It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Hey Goggers;

As many of you know, we announced on last Friday that we are going to introduce regional pricing for 3 new games coming up on GOG.com soon. Looking at the amount of reactions (over 3,500 comments at this very moment), it is obvious that this change is making many of you guys worried. We must have failed to clearly explain why our pricing policy for (some) newer games will change and what this means as a matter of fact for our PC & MAC classic games, which account for over 80% of our catalogue.

To be honest, our announcement was a bit vague simply because our future pricing policy is not 100% set in stone yet and we were just worried to make any promises before it was. You know, GOG.com has been growing quickly (thanks to you!), and the more we grow, the more we are worried to make some of you guys disappointed. This is why we were so (over-)cautious with our announcement.

We should have just been upfront about why we've made these changes and what they mean for us in the future and what we're planning. So let's talk. To be clear: what I'm talking about below is our plan. It's a plan that we believe we can accomplish, but while it's what we want to do with GOG, it may change some before it actually sees the light of day. Please don’t blame me for talking open-heartedly today and telling you about the plans and pricing policy we want to fight for and eventually achieve. The below plans aren't sure. The only guarantee I can give you is that we’ll do our best to fight for gamers while still making sure GOG.com as a whole grows (because well, we still want to be around 50 years from now, you know!). So, enough for the introduction, let’s get things started.

Why does GOG.com need to offer newer games at all?

We've been in business for 5 years now, and we've signed a big percentage of all of the classic content that can be legally untangled. There are still some big companies left we're trying to bring into the GOG.com fold, like LucasArts, Microsoft, Take2 and Bethesda, but what classic titles will we sign in the future once we have those partners on-board? We need to sign newer games or else just fire everyone and keep selling the same limited catalog. Either we bring you “not so old” releases from 2010+ or brand-new AAA titles, because these will become classic games tomorrow. It’s as simple as that.

Also, well, we want to expand beyond just classic games, hence the fact we have been offering you brand-new indie releases for almost 2 years now. Why expanding? Well, obviously, because the more games we sell, the more legitimacy we have on the market and the more likely it is that we can achieve our mission: making all PC & MAC video games 100% DRM-free, whether classic or brand-new titles.

To be straightforward (excuse my French):DRM is shit-- we'll never have any of it. It treats legitimate customers like rubbish and pirates don't have to bother with it. It's bad for gamers, and it's also bad for business and our partners. We want to make it easy and convenient for users to buy and play games; rather than give piracy a try. Happy gamers equals a healthy gaming industry; and this is what we fight for. Anyway, I am sure you well know our opinions about DRM.

To make the world of gaming DRM-free, we need to convince top-tier publishers & developers to give us a try with new games, just like they did with classic games. We need to make more case studies for the gaming industry, just like we successfully did back in 2011 with The Witcher 2. It was our first ever 100% DRM-free AAA day-1 release. GOG.com was the 2nd best-selling digital distribution platform worldwide for this title thanks to you guys, despite having regional prices for it. We need more breakthroughs like this to be able to show all the devs and publishers in our industry that DRM-free digital distribution is actually good for their business and their fans. And when I say breakthroughs, I am talking about really kick-ass games, with a potential metacritic score of 85% or more, AA+ and AAA kind of titles.

And this is exactly why we signed those 3 games we told you about last Friday. We believe those 3 games can be massive hits for hardcore gamers, that they can help us spread the DRM-free model among the industry for newer games and we did our best to convince their rights holders to give GOG.com a try. One of those games, as you see already, is Age of Wonders 3. We're planning more titles even beyond these first 3 soon.

Alright, but why is regional pricing needed for those (only 3 so far!) newer games then?

First of all, you have to be aware of an important fact when it comes to newer games: GOG.com cannot really decide what the prices should be. Top-tier developers and publishers usually have contractual obligations with their retail partners that oblige them to offer the game at the same price digitally and in retail. When they don’t have such contractual obligations, they are still encouraged to do so, or else their games might not get any exposure on the shelves in your favorite shops. This will change over time (as digital sales should overtake retail sales in the near future), but as of today, this is still a problem our industry is facing because retail is a big chunk of revenue and there’s nothing GOG.com can do to change that. We need to charge the recommended retail price for the boxed copies of the games in order for developers (or publishers) to either not get sued or at least get their games visible on shelves. You may recall that our sister company CD Projekt RED got sued for that in the past and we don’t want our partners to suffer from that too.

