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”
Regional pricing makes me a sad panda…… :(_ _ _
avatar
dhundahl: purchasing power makes both flat and regional pricing models unfair
avatar
mobutu: While that is true, so is the fact that the current implementation of regional prices is more unfair than one flat price.
Well, the current new release pricing model certainly strikes me as less fair than a flat price, but I don't think GOG could've done much about that aside from not selling those games in a DRM-free version. And if I can choose between being ripped off by Steam through regional pricing or being ripped off by GOG and at least get my game DRM-free, then it's really not a hard choice for me. I'm not going to be buying AOW3, though. In part because I really hate buying games at release and in part because my computer isn't strong enough for it. :-(

Anyway, the classic pricing model they've suggested seems mostly like a regional version of a flat price. It's a few cents worse in some cases but it's mostly just the same price in a more local currency. As long as that remains the case, I really don't think it's too much of a problem. They've gone away from the letter of their core principle but not really from the spirit of it.

Sure, one might see this as an indication of future choices, but until they actually make those choices, then I think they deserve the benefit of the doubt. They haven't generally screwed us over so far, have they?
avatar
Sanjuro:
avatar
ShadowWulfe: Not surprising that that happened, yet at the same time people that I know tend to trust Steam/Team America with pretty much everything, unfortunately.

Sigh.
derail!

FREEDOM IS!
THE ONLY WAY YEAH!

[i'm rather partial to the bummer mix of that song. the original is just too brash for my tastes.]
avatar
mobutu: While that is true, so is the fact that the current implementation of regional prices is more unfair than one flat price.
avatar
dhundahl: Well, the current new release pricing model certainly strikes me as less fair than a flat price, but I don't think GOG could've done much about that aside from not selling those games in a DRM-free version. And if I can choose between being ripped off by Steam through regional pricing or being ripped off by GOG and at least get my game DRM-free, then it's really not a hard choice for me. I'm not going to be buying AOW3, though. In part because I really hate buying games at release and in part because my computer isn't strong enough for it. :-(

Anyway, the classic pricing model they've suggested seems mostly like a regional version of a flat price. It's a few cents worse in some cases but it's mostly just the same price in a more local currency. As long as that remains the case, I really don't think it's too much of a problem. They've gone away from the letter of their core principle but not really from the spirit of it.

Sure, one might see this as an indication of future choices, but until they actually make those choices, then I think they deserve the benefit of the doubt. They haven't generally screwed us over so far, have they?
Actually they have since they erased fair pricing policy from their policy list. Its not there anymore with othe policys. Its only drm-free left.
Might want to make a huge sale before going over to unfair pricings.
Regional pricing / locking = DRM. Not full fledged super annoying DRM, but it certainly IS DRM. So you better eat your hat Enigmatic T ...
I thought really hard about his for a few days. I can see the pros and cons of both sides. I myself have no big problem with regional prices. I will not buy if it seems to expensive and I will not spend more money than I already do.

I can understand people that still have big wishlist and are afraid that it's get more expensive to fullfill those wishes.
I can understand people that already bought hundreds of games here that they have no problem because - they have what they want and the change may bring more new games.

I DO consider it a mistake to change to regional prices. Not because of fairness etc, but because it's impossible to do it right.
A one-world-price is not fair, because there are poor countries and rich countries and exchange rates. We all know this. But a one-world price is also a principle. It's like the weather - you can complain as much as you will, it won't change anything. That's why many people are okay with it in the end.

A local price on the other hand makes sense locally - a mortar and brick store. In a global store it makes us aware that prices are determined by other people at will. And so we start to question them. And find reason to complain. Because suddenly we see there are people making these prices and maybe they're swayed by our whining.

If someone makes these prices, we want them to be fair. But that's not possible. Someone will always feel cheated. You could try to leverage to average income and exchange rates in all the countries of the world, what would be a Herculian task, and it would not be enough. There are countries with the same average income, where one has an even distribution and the other has a few very rich people and the rest is poor. They'd be cheated. You have countries with same average income but one has low living costs, the other has high living costs, and so much less money for luxurary goods like video games. Feeling cheated. Even if you could leverage that, what I find impossible, you have differences within countries. I'm from east germany and wages are considerably lower than in the west. Wages in the city are higher than on the countryside. Take New York, Manhatten, 6th Avenue. You have millionaires at the one end and homeless people on the other. That's one street in one part of a city.

tl:dr: A flat price is set in stone. Take or leave. With regional prices people will think their region is treated unfairly.

PS: I could live with a regional price model a la: for certain games, they are there, like Witcher 3 and other AA+ titles. If the rest is left untouched. The g.o.g. - you know what I mean. People will vote with their wallets. Let them. This would also show the publishers what people really want, giving you more power in negotiations.
avatar
StormHammer: Exactly. Going by the AOW3 list, 18 countries will pay the same as the US, only 2 countries will pay less, and at least 45 countries will pay more.

