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
TheEnigmaticT: 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.
avatar
JediEagle: Yeah, the user analysis ... Well, I dont let paypal do the conversion, because it's a lot worse than my banks. And my bank doesnt charge me extra fees for conversion. I'm not gonna go broke because of the 30 extra cents, but hey, I often bought a game on another distribution channel, because of those 30 cents (you know, here or gmg instead of steam). All my go to stores are doing this.

But, I guess there is no more point in arguing. You are going down this rode. For me, this just means, I'll buy a lot less, which is nice too :)
Rising pricing is rising pricing and that is a violation of your former fair pricing policy.
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
TheEnigmaticT: Well, the definition of DRM is "Digital Rights Management (DRM) is a class of technologies[1] that are used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders, and individuals with the intent to control the use of digital content and devices after sale;(1)". Under any circumstance I can think of, regional pricing is by definition something that's occurring before sale (possibly during sale; I don't see how it's after the sale). For the moment, I believe my hat's safe; that said, tell me why you think it counts as DRM, because I'm curious what "DRM" means to you.
This is getting silly. ( Reading your post I told myself "Are you fucking kidding me ? Am I posting on EA forum ?)

Now we are sticking to dictionary definitions to the letter ? So a program which would spy on you after purchase of a game but won't do anything else, is not DRM, is legit, and therefore can be sold on GOG ?

Besides regional-locking products is a form of DRM - you can't play your product in another country/region.
And I still wait for GOG great idea, how to have regional pricing, without it's exploatations and region locks.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Darkalex6
avatar
blotunga: No the wouldn't. If they would've dropped both the "one world. one price" principle and the "drm free" principle, I think almost everyone would stop buying from here. That would effectively close them down... Change management 101: changes have to happen slowly, so that those affected have time to adapt.
avatar
Matruchus: Exactly it just points out that in time gog will have to go drm way even if we scream outrage and make word war 3 out of it. It makes me sad.
I look at more that the fight against DRM and regional pricing has always had a very low chance of success. Yes some strides have been made but not enough and at some point you have to question whether certain fights are cost effective anymore. They made the decision that regional pricing fight isn't cost effective to fight anymore. If they chose the other direction (that the DRM-free fight was hopeless), the site would shut down from forum traffic alone.
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
TheEnigmaticT: Well, the definition of DRM is "Digital Rights Management (DRM) is a class of technologies[1] that are used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders, and individuals with the intent to control the use of digital content and devices after sale;(1)". Under any circumstance I can think of, regional pricing is by definition something that's occurring before sale (possibly during sale; I don't see how it's after the sale). For the moment, I believe my hat's safe; that said, tell me why you think it counts as DRM, because I'm curious what "DRM" means to you.
I think the impression here is that GOG will enforce Regional Pricing by using Region Locking, which is "a class of technologies[1] that are used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders, and individuals with the intent to control the use of digital content and devices after sale."

After all, you can put prices in as many currencies as you wish, but what is to stop me from simply selecting the most favourable currency for me?

Regional Pricing only works if I cannot pay in a currency other than that of my own nation. otherwise, all you really have is a rather cumbersome way of hiding the real value of the product for the consumer.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: Well, the definition of DRM is "Digital Rights Management (DRM) is a class of technologies[1] that are used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders, and individuals with the intent to control the use of digital content and devices after sale;(1)". Under any circumstance I can think of, regional pricing is by definition something that's occurring before sale (possibly during sale; I don't see how it's after the sale). For the moment, I believe my hat's safe; that said, tell me why you think it counts as DRM, because I'm curious what "DRM" means to you.
avatar
Davane: I think the impression here is that GOG will enforce Regional Pricing by using Region Locking, which is "a class of technologies[1] that are used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders, and individuals with the intent to control the use of digital content and devices after sale."

After all, you can put prices in as many currencies as you wish, but what is to stop me from simply selecting the most favourable currency for me?

Regional Pricing only works if I cannot pay in a currency other than that of my own nation. otherwise, all you really have is a rather cumbersome way of hiding the real value of the product for the consumer.
Gog already stated that we will only be able to pay in our national currencies and not able to see what the price will be in other currencies.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Matruchus
avatar
hedwards: 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
skeletonbow: I've read the announcements GOG.com has made on the homepage and followups they've made to that. I've no idea what all you've read and how it lines up to what I've read though. Having said that, I think it's up to one's own personal interpretation personally. I don't feel I've been lied to at all. I will agree that this is a change and that it is in opposition to strong feelings they've presented before and that because they've been so vocal about it before in interviews and presentations many people are upset about a change like this, and I think people have a right to feel however they feel. Nobody's feelings about this are wrong - but not everyone shares the same feelings.