On top of that, you have to know that there are still many top-tier devs and publishers that are scared about DRM-free gaming. They're half-convinced it will make piracy worse, and flat pricing means that we're also asking them to earn less, too. Earn less, you say? Why is that? Well, when we sell a game in the EU or UK, VAT gets deducted from the price before anyone receives any profit. That means we're asking our partners to try out DRM-free gaming and at the same time also earn 19% - 25% less from us. Other stores, such as Steam, price their games regionally and have pricing that's more equitable to developers and publishers. So flat pricing + DRM-Free is something many devs and publishers simply refuse. Can you blame them? The best argument we can make to convince a publisher or developer to try DRM-Free gaming is that it earns money. Telling them to sacrifice income while they try selling a game with no copy protection is not a way to make that argument.

Getting back to those 3 new upcoming games coming up. The first one is Age of Wonders 3, which you can pre-order right now on GOG.com. The next 2 ones will be Divine Divinity: Original Sin and The Witcher 3. We’re very excited to offer those games DRM-free worldwide and we hope you’ll love them.

Still, we know some countries are really being screwed with regional pricing (Western Europe, UK, Australia) and as mentioned above, we’ll do our very best, for every release of a new game, to convince our partners to offer something special for the gamers living there.

And don’t forget guys: if regional pricing for those few big (as in, “AA+”) new games is a problem for you, you can always wait. In a few months. The game will be discounted on sale, and at 60, 70, or 80% off, the price difference will be minimal indeed. In a few years it will become a classic in its own right, and then we have the possibility to to make it flat-priced anyway (read next!) The choice is always yours. All we are after is to present it to you 100% DRM-free. We are sure you will make the best choice for yourself, and let others enjoy their own freedom to make choices as well.

So, what is going to happen with classic games then?

Classic content accounts for about 80% of our catalog, so yes, this is a super important topic. We've mentioned here above that we can’t control prices for new games, but we do have a lot of influence when it comes to classic games. GOG.com is the store that made this market visible and viable digitally, and we're the ones who established the prices we charge. We believe that we have a good record to argue for fair pricing with our partners.

So let's talk about the pricing for classics that we're shooting for. For $5.99 classics, we would like to make the games 3.49 GBP, 4.49 EUR, 199 RUB, and $6.49 AUD. For $9.99 classics, our targets are 5.99 GBP, 7.49 EUR, 349 RUB, and $10.99 AUD. This is what we’ve got in mind at the moment. We’ll do our best to make that happen, and we think it will. How? Well, we have made our partners quite happy with GOG.com's sales for years - thanks to you guys :). We have created a global, legal, successful digital distribution market of classics for them. This market didn't exist 5 years ago. By (re)making all those games compatible with modern operating systems for MAC and PC, we've made forgotten games profitable again. When it comes to classic games, we can tell them that we know more about this market than anyone. :) Being retrogaming freaks ourselves, we know that 5.99 EUR or GBP is crazy expensive for a classic game (compared to 5.99 USD). We have always argued that classic games only sell well if they have reasonable prices. Unfair regional pricing equals piracy and that’s the last thing anybody wants.

What’s next?

We will do our very best to make all of the above happen. This means three things:

First, we will work to make our industry go DRM-free in the future for both classic and new games (that’s our mission!).

Second, we will fight hard to have an attractive offer for those AA+ new games for our European, British and Australian users, despite regional pricing that we have to stick to.

Third, we will switch to fair local pricing for classic games, as I mentioned above.

TheEnigmaticT earlier mentioned that he would eat his hat if we ever brought DRM to GOG.com. I'm going to go one step further: by the end of this year, I'm making the promise that we will have converted our classic catalog over to fair regional pricing as outlined above. If not, we'll set up a record a video of some horrible public shaming for me, TheEnigmaticT, and w0rma. In fact, you know what? Feel free to make suggestions below for something appropriate (but also safe enough that we won't get the video banned on YouTube) so you feel that we're motivated to get this done quickly. I'll pick one that's scary enough from the comments below and we'll let you know which one we're sticking to.

