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
zambrey: Then I'd say they are overreacting.
avatar
Matruchus: No overraction there. I know that Poland at the moment is an exception in gogs regional price increase so you my not be that hurt as most of the people on this thread.
Not sure either way about that, but if I'm not mistaken Poland is one of the few countries aside from the UK which does not have the Euro as their official currency. I'd imagine the games in Poland are priced in their local currency if it is stable, or perhaps in USD if it isn't. Don't know either way however, but I'm sure someone will clarify likely now that I've thrown this out there. :)
avatar
lostwolfe: uh oh.

i just went to the main page.

the releases sidebar is no longer showing the "letter from the md." ;)

i have a feeling this didn't turn out quite the way they expected.
avatar
JudasIscariot: It's showing it to the right of the announcement for the Shadowrun DLC :)
They bumped it near the top as of a moment ago (top line, right item of two). I was wondering why, but I guess this is it. I'd thought it curious before, but I applaud the openness of trying to keep it visible. I don't agree with some of what's going on here, but I do want to try to be fair about the positives (not that I can promise that I fully manage that).
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: Damn, I'm psychic!

Just you people wait, I'm going to win the lottery jackpot, and buy GOG.com, and turn this ship around! ;)
avatar
Matruchus: Well leaving thread, going to bed. Its already 01:53 here.
Which reminds me, I've been arguing this stuff for hours and haven't even had my supper yet. And it's 2:40 around here. God dammit!

*kicks himself for getting into this argument*

Anyway, sleep tight. It's been fun.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: Mostly, we couldn't keep up with the number of comments and also figure out sensible replies, so rather than post something sort of coherent late yesterday, we're regrouping and working on this now.
avatar
PaladinWay: Not being able to keep up with the number of comments on a thread like this is...well...just human. Anyone who expected you to read and reply to everything clearly isn't being rational. Personally, the thing I'd expected you to do is open the forum and look for comments on the current or last page or two and start replying. Saying, "I can't read as fast as all of you are commenting" is very human and very valid and any reasonable person would accept that as valid. No comments at all, when you've already lost trust and know you've lost trust and started the thread because you lost trus, and not starting to comment until AFTER someone points out how to find all the staff comments in a thread...well, that's not going to inspire additional trust.

Can I believe your above statement might be true, sure. Does your above statement reassure me and make me feel that I can rest easy that you haven't slid too far down the slippery slope, not in the slightest. Would statements in the middle of the firestorm have made me believe you were magically sincere, no. Would statements in the middle of the firestorm have made me believe you gave a damn even if people didn't notice that you didn't and were still trying even if you'd perhaps lost your vision and your way, yes.

As a note, this reply is coming from me going through all the staff replies from the above link.
Perhaps they also think that the best way to inspire trust is through actions, and not promises or words; words are wind.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by cmdr_flashheart
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: - GOG.com made the rule.

- GOG.com promised to follow the rule.

- GOG.com made a point about how bad it is to not follow the rule.

- GOG.com made a point about how great they were for following the rule.

I guess that means that the folks at GOG.com are "so German" too.

And they didn't break the rule, they removed it.
avatar
dhundahl: Yeah, GOG made the rule, promised to follow it, argued that not following it is bad, argued that following it made them awesome, and now they're revising the rule somewhat while apparently still trying to the spirit of the rule.

And meanwhile you're arguing that if they can't follow the rule then it totally doesn't matter what they want. But what they want matters because they're a major DRM-free digital distributor that generally sells games relatively cheap. They certainly have their retail competition in my country soundly beaten and if they stick with that so-called "fair regional pricing" then that will continue to be the case. What GOG wants matters to me, and I'm guessing it matters to a lot of their customers, regardless of whether they're following their own rule to the letter.
They "revised the rule somewhat"?

They removed the rule from the storefront, it's no longer present.

And they can only stick with the pricing that the publishers tell them to stick with.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by Ichwillnichtmehr
avatar
Bloodygoodgames: What cracks me up about this is T is supposed to be their marketing and PR guy.

So you can only imagine how much worse the responses would be from anyone else at the company :)

Marketing and PR 101 is something GOG staff obviously should have taken years ago as none of them seem to have a clue about what to say and do to keep your customers, as oppose to how to piss them off so badly they will never buy from GOG again.

Every comment I read from GOG staff now just convinces me the company couldn't give a flying damn about their customers, as long as they're still spending money here.
What usually cracks me up is how people with no credentials start talking about about how other people should take 101 classes in this or that.

Incidentally, I've got a bit more than a Marketing and PR 101, and I don't see what TET could've done differently in this case. For that matter, I'm not sure that GOG has really made any marketing blunders aside from being so loud about their former strategic positioning on the market that any repositioning became difficult. One thing that would help is a short version of what's happening that is easy for anyone to understand and I'm sure they'll do that once they have any hard answers to put into it.

