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
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.
avatar
dhundahl: 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?
How about a swiss paying less than a Romanian/Bulgarian/Hungarian.
avatar
Randalator: I don't either.

However I do mind being charged more for no other reason than "because fuck you, that's why". $1=€1 is NOT backed up by the average income in the US as compared to Germany.
avatar
DiscipleJF: I can understand where you are coming from. I really can. But GOG will sort it all out whereever they can. Just let them try to sort it out. The pricing system isn't even sorted yet and everyone is running around "oh hell we're all gonna die!!!!".
People aren't running around throwing their hands up in despair, they're mostly disappointed, and worried about the future. And they are because not only GOG went back on one of their core principles, one their customers seem to value more than they expected, but they did it in a way that strays from their usual, transparent and fair MO.

Just read TET's replies in the announcement thread, and then jump to Rambourg's letter: apparently the reason behind regional pricing is complying to publishers needs when it comes to bigger releases, and yet they're "shooting for" regional prices for the whole classics catalogue.

"Shooting for" is the keyword (along with "we do have a lot of influence"), because unless Rambourg's wording is really poor there, my take is that all GOG can do when contracts are up for re-negotiation is to suggest prices. However, if, say, publisher X wants to use a 1 $ = 1 €/£ price conversion for their classic, GOG will have to comply, else they lose the game. Many have already touched upon how that gives more and more power to the game's publisher and how things could ultimately go downhill from there, so there's really no point in me stressing that.

The reason behind regional pricing for classic games however is still unknown: one can speculate it concerns exchange fees, VATs, or simply to please publishers, but as others pointed out someone is gonna get shafted in the end, even if it's just 0,10-0,20 cents per game (I know this'll happen to me at least, given my bank's current exchange rates).

I can live with that, but again, the point here isn't really all about prices, but rather about GOG throwing out of the window part of their (former) core ideas, allegedly for their customers' sake - which to me is pretty evident it's not the real reason. It's a move aimed at pleasing publishers, thus allowing GOG to offer a wider catalogue of newer games, that is all.

Problem is, if a bigger, newer catalogue is all GOGgers wanted (ie, bigger catalogue > DRM-free, fair priced catalogue), chance is they wouldn't be shopping on GOG in the first place: there's much better alternatives when it comes to newer releases, we all know that.

You're asking in the post below:

avatar
Matruchus: They did say that the system for new games is now working and its going to be only regional pricing. Thats how it is at the moment.
avatar
DiscipleJF: True, but what are the rates? They haven't finalised anything yet.
To which I reply: if things aren't finalized, you just don't go out and semi-announce things. It leads to confusion and worry, and we can all see that.

And as others have mentioned: if you (GOG) are not sure about which direction to take, ask your customers - you know, the guys who keep you going. Those who support GOG, and care enough about the store that they don't log in to just snatch the free game which is up for grabs once in a while, will gladly spend 5 minutes of their time and take the survey.
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.
Sorry, but the "To prove to publishers that DRM-free can sell as much as DRM." sounds like made up, because how would this prove here anything? And I didn't read this part anywhere in an official statement.
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.
The only thing you can do to be forgiven is to add Sword of the Samurai on GOG . Rights are owned by Tommo, which is already here .
avatar
DiscipleJF: Nah, we are part of the European "Union", however we are not officially a "part" of Europe and I've never seen nor used a euro, in my life.
You mean Euro zone, don't you ? The UK might want to get out of the European Union, but getting out of Europe will be somehow difficult for the time being, as it is a geographical entity, limited, to the West, by the Atlantic dorsal ( that slices to Iceland) and, to the East, by the Urals. And the British Isles are part of it.
avatar
DiscipleJF: Funny how no one complains that Witcher 2 costs more than most. Or Race Driver GRID, etc. $9.99? Nope.

I like the current pricing but regional pricing I'm "game" for. If a game is worth the asking price to me, I'm happy to pay.

Well go play a games console then. Oh wait, they have regional pricing too! Nevermind, go grab a coffee at Starbucks? No! Erm, go buy a newspap... Ummm, ideas anyone!?
avatar
paulrainer: nono no ..i still buy games but pirated ones thanks very much
What, you're actually paying the pirates for games they didn't make? That seems utterly ridiculous, pardon me for saying.