I hope that this explanation has helped ease your worry a bit and help you keep your faith in GOG.com as a place that's different, awesome, and that always fights for what's best for gamers. If you have any questions, comments or ideas, feel free to address them to us below and TheEnigmaticT and I will answer them to the best of our abilities tomorrow. We hear you loud and clear, so please do continue sharing your feedback with us. At the end of the day GOG.com is your place; without you guys it would just be a website where a few crazy people from Europe talk about old games. :)

I end many of my emails with this, but there's rarely a time to use it more appropriately than here:

“Best DRM-free wishes,

Guillaume Rambourg,
(TheFrenchMonk)
Managing Director -- GOG.com”
avatar
paulrainer: ... with 5ltrs of petrol ready to burn the place down ...
I confirm then that I would not like to have you as a costumer :) or I'll need to have a good fire insurance.
high rated
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: Offering the choice causes a few problems:

1. We've complicated checkout. That's not good from a business perspective, a usability perspective, and even a customer support perspective.
You already complicate checkout by going from USD only to multiple currencies. A simple drop down menu with currency options doesn't make it more complicated. Default it to the regional currency for those customers who don't want to think about prices and give others a choice.

avatar
TheEnigmaticT: 2. Suppose we don't care about complicating checkout because all of our users are smart enough to not get lost when presented with a choice like that. From there we have two choices on our side: fixed local currency prices or dynamic local currency prices.
It's a pretty safe bet that your users are indeed smart enough to not get lost with a drop down menu. It's not rocket science.

avatar
TheEnigmaticT: 2a. Fixed prices make us more or less a ForEx speculation website. Before buying, then you have to check to see which is better for you today.

2b. Dynamic pricing means that we can't advertise our prices anywhere, because we have no idea what the price will be the day after the ad is done.
Sure you can. Just keep advertising in USD. Or are you planning to include every currency in your advertising? I think that might indeed be too confusing.
avatar
dhundahl: What you're saying depends entirely on how the regional pricing model is implemented. Regional pricing means that prices are different in various regions. It does not necessarily imply that prices are higher. As an example, the car industry actually used to sell cars a bit cheaper in Denmark to boost their sales. This was necessary because the Danish government, being a bunch of greedy buggers, tax car sales with a 180% registration fee and on top of that a 25% VAT. If a car is sold at 100, the registration fee adds on 180, taking the car price to 280. Then comes 25% VAT, taking the car price to 350.

Unfortunately this principle was in violation with some EU bullcrap and the car industry had to align their prices across the EU instead of giving one country preferential treatment. I'm pretty sure that was EU-speak for the German government not liking how Germans could buy cheaper cars across the border.

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.
avatar
Matruchus: Well will have to see but at the momen everything points that way.
I would hope that our answers have helped clear this up a bit: we're not raising pricing in any significant degree for back catalog (indeed, one user analysis suggests our current proposed pricing is actually a very slight pricing cut for the EU). For some new games (those which are regionally priced in other stores) we will be charging the same amount here on GOG.com that you'd be charged anywhere else in the world. If you're that opposed to regionally priced games overall, then there's no need to buy them. On the other hand, bringing games DRM-free to digital distribution seems like a big plus to me; for all of those who don't mind the regional prices, I would think that you wouldn't mind that they now have those games DRM-Free somewhere, even if you don't care for them.
high rated
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: For new games, we're offering competitive pricing (as in, it costs the same price on GOG.com as it does at any other store in the world.). Then, beyond that, we're offering something from our own pockets to offset the fact that, yeah, regional pricing can suck when it's not done fairly. But the argument over what's a bigger fight (DRM or flat pricing) was one that we worked on for a long time, here, and our decision was that to advance the cause of DRM-Free gaming.

You could argue that we could have done both, but we believe that we'd been hitting a whole lot of walls trying to fight both at once. And so we chose which was more important to us and, we believe, to gamers in general. We're not giving up completely on making regional pricing better. We will push for better terms for regionally priced games when and where we can. But part of growing up is realizing which fights to pick. I think we can make many more gamers happy with our new policies than we would have with our older ones.