And I don't think they've managed to piss off their customers so badly that they'll never buy from GOG again. If you want to read comments from companies that don't give a shit, go check out Blizzard or Steam and how they deal with unhappy customers.
avatar
Matruchus: Well leaving thread, going to bed. Its already 01:53 here.
avatar
dhundahl: Which reminds me, I've been arguing this stuff for hours and haven't even had my supper yet. And it's 2:40 around here. God dammit!

*kicks himself for getting into this argument*

Anyway, sleep tight. It's been fun.
Good night, see you around.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by Ichwillnichtmehr
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: I was simply stating the fact that, out of the thousands and thousands of games that are classics that we *could* acquire, the number of games that *should* acquire is much lower.
You stated this in response to some criticism, and it was a fair answer to that criticism. However, what's your stance on games that are offered to you? If an old game comes to you and says, "Here's our old game, some random extra content as bonuses, compatibility fixes for Win XP, Vista, 7, & 8 are patched in where relevant and included in this 2 page document where procedural. Please put this in your catalog for $5.99 with all your standard terms." At that point, what's your boundary for it being worth it? Even with that, you'd need some man hours to test, package, and post, so I can see turning that down if it's believed no one in the world would buy it. But what kind of purchasing estimate does it take at that point?

Just curious. I won't be upset if you ignore this, just a question that came to mind reading your reply that I honestly would like to know the answer to.
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: Damn, I'm psychic!

Just you people wait, I'm going to win the lottery jackpot, and buy GOG.com, and turn this ship around! ;)
avatar
Matruchus: Well leaving thread, going to bed. Its already 01:53 here.
Night, see you around.
avatar
Bloodygoodgames: What cracks me up about this is T is supposed to be their marketing and PR guy.

So you can only imagine how much worse the responses would be from anyone else at the company :)

Marketing and PR 101 is something GOG staff obviously should have taken years ago as none of them seem to have a clue about what to say and do to keep your customers, as oppose to how to piss them off so badly they will never buy from GOG again.

Every comment I read from GOG staff now just convinces me the company couldn't give a flying damn about their customers, as long as they're still spending money here.
avatar
dhundahl: What usually cracks me up is how people with no credentials start talking about about how other people should take 101 classes in this or that.

Incidentally, I've got a bit more than a Marketing and PR 101, and I don't see what TET could've done differently in this case. For that matter, I'm not sure that GOG has really made any marketing blunders aside from being so loud about their former strategic positioning on the market that any repositioning became difficult. One thing that would help is a short version of what's happening that is easy for anyone to understand and I'm sure they'll do that once they have any hard answers to put into it.

And I don't think they've managed to piss off their customers so badly that they'll never buy from GOG again. If you want to read comments from companies that don't give a shit, go check out Blizzard or Steam and how they deal with unhappy customers.
LOL, I've been in the PR and Marketing field for 25 years. I'd say I have a few more 'credentials' than you have on that score.

I must say I'm loving reading some of the comments on here from the GOG fanboys though. I'm going to enjoy reading them even more when new games come on GOG where you're all being shafted with ripoff prices. The outrage then will be hilarious to watch.

I'll laugh even harder when GOG introduces DRM. Which......they eventually will.....with yet another excuse as to why they 'had to'.
avatar
cmdr_flashheart: Perhaps they also think that the best way to inspire trust is through actions, and not promises or words; words are wind.
Absolutely true. My main point is that even those actions have interpretations that are influenced by actions even older. The initial actions haven't made me decide GoG is scum or anything, but it has made me increase the amount of scrutiny required for their actions and a higher bar for judging the reasons behind those actions.

Trust can never be regained as fast and as easily as it can be lost. That's why all the tiny things can add up.
avatar
dhundahl: You're butchering the quote, Ichwillnichtmehr. That's not a nice thing to do. :-(

I trust that you speak English well enough to know the difference between "agree with" and "go along with", which really should be all the answer you need. You can go along with something you don't agree with because the alternatives are worse and that doesn't mean you actually do agree with it.

By the way, GOG is very much ripping us off on behalf of the publishers, it's a ripoff that happens to anyone buying AOW3 on release day. GOG couldn't prevent that ripoff from taking place in any imaginable way, they could merely decide not to be a part of it. And if they made that choice then there'd be no DRM-free version, would there? So GOG could achieve absolutely nothing by refusing to compromise or they could provide the world with a DRM-free AAA title on release day if they'd compromise on their pricing model. Those were the choices and please don't tell me that you're an expert in business reasoning or ethics and therefore know better than GOG what GOG should choose. Because let's be honest for a moment, you're almost certainly not and you almost certainly don't. Just like I'm not and I don't.
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: I agree, I'm no expert in the business.