I was initially a little disappointed about it knowing that it was a change from what they've said in the past, but my mind went to the place of "ok, what's behind this and why" and when I read the explanations of what was behind it and why and thought about it for a while, even though I realize it is a change in opposition to principles they've stated in the past I saw the benefits they were hoping to achieve in bringing new titles here and felt that these were acceptable compromises to make from my own perspective at least.

One thing is that while GOG.com did mention non-regional pricing as one of their core values previously and I recognize that and went along with the idea that it was good for everyone because I was told it was by them, it was never one of my own personal "core values". It was theirs and I just went along with the idea without really thinking about it too much as to what the pros and cons of that "value" might be, and there are indeed pros and cons to it no matter how one slices it.

It wasn't until this recent announcement that I ever even really contemplated what possible pros and cons there could be if such a policy/value/principle were to change. But after analyzing everything GOG.com has said and things many others have said, my mind keeps coming back to this:

It is my understanding that GOG.com's most core principle/value as gamers themselves is DRM-free, and that that is the absolute core thing behind everything they do. Yes, they have stated some other principles also, but DRM-free is the absolute core principle the business is founded upon. With good intentions and good hearts behind them, they set out to bring their vision of DRM-free gaming to the world along with some other very good principles too, but over time what has happened is that they have slowly started to realize that the collective whole of the values they hold dearly are actually in gridlock with each other. That is to say that one core value that is important to them, and to many others here is actually at rather great odds with the absolute core value of DRM-free gaming everywhere always. Not in principle in the ideal world - but in reality in the real world where game publishers get to choose how their games are sold.

What I'm saying is that I believe that GOG.com has come to the painful realization as a company, that their vision of all games being DRM-free everywhere always is simply not feasible so long as they grip firmly onto all of their other principles with equal weight universally and refuse to back down, and that if they don't loosen up on some of these things a slight bit that they very well could end up losing the battle on DRM-free period in the long run.

Steam is slowly adding many of the titles GOG.com sells, and some of them are actually the GOG.com versions including the GOG files even. Steam is vastly more widely known and popular than GOG, and now Steam is essentially selling GOG's version of games (Tomb Raider 1 as an example) under Steam. That is most likely because - and I'm making an educated non-emotionally-driven guess here - that the agreement that GOG has with game publishers probably permits the game publisher the rights to any bug fixes, patches or other tinkering that GOG produces in order to make their games work, and the game publisher is then free to use GOG's bits to sell their games on other platforms. To be clear, I'm not pointing that out to say whether it is good or bad or evil or whatever, but just to point out a fact, and to realize that GOG now has to compete with Steam even more directly with their own game versions on there, and that's only likely to increase in the future also. "Yeah but Steam is DRM!!" Sure, and many people out there say "so what's your point"? I don't but the people buying games on Steam have made Steam the #1 publisher and their voting with their wallet by buying games there make them the big guy in the room, and when they can start chiselling away at what GOG is trying to achieve, GOG needs to figure out how they can continue to grow and to fight to bring more publishers to DRM-free on GOG.

The fact is, the longer that GOG is unable to woo a given publisher, the more publishers *are* going to use Steam and Steamworks, Steam achievements, Steam trading cards, Steam *everything* and make games that are so deeply nested and infected with Steam that it takes significant development resources to even begin to think about unmarrying the code from Valve's Steam platform at all, and once a few years have gone by most publishers couldn't remotely be bothered to spend 4 months of man hours to retool a game for some other digital distribution platform and pick up another 1/2/5% of sales or whatever it might be - so GOG loses that game from even being a possibility.

If game publishers demand regional pricing on their newly released games and GOG doesn't allow it, then GOG simply never gets newly released games except those which are the rare exceptions to the norm. But not only do they not get these newly released games, some percentage of them will end up as I said above being tightly married to Steam and never be a possibility on GOG.com likely a year from now or 15 years from now for that matter. It seems there is a worrying trend of this becoming more and more "the norm", and if GOG does not project out what the market looks like in 5/10/15 years from now and envision how they will remain relevant in a highly competitive cut throat gaming industry, they might hold onto their beautiful heart warming principles with love in their hearts and joy in their eyes as a stake is driven through their souls by the almighty Steam machine that tosses them aside like yesterday's newspaper.