Some of you feel betrayed by this change. I understand that. Some of you are incandescently angry about it. I'm sorry that we've made you so upset. Every change that we've made in the last 5 years has been a change that we believe will help make GOG.com bigger, bring us more gamers, and help us sign more big content DRM-Free on GOG. We're sorry if you feel we've betrayed everything that made us special to do so. It's your feelings, and it's your right to feel that way. I hope that, when you've had some time to cool down and some time to see what we're actually doing, you'll feel that we haven't let you down, in the end.
I actually had time to cool down. (while STILL waiting for comprehensive response)
If I would get one penny, for each and every time that a company dropped down their "core values" I would be quite rich, and I am totally not suprised it happens. What makes me sad is, that I actually believed that GOG was something a bit more then another online shop. Now I am pretty much convinced that it is not, and it does not matter wheather I buy from you, Steam or any other retailer.

Also, you made this change out of blue, if community opinion is so important for you, why not ask customers first, before making such change ?

And the part of your speech that made me now boil for a while - I wholeheartedly disagree that part of growing up is becoming opportunistic even about the things you consider most important - and I pity those who hold such point of view on life.

Edit 1: And yeah, " we're offering something from our own pockets to offset the fact that, yeah, regional pricing can suck when it's not done fairly." .
Why not offer something extra for DRM ? I don't see any reason why not, you will " make many more gamers happy" by selling new AAA titles with Origin, Uplay or Steam integration.

Edit 2: And your competitive pricing is as competitive as any other online seller. For me, the DRM-free is no longer a valid cause for supporting you, because what you say and you do is no longer coherent, even more you now have a history of broking core value, and doing it without any notice or discussion.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Darkalex6
avatar
Bloodygoodgames: Sure, but there's absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever, particularly as when you look at their financials, their profits are increasing quarterly without AAA games and regional pricing.
They still have momentum. However you have to agree that with the limited catalog, soon they'll hit a wall. It's hard to increase user numbers. DRM Free has its draw, but I've heard also all the arguments of the Steam fanboys against gog. Some of which I agree with. Like linux support, automatic updates (I mean it should be an option - not mandatory - still would be nice), presence in a lot of bundles. Indie games won't keep gog afloat. Most indie games go into bundles before being here thus only a handful will ever be sold here.
avatar
synfresh: GoG has been in business for 5 years, tell me now. Has DRM-Free or regional pricing changed one iota in this industry? GoG does not have a large marketshare, look at any sales comparison of games that are sold on both here and Steam and you tell me what percentage GoG averages? The only game where GoG comes out looking ok is their own title (Witcher).
avatar
Davane: How about waiting for Steam to implode when Valve attempts to launch their Steam Machine in competition with the Playstation 4 and the Xbox One?

The industry is the way it is for many reasons, but by far the biggest is that people don't really care about much besides getting the latest games. A lot of this is because the biggest reason for gaming in the first place is escapism, and people simply don't want to get involved. Combined with the apathy that causes people to self-censor themselves, in the mistaken belief that they cannot change anything, and that they have go with the status quo, it is no wonder very little has been achieved.

This is because the majority of people, especially collectively, are either stupid or lazy (or both), and focused a lot on short-termism. However, such short-termism is ultimately self-defeating, because it leads to selfish, self-preserving behaviours which are unnecessary. It leads to competition where there is no need for competition. Such ideas are often based on the idea that there are limited resources, when this is simply not true.

In terms of making any sort of change, the logic itself is quite simple - almost too simple to believe. The chance of failure in a given action is always less than the chance of failure of not trying. Thus, if you want to succeed at anything, you MUST try, otherwise you simply won't succeed.

This is what is so sad about GOG throwing away Worldwide Pricing. They have stopped trying, and as such there is now a 100% chance that they will fail to bring about Worldwide Pricing in the industry. They have guaranteed that they will fail at this policy. When they were trying, even if it had a 0.001% chance of success, people supported them because there was still this chance.

Has DRM and Regional Pricing changed one iota in this industry in the 5 years that GOG has been in business. The answer is yes, it has. These may not have been big changes, but they are still changes. Many of the big players are still toying with DRM, sure, but at least they are working to improve it. Steam has DRM, sure, but it is no way near as intrusive and obnoxious as the initial DRM systems we say 5 years ago. Even EA has learnt that if you put extremely obnoxious DRM in your game, people won't play, and the game will die. Sure, they are trying to put a friendly face on DRM, rather than be DRM-Free, but it IS an improvement.

Likewise with Regional Pricing. Sure, many publishers still use the idea that 1 USD = 1 EUR, but at least they have stopped with the absurd idea that 1 USD = 1 GBP. This, is an improvement, as well.

