning that it's actually DRM-free if you own the old physical media. As such, I don't see why it would be a big deal to sell it here at GOG with no DRM, though of course we're talking about a Microsoft game and they just might prefer to have it fade into obscurity just to be difficult. Which is a shame, since it was such a nice blend between spaceship combat and casual shooter. Damn shame they never made a sequel. FL2 would be one of very few games that I just might buy on release day.

FL aside, I do agree. AoE isn't that likely since MS might still think to do something sensible with the franchise and Valve making their very own Half-Life available anywhere but on their very own Steam-service? I find that highly unrealistic, to say the least. :-)
The legal problems are likely keeping Freelancer on MS' own services. Technically, it probably isn't a big deal. Legally is another problem.

avatar
HGiles: Someone did already point this out.

I don't support regional pricing. I can see why GOG agreed to this though. No pricing scheme works for everyone.
avatar
synfresh: To prove to publishers that DRM-free can sell as much as DRM. The end goal for GoG has always been DRM-Free.
I'm not sure why you're replying to my post. Your point doesn't seem relevant to what I said or what I was responding to.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by HGiles
avatar
Matruchus: Gog is not introducing fair pricing for classics for the price differences will be fixed and not bound to daily currency changes so there is nothing fair in that.
Depends on your definition of the word "fair", doesn't it? It's arguably unfair that a Russian and a Swede aren't paying the same price, but then again, once you take purchasing power into account, they really wouldn't be paying the same price anyway, would they?

Regardless of the few cents of difference on the classics, the price remains at the bargain bin range. That's a fair price, isn't it? There might even be a discount every now and again, which is even more fair, isn't it?
avatar
Liljna: This thread is so long so I gave up figuring if someone already said this.
But not all European countries have the Euro as currency, but they still have to pay in Euros because of their geographical location.
So they don't save any fees, because these customers have to pay a fee no matter if they pay in Dollars or Euros. So if the Euro price is higher compared to the Dollar price (translated to their own currency of course), it will be a price hike for them.
avatar
HGiles: Someone did already point this out.

I don't support regional pricing. I can see why GOG agreed to this though. No pricing scheme works for everyone.
Fair enough, I just wanted to make sure you and others knew (and I was admittedly too lazy to read through the thread).

I like your level-headed thinking though.
Will people JUST READ THE DAMN LETTER from end to finish? I'm not against the pricing idea for old games, since FOR THE FIRST TIME something being in euro isn't bullshit. I don't know about others, but in my country this works: 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 $10.99 AUD.
In my national currency, 4,49 EUR is roughly equal (a few "cents" difference) to 5,99 dollars, so no problem for me on that count. I doubt I will buy AAA games either from Steam or GOG, but as for the old ones I'm okay with that.
And my country is fucking POOR, so if it's okay for my currency it should be mostly okay for other Easter Europeans.
PS: I'm from Bulgaria.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by ClaymoreFan
So we promised an answer for you guys today, and I've been hanging out at the office late in hopes it would develop; sadly, it seems that a few answers are still hung up on confirmations. Sorry about this, but we are going to be having a final go at it first thing tomorrow morning our time and will hopefully get all your questions answered by then.
avatar
Matruchus: Look the rates for AOW3 are 39.99$=39.99€ that says it all. If they had any brains they would have waited with the release of this game. It has revealed their intentions.
avatar
HGiles: They're treating classic and new games differently. New games get publisher set rates. Probably just as bad as people are expecting.

Classic games get a pretty close conversion. It's discussed in the letter. Some are higher by a few cents, some are lower by a few cents.
Until the publishers decides, that they want $1 = €1, and since GOG.com has now allowed that for other games on the site, there is no reason why they shouldn't get it for their games too.

After all, it's the industry standard.
avatar
ElarionAbendglan: What means the publisher "now" decides prices? They always did. If you make them an offer to bring their shiny new game onto your platform and the deal just doesn't cut it, they say "no thanks". That's what it's always been in every business worldwide. This one is no exception.
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: GOG.com made the rules for prices for their platform, and these rules included $1 =/= €1

Now the publisher makes the rules for prices on their platform, and the publisher wants $1 = €1

You said "They don't even aim for 1$=1€ so what was the matter here?", and I pointed out that it is now irrelevant what GOG.com is aiming for, as they have abandoned their rule of "$1 =/= €1"
Ahhh i see your point. :) Okay i can understand what you mean. The problem is still the same: A deal always has to be made by both sides. There is still no reason GoG can't say "no" either if they think the price is to high. So still no change for me to see there and no "publisher controlled GoG". :)
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: So we promised an answer for you guys today, and I've been hanging out at the office late in hopes it would develop; sadly, it seems that a few answers are still hung up on confirmations. Sorry about this, but we are going to be having a final go at it first thing tomorrow morning our time and will hopefully get all your questions answered by then.
Cheers for your time mate.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: So we promised an answer for you guys today, and I've been hanging out at the office late in hopes it would develop; sadly, it seems that a few answers are still hung up on confirmations. Sorry about this, but we are going to be having a final go at it first thing tomorrow morning our time and will hopefully get all your questions answered by then.
Did you see the video?
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: So we promised an answer for you guys today, and I've been hanging out at the office late in hopes it would develop; sadly, it seems that a few answers are still hung up on confirmations. Sorry about this, but we are going to be having a final go at it first thing tomorrow morning our time and will hopefully get all your questions answered by then.
Cheers for you guys for taking all this time to read through this huge wall of text. :) Have yourself some rest.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: So we promised an answer for you guys today, and I've been hanging out at the office late in hopes it would develop; sadly, it seems that a few answers are still hung up on confirmations. Sorry about this, but we are going to be having a final go at it first thing tomorrow morning our time and will hopefully get all your questions answered by then.
Hope springs eternal.