By the way, I'm fairly sure at most half an hour's worth of googling would get you the game for free. If you don't mind not paying people for their work then why not apply that same principle to the pirates as well? That way you'll save up enough to enjoy a cup of region priced tea while playing the game. :-)
high rated
avatar
HypersomniacLive: If the game is multiplayer, it exists on a server so the concept of DRM doesn’t exist and I’m fine with that.
Source
MCV India - INTERVIEW: Marcin Iwinski, co-founder, CD Projekt
Iwinski was talking about MMO games with that statement. Regardless, he's wrong either way. The multiplayer for Battle Worlds, Planetary Annihilation, and Age of Wonders 3 do not "exist on a server," they exist on the users' computers. The publishers implement the required account system as an anti-piracy measure, to prevent those who pirated the game from being able to play. That is DRM. And GOG is now selling those games.
high rated
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"
avatar
ElarionAbendglan: 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". :)
I know, and completely agree with you, that a deal has to be made by both sides.

Only in this deal, GOG.com weakend their position for all future deals, because they backed down from something which they repeatedly said they would never back down from.

They showed weakness(exaggeration, I know) and that will not be forgotten.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by Ichwillnichtmehr
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.
Appreciating it TET!

Should we expect a further announcement (with the answers) regarding the situation, or rather you/the staff replying to some of the questions in this topic?
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.
avatar
Licurg: The only thing you can do to be forgiven is to add Sword of the Samurai on GOG . Rights are owned by Tommo, which is already here .
My price isn't that high. Sure, GOG would probably have to find another publisher and that other title was DRM free anyway, but that's a small price to pay considering the outrage this has caused.

Also, I'm still wondering why the hell CD PROJECKT went with Namco again after they bastardized the release of Witcher II.
avatar
HypersomniacLive: If the game is multiplayer, it exists on a server so the concept of DRM doesn’t exist and I’m fine with that.
Source
MCV India - INTERVIEW: Marcin Iwinski, co-founder, CD Projekt
avatar
ThreeSon: Iwinski was talking about MMO games with that statement. Regardless, he's wrong either way. The multiplayer for Battle Worlds, Planetary Annihilation, and Age of Wonders 3 do not "exist on a server," they exist on the users' computers. The publishers implement the required account system as an anti-piracy measure, to prevent those who pirated the game from being able to play. That is DRM. And GOG is now selling those games.
Interesting point. Didn't knew (because I don't own them) those games have account bound multiplayer parts especially in regards of LAN play or via internet on their very own hosted sessions. This is indeed a DRM as the MP part would cease to function if they don't provide the login servers or decide to ban you from there for some reason beyond my imagination.
avatar
skeletonbow: Surely you jest. In all of the interviews, videos of GOG folk I've seen to date I get a totally different impression of them. They come across to me as people who are just like me, who want to see a better situation out there for people but have difficult decisions to make sometimes. They seem like the type of people who I'd be happy to invite into my home for dinner and a LAN gaming session or to crack some beers with while we reminisce about decades old games and how we'd like to see gaming move forward in the future to give gamers a better experience globally.

I think they genuinely have a set of great values and want to do the best things possible for gamers including the gamer inside each of themselves, but that they're faced with the reality of the "system" that is in place and that to attain the goals they'd like to attain in bringing DRM-free to the masses they've realized they have to make a few compromises to issues that are important but nowhere near as important as DRM-free is along the way, and they're trying their best to figure out how to do that in a way that has the least impact on people as possible.

I don't get the slightest hint from any GOG employees or what they've said or done in the past including now, that they are evil, that they are greedy, or that they want to rip off as many people as possible, nor that they sit around plotting evil deeds on their customers. So the only thing I can do is assume your statements are cynical humour, and like the Hitler video someone posted - I am a cynic myself and can appreciate such things even if the message in them is in opposition to my own views/opinions. If you are not attempting to be cynical I still respect your opinion of course but I think I'll choose to see it as humour anyway. ;oP
avatar
CarrionCrow: Being honest, I feel the exact same way about them. That feeling is part of the reason why I'm getting more than a little perturbed. (Avert your eyes, oh delicate squeamish masses, I'm not just ass-kissing here, I'm on the verge of virtually rimming every single GOG staff member. It'll be sloppy, but I'll try to make it sexy as well. ;) ) I too think they're good, cool people trying their best in a shitty system, hanging on to everything they can while the odds are against them. It sure as hell can't be easy in such a situation. And as such, seeing them get slammed from one end to the other isn't exactly fun. They aren't going to get into forum fighting, their level of professionalism is higher than that. They just get blasted. So yes, long story still just as long, all those comments are meant strictly as humor.
Ah good, then my assumptions were correct. ;) I trust GOG.com folk and believe that they are trying to do what they think is right long term for to be able to continue a DRM-free business model like this. I think that they have come to the conclusion that something like regional pricing is something that if they hold out on forever will end up becoming unsustainable over the long term, and that bending slightly on this will allow them to bring a lot more DRM-free to their customers and I think that they believe this outweighs the compromise and that most people will see it this way too.