I believe they realized that regional pricing in the industry is not going to go away and that while they could get companies to embrace DRM-free to some extent, companies are much less willing to budge on regional pricing. I thing GOG has started to realize that to embrace their vision of DRM-free being the one principle to rule them all, they had to bend on the regional pricing issue and take some egg in the face as a result. Do they deserve egg on the face? Probably, and I think they'd likely agree to that themselves. They probably had to vomit in the toilet a few times to make the decision they did.

It's very hard to compromise one of your values, but it's even harder if you know that if you don't compromise one of your values, you end up harming your ability to be true to an even more core value that is the core of what you believe if you discover that your values are at odds with each other for reasons beyond your control.

While this is my own speculation about what has happened, I believe it is not far from the truth as ugly and unpleasant as it is for GOG.com or any of us customers whether anyone wants to consider it to be the case or not.

I want to see DRM-free gaming propagate to every square inch of the planet, above all else, above any other factor. Even if some other thing changes that affects me negatively I want to see DRM-free be the result. One can have all the principles in the world but if those principles simply can not result in you achieving the goal you wish to achieve, then you either fight a long hard futile fight that you can't possibly ever win, or you compromise some of your principles just enough to try to ensure you have a standing chance to attain your primary goal.

I think GOG.com is extremely brave for having to make such an extremely difficult decision like this probably with knots in their stomach and anxiety over the resulting backlash that they most likely knew would result, but knowing that it was for the greater good (DRM-free continuing to become more and more feasible) in the long run.

I could be wrong, its just speculation as I've said, but I believe and also hope I am right about this.
Great post and sums it up perfectly. This isn't about trying to screw customers. This is about what makes the most long term business sense plus still allows them to try to fight for DRM-Free, which is what they are ultimately about.
I'm seeing a lot of talk about trust, principle and betrayal. I'm not sure I understand that.

When I make a deal with GOG, money and goods change hands, and then we're done. Because the games are DRM-free, we never have to see each other again after that. That's not the kind of relationship I put a lot of personal faith in. In fact, that's the whole reason I prefer DRM-free, and by extension GOG: because beyond the initial transaction, trust is not a factor.

Even if GOG dropped DRM-free in the future, I wouldn't feel betrayed. Disappointed, yes, but GOG has no power over the games I've purchased here. Unlike with Steam, there is no ongoing relationship here, and thus there's very little that they can cheat me out of. The worst they can do is remove my ability to redownload or update my games, and while I'd be miffed at that, it wouldn't be the first time I've had that happen.

Business is business, and business is not static. I don't really see this as a matter of principle.
Well...
Guess it was fun as long it lasted.

Sorry for being pessimistic.
But i dont think this is gonna work out very well.
avatar
Davane: I think the impression here is that GOG will enforce Regional Pricing by using Region Locking, which is "a class of technologies[1] that are used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders, and individuals with the intent to control the use of digital content and devices after sale."

After all, you can put prices in as many currencies as you wish, but what is to stop me from simply selecting the most favourable currency for me?

Regional Pricing only works if I cannot pay in a currency other than that of my own nation. otherwise, all you really have is a rather cumbersome way of hiding the real value of the product for the consumer.
avatar
Matruchus: Gog already stated that we will only be able to pay in our national currencies and not able to see what the price will be in other currencies.
Hence hiding the true value of the product. I guess I am suddenly becoming Russian then...
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
TheEnigmaticT: Well, the definition of DRM is "Digital Rights Management (DRM) is a class of technologies[1] that are used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders, and individuals with the intent to control the use of digital content and devices after sale;(1)". Under any circumstance I can think of, regional pricing is by definition something that's occurring before sale (possibly during sale; I don't see how it's after the sale). For the moment, I believe my hat's safe; that said, tell me why you think it counts as DRM, because I'm curious what "DRM" means to you.
And one more thing - so, if GOG would have a download client, which would authorise (or not) payments based on customers location and technical specs, which would work DURING/BEFORE payment... that is not DRM ? Come on.
high rated
avatar
MoP: . After all these years I really hoped Your "net" would be more encompassing than the wishlist and the "metacritics", which just seems short-sighted.