Bear in mind that the industry itself is also changing, despite dinosaur publishers trying to keep things the same. High streets all over the world are dying and changing, as retail stores are realising that they cannot compete with digital distributors in terms of prices alone. As such, many retail stores will be there for the service, as opposed to the products. I am thinking that it won't be long before retail stores become the arcades of tomorrow, where you can go and play games, before purchasing them and taking them home with you. Retail stores will simply become advertising outlets for new games, used to build hype before digital releases.

It makes no sense for GOG to give up their principles in a changing industry, because it is an "industry standard." Nobody knows how long this will be the industry standard for. The last thing GOG wants to do is give up on a principle and then find that actually, the entire industry eventually switches to that principle anyway, and GOG has lost a valuable head start they once had, coupled with the lost trust of their community, because they were trying to keep up with the dinosaurs.

History shows that it is the upstarts that drive innovation in the industry. Being first is rarely a driving factor for change and improvement. Such innovation quite often comes from the smaller, trailing companies, that are looking to find ways to give themselves the lead. Of course, this also stems from the issues that those in the lead tend to become complacent and stagnate - when in reality the only real competition anybody or anything actually has is with itself.

This is how the second best boy on the block competes with the front runner. GOG should be playing by its own rules, not by the rules of Steam. Everybody here wants GOG to be the best GOG, not the second best Steam.
This exactly. Great post man.

"The last thing GOG wants to do is give up on a principle and then find that actually, the entire industry eventually switches to that principle anyway, and GOG has lost a valuable head start they once had, coupled with the lost trust of their community, because they were trying to keep up with the dinosaurs."

I think that GOG had a problem of future planning or lost of long term goals.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: 2b. Dynamic pricing means that we can't advertise our prices anywhere, because we have no idea what the price will be the day after the ad is done.
This is still viable imho. Just advertise in USD and checkout in local currency.
high rated
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: but with the convenience of the fact that we're now charging in local currencies.
How exactly would this be any more convenient?

I fail to see how this is actually more convenient for anybody.

Also, there seems to have been some massive sort of miscommunication somewhere.

Does GOG intend to change the prices in the current classic catalogue to Regional Pricing? Will we see the EXISTING games (such as King's Quest, Baldur's Gate, and Carmageddon) switching to Regional Pricing?
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: On the other hand, bringing games DRM-free to digital distribution seems like a big plus to me...
In my eyes that's the criterion you have to fit first and foremost. I've bought a lot of regional priced stuff on Steam, and if I imagine all of the games I could have bought without any sort of DRM... well, that's a perfect dream.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: but with the convenience of the fact that we're now charging in local currencies.
avatar
Davane: How exactly would this be any more convenient?

I fail to see how this is actually more convenient for anybody.

Also, there seems to have been some massive sort of miscommunication somewhere.

Does GOG intend to change the prices in the current classic catalogue to Regional Pricing? Will we see the EXISTING games (such as King's Quest, Baldur's Gate, and Carmageddon) switching to Regional Pricing?
Yes it does. You have it promised in the letter above.
I think this whole issue is not just about the regional pricing issue as such. It's about the software market as a whole and the fact that software is something that we as a society still don't have a clear consensus about (even after it has been around for so many years), and the producers, publishers and whole industry feels that its interests are not secured well enough (which is perfectly understandable; everyone wants profit for their work or, even better, without it) but the customers feel that they are getting ripped off again and again.

It's about inadequacy between what is possible from technical point of view and what is allowed by law.

We've had for quite some time a concept of copyright laws pertaining to literature works, music and so on. And software is put somewhere in that domain. But not completely since in many copyright law systems (and there are so many of them) there are huge exceptions regarding software saying that you are not allowed to do many things with software that you are allowed to do with, for example, a music CD. You can buy yourself a painting and hang it on the wall in your office so every visitor can appraise it but if you buy yourself a piece of software you (usually) need to buy a separate license for every user accessing it even though it's still the same piece of code that is working. (I won't even start ranting about when you buy a software with some functionality disabled on purpose).