Regional pricing for new games has therefore benefited a sum total of ... 2 countries out of 65. Good job. :/
avatar
VulpisFoxfire: Is that conclusion before or after taking exchange rates into account?
Part of the flip side of this seems to be companies setting a game at 59.99 USD for US customers, and 59.99 AUD for Austrailian customers, which royally rooks the AU gamers due to the difference in the currency values.
I'm going by the dollar prices posted by people who checked how much AOW3 would cost in their regions: http://www.gog.com/forum/age_of_wonders_series/post_your_regional_price_for_aow3/page1

I assumed the US price for that game ( $39.99 ) as the 'base price' - and this is what other countries would have continued to pay under a flat pricing model. So I simply counted the number of countries deviating from that baseline under regional pricing.

3% of countries will pay less. 28% will pay the same. 69% will pay more.

Edit - I put 'customers' instead of 'countries'. :/
Post edited February 27, 2014 by StormHammer
avatar
bouncedk: Regional pricing / locking = DRM. Not full fledged super annoying DRM, but it certainly IS DRM. So you better eat your hat Enigmatic T ...
No. DRM means you can't install/run a purchased game without permission. It's a restriction management.

What you mean is RPM. Regional price management :-P
avatar
bouncedk: Regional pricing / locking = DRM. Not full fledged super annoying DRM, but it certainly IS DRM. So you better eat your hat Enigmatic T ...
Agree with that is really is a form of DRM that is since it regulates your right to buy the game, since it discriminates buyers all over the world.
avatar
StormHammer: Exactly. Going by the AOW3 list, 18 countries will pay the same as the US, only 2 countries will pay less, and at least 45 countries will pay more.

Regional pricing for new games has therefore benefited a sum total of ... 2 countries out of 65. Good job. :/
avatar
Matruchus: Agree that is the basis of all complaints for two days now and gog stil does not see it.
What I think you're forgetting is that GOG had virtually zero influence on the pricing of AOW3. Their choice was in getting it DRM-free or not selling it at all. They decided to sell it DRM-free. As a consequence, you can buy the game at Steam's price here at GOG but without the Steam DRM.

It was never an option to get AOW3 on release day at a flat price around the world with no DRM. GOG hasn't thought of this option and decided not to do it because they're greedy like that. GOG simply never had this option.

The real news here is that classics might be going regional too, but judging by the suggested prices that's more of a technicality for now. The prices won't change to any significant degree, even if they'll change to the point of being regional.
avatar
dhundahl: The point is, regional prices just mean different prices in each region. It doesn't have to mean that price go up and so far we've got no real indication that GOG is going to hike the prices to any significant degree, at least not beyond what forces outside their control force them to do.
Of course we have seen the kind of price hikes which forces "outside their control" "force" them to do.
avatar
bouncedk: Regional pricing / locking = DRM. Not full fledged super annoying DRM, but it certainly IS DRM. So you better eat your hat Enigmatic T ...
avatar
Matruchus: Agree with that is really is a form of DRM that is since it regulates your right to buy the game, since it discriminates buyers all over the world.
on facebook they said:
"region locking IS a form of DRM, and for that exact reason we never plan to introduce it. We didn't take that extra step now to be able to secure more DRM-Free games, only to abandon our DRM-Free mission afterwards."

i dont know why they dont answer these questions here...
avatar
Matruchus: Agree that is the basis of all complaints for two days now and gog stil does not see it.
avatar
dhundahl: What I think you're forgetting is that GOG had virtually zero influence on the pricing of AOW3. Their choice was in getting it DRM-free or not selling it at all. They decided to sell it DRM-free. As a consequence, you can buy the game at Steam's price here at GOG but without the Steam DRM.

It was never an option to get AOW3 on release day at a flat price around the world with no DRM. GOG hasn't thought of this option and decided not to do it because they're greedy like that. GOG simply never had this option.

The real news here is that classics might be going regional too, but judging by the suggested prices that's more of a technicality for now. The prices won't change to any significant degree, even if they'll change to the point of being regional.
Well they just should not sell the thing and just pick it up one year later after the price would have dropped. I mean come on people this company was about trust and not get everything you can for any price you can. It just show their greed.

avatar
Matruchus: Agree with that is really is a form of DRM that is since it regulates your right to buy the game, since it discriminates buyers all over the world.
avatar
ViDRa: on facebook they said:
"region locking IS a form of DRM, and for that exact reason we never plan to introduce it. We didn't take that extra step now to be able to secure more DRM-Free games, only to abandon our DRM-Free mission afterwards."

i dont know why they dont answer these questions here...
Well gog doesnt care and they know regional pricing means regional locking and that is a form of drm although the most basic one.

The problem is that most people dont see this as drm, although thats what it is since it restricts your constitutional right to ownership by making you unequal in the buying process.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by Matruchus
avatar
StormHammer: 3% of countries will pay less. 28% will pay the same. 69% will pay more.
And it can't be stressed enough that a large part of the 69% consists of customers from poor countries.