Let's listen to some experts, shall we: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6P3yOTR2Vc&t=1194
So your entire defense of you butchering my quote and being somewhat hysterical about them converting the price of their classics to euro instead of dollars is: "WAAAAAAAH!"

Brilliant. You know what? Your user name is a great suggestion. If you only want to complain and refuse to listen to any kind of argument then why am I bothering? I could be doing at least a few dozen better things.
avatar
cmdr_flashheart: Perhaps they also think that the best way to inspire trust is through actions, and not promises or words; words are wind.
avatar
PaladinWay: Absolutely true. My main point is that even those actions have interpretations that are influenced by actions even older. The initial actions haven't made me decide GoG is scum or anything, but it has made me increase the amount of scrutiny required for their actions and a higher bar for judging the reasons behind those actions.

Trust can never be regained as fast and as easily as it can be lost. That's why all the tiny things can add up.
There's nothing they can do today, tomorrow, or even in the next few days which will make regional pricing go away.
avatar
mozzington: I also feel as though the MD has made himself look a little silly with the contents of the letter and use of the word SHIT in it. It's not professional and if I had done that here I'd be sacked.
avatar
skeletonbow: There's no right or wrong opinion about this, everyone has their own and that is how it is for them but I personally appreciate people at GOG giving straight up down to earth replies in postings, or announcements which sound like they come from a real human being - over something that looks like it was printed on company letterhead after going through proof reading and grammar correction, political correctness filters and passing through a legal team the size of a football team, making 10 rounds through the whole circuit and then getting blessed to be printed and sent to customers like a form letter.

It tells me that the person is human and speaking from their heart and not trying to fluff things over. They're being real and not fake. There are some risks in doing so of course too, but everything is a risk. You can be all cold and "professional" and sound like a chain letter approved by a legal department and upset 10 times as many people for sounding like a superficial machine spitting out cookie cutter responses just to please people too. I'd actually have been much more concerned if the announcement sounded like a lawyer at Microsoft wrote it personally.

That's just my personal interpretation. Others will feel differently and rightfully so for their own reasons, but perhaps someone might feel the same after considering my thoughts. I definitely appreciate seeing the human side of GOG employees and feeling like they're someone I could invite into my home and both they and I would feel comfortable having some laughs or gaming or whatever. I couldn't have that feeling from someone in an 8 piece suit with pointy hair and a spreadsheet under their arm.
Did you read the same announcements and posts as I did? They lied about the extent of the regional pricing changes. They severely overstated the significance of the games that this change brings. And they were quite condescending in the way that they've responded.
avatar
Bloodygoodgames: What cracks me up about this is T is supposed to be their marketing and PR guy.

So you can only imagine how much worse the responses would be from anyone else at the company :)

Marketing and PR 101 is something GOG staff obviously should have taken years ago as none of them seem to have a clue about what to say and do to keep your customers, as oppose to how to piss them off so badly they will never buy from GOG again.

Every comment I read from GOG staff now just convinces me the company couldn't give a flying damn about their customers, as long as they're still spending money here.
avatar
dhundahl: What usually cracks me up is how people with no credentials start talking about about how other people should take 101 classes in this or that.

Incidentally, I've got a bit more than a Marketing and PR 101, and I don't see what TET could've done differently in this case. For that matter, I'm not sure that GOG has really made any marketing blunders aside from being so loud about their former strategic positioning on the market that any repositioning became difficult. One thing that would help is a short version of what's happening that is easy for anyone to understand and I'm sure they'll do that once they have any hard answers to put into it.

And I don't think they've managed to piss off their customers so badly that they'll never buy from GOG again. If you want to read comments from companies that don't give a shit, go check out Blizzard or Steam and how they deal with unhappy customers.
They could have evaluated the situation ahead of time and made contingency plans. It's not like this is the first time that the customers have been outraged by change.

I'm not really sure that there was a good way of doing this, but I think the condescension in the posts and trying to spin this as somehow good without giving us any reason why it's good for us were poor decisions.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by hedwards
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: How about making a list of possible aquisitions, and asking your customers if/which they want?
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: That's more or less what the wishlist is there for. We can't really tell people, "Hey, this is who we're talking to!" or we'll find more examples of studios swooping in and signing rights out from under our noses. :)
It's fair that it's business sensitive in one way or another not to say exactly who you're talking to. However, could you perhaps check your wish list and make a statement along the lines of:

Going down to the Nth item of the wishlist, there are only X% of the games we haven't been trying to sign (the Nth game includes M different studios).

Ideally I'd think it'd be nice to hear that answer where X = 5, but if that's too competition sensitive then perhaps X = 10?