What we don't know of course, and they couldn't know either - is if most people WILL see it this way. It's really hard to gauge, or to predict in advance I think. It's one of those type of decisions you can't make lightly or whimsically and have to think long and hard and weigh the pros and cons of and make a judgment call as to which of the different paths will allow you to stay as true to your roots as possible while continuing to be competitive and able to grow at the same time far into the future. You make the call and try to communicate it as best you can and it may or may not go over well, and you may or may not end up communicating it well or anticipating how people might react. Personally I think they knew that there would be resistance to it but that perhaps people would be more open to the idea given all the variables than people would be closed and angry.

This thread has a lot of anger in it and that is understandable to a degree I believe under the circumstances, but it's hard to gauge expression of anger and disagreement with the new policy against people who agree with the change as I think people who disagree with it are much much more likely to be angry and very vocal about it than people are to be happy or neutral about the change and also be very vocal about it.

Now, I personally think fixed prices are great and are definitely better than regional pricing, but as I've expressed many times here already I think the benefits of this outweigh the losses by a great amount and that it is a reasonable compromise at least based on what I've read so far from GOG.com along with some deep thought I've put into it. I admit that I could totally be wrong too, and I hope I'm not. If I'm wrong I'll eat my words I don't care about being right or wrong. I just see GOG as an honest company being faced with tough decisions and trying to figure out a way to make them work and make everyone more happy in the end than not, and that along the way there will be some bumps and learning to do. If it does turn out to be a mistake all around, I think GOG will come forward and admit it, apologize and try to make things right somehow. They have a history of trying their best to make things right in the past whenever they've done just about anything in the past which people felt was wrong for some reason or another.

This is a difficult thing to try to communicate though too, and as you say they aren't going to get into a messy fight in the forums about it either as that would be unprofessional. I think they're reading people's opinions and concerns with great care and that they truly care about their customers and want to try to do the right thing for everyone, and try to convince people that what they think the right thing is and why they think that. I also think that whatever they decide to do, people can disagree with them or even be angry about their decision - without them being evil or greedy or "sell outs" or whatever. Of course, I could be wrong about them and their motives too, and I'd be very upset if some day I start thinking and feeling as angry towards them as some people are here.

I swear, if GOG does something that I truly think is due to evil greedy motives behind it, I will try to be the first person to call them out on it here. They just honestly don't come across that way to me even if they might sometimes do something I don't completely agree with (like DLC additions).

I have to admit too that I have been on the receiving end of the wrath of the public in my former job after having made changes from time to time things for the greater good of everyone in my mind, and often some of those changes that I myself didn't like for my own use - but I recognized something was better for the default for people at large and made the change - to get my head bitten off by people and called every name in the book, including many of the things I see people throwing at GOG people. I had tough skin and endured it mind you, but I've got some battle scars along the way too. :) Fortunately for me, more people knew who I really am and what I really believe and that my heart was in the right place and that my decisions were well intentioned and would be well received by the majority even though in those cases there were often very very very VERY vocal minorities. I will also admit that I wasn't 1/100th as friendly in my communications to my detractors as is GOG. I learned a lot over time though and try to be as friendly as possible even when engaged in disagreements about things now. :) I do so with varying degrees of success but more success than failure, and I think GOG does a much better job overall than I, although I'd have never dressed as a monk... LOL
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.
avatar
wintermute.: Sorry, but the "To prove to publishers that DRM-free can sell as much as DRM." sounds like made up, because how would this prove here anything? And I didn't read this part anywhere in an official statement.
Well, from GoG's perspective they feel (or perhaps have been told) that the reason there is DRM on titles is to prevent piracy so if a title wouldn't have DRM, it would increase piracy and hurt sales (this is the publisher thinking). What GoG did say in the letter is to bring more releases (new) on here. Well again, the only saving grace that a publisher who has DRM on their titles is going to go DRM free is if they see other games (new releases) selling well in a DRM free marketplace.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by synfresh
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.
Thanks TET, we appreciate the effort, and concern. I mean that.
avatar
DiscipleJF: Nah, we are part of the European "Union", however we are not officially a "part" of Europe and I've never seen nor used a euro, in my life.
avatar
Phc7006: You mean Euro zone, don't you ? The UK might want to get out of the European Union, but getting out of Europe will be somehow difficult for the time being, as it is a geographical entity, limited, to the West, by the Atlantic dorsal ( that slices to Iceland) and, to the East, by the Urals. And the British Isles are part of it.
I refer you to http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Starship_UK ;)