So it's more like a hammer or a bandsaw - you buy two hammers for two people, because two people can't use same hammer at the same time. It's similar with software, right? Wrong. When you buy a hammer noone (in any sane law system) can forbid you to drill a hole thru the handle and attach a chain to it. Noone can forbid you to paint it red. With software you are only allowed to a very limited set of what you can do unless the license says otherwise (yet still many producers try to convince you that you can't do even those things permitted by law!). And for hammer, bandsaw, family sedan or a skyscraper building you get warranties and producer is held responsible for its creation by law. In case of software it's usually "you can have it my way, and I don't give a damn if it's working or not". (yes, I'm talking about "consumer-grade" software; many-many-thousand-dollars contract usually have different terms). Why? Because the software is not sold to you. It's only licensed.

So from the consumer point of view software gives almost no rights which come from copyright laws and no rights that come from "common stuff" laws.

And finaly, there is one more factor that distinguishes software from other stuff - it's compatibility and importance of it. When one might argue that in case of games, which by themselves are - let's admit - just a source of fun and noone forces us to buy it. It's only our way to get "kicks for bucks", so the monopoly created by law (because it's not a natural monopoly; there is no technical reason why any single one of us could not make and sell copies of games available on GOG or Steam or any other software store) can be viewed as "not that important", but software nowadays is much more. And compatibility with existing solutions is very often what forces you to use particular product because there is no alternative - specifications are unknown and therefore there are no alternative implementations (BTW, I'm not so sure if software patents would not be a good idea if they were linked with reduction of copyright law protection for software). So if you want (and in contemporary world it's hard to tell someone "don't use computers") to use your computer for a particular purpose you have often a single or at most a few solutions available to you.

And thus it's not only the customers who lose in this market game. It's also the small vendors who cannot compete with big companies because they can't be compatible and existing userbase makes incompatibility a no-go.

We've had software on the market for only few decades for now, and so far "the political climate" was mostly to extend and extend level of protection. So a simple customer feels that he's just getting less and less for more and more. And I don't think I need to tell anyone that it's not a very nice feeling.

And that's the reason why differentiating prices is wrong from the customer's point of view. If you consider a car, refrigerator or aforementioned hammer the prices are more or less similar in different countries (especially if you take into account countries with free-trade-agreements) simply because noone can forbid you from buying a hammer in Holland and selling it in Denmark or buying Aspirin in Bulgaria and selling it in Poland. But in the case of software you cannot simply buy a game in US and sell it Italy. Why? Because some people said so. There is no technical or any other reasonable explanation for that. It's simply that some people want to earn more (preferably with less work).

Same goes for DVD zones, DRM-ing games and so on. (not to mention "you can sell a cisco equipment but license for embedded software is non-transferable". And that's what's wrong from customers' point of view.
I'm far from saying that "piracy" (hate that word, BTW) is good or that people should not profit on their work. But between profiting on your work and leveraging the artificialy imposed monopolistic position is a huge difference.

So it's not just about regional pricing itself. It''s more (as I understand from the comments) about GOG shifting from being "the good guy" (letting people buy nice games for reasonable prices; after all why shouldn't a game that has 20 years be cheaper from the modern releases by the factor that - for example - 20 years old CRT TV is worth compared to a brand new OLED one?) to being "just another one of THEM".
I'll admit right from the start I don't understand much of business or economic theories. That said it's all very well to talk about the EU getting slightly lower prices but coming from New Zealand I can't see regional pricing resulting in anything but higher prices. Its not like we're talking about a physical product with shipping costs over a vast distance to get here we're talking about a download which should cost anything different distance been irrelevant .
high rated
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: For new games, we're offering competitive pricing (as in, it costs the same price on GOG.com as it does at any other store in the world.).
How is that competitive? If you are selling it for the same price as every other store it is the complete absence of competition.
avatar
JudasIscariot: AFAIK, the plan to reprice the older games in the aforementioned currencies is to offset, for the most part, the fees incurred by currency exchange.
avatar
wicked: For me this represents an increase in fees. If you're really doing it for my own good, let me select my preferred currency on my user page.
For me too its an increase if its not going be bound on realtime currency conversion. Fixed prices in local currency will just mean we have to pay more again in comparison to the rest of the world.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Matruchus
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: For new games, we're offering competitive pricing (as in, it costs the same price on GOG.com as it does at any other store in the world.).
avatar
silentbob1138: How is that competitive? If you are selling it for the same price as every other store it is the complete absence of competition.
I thought cartels were illegal in most parts of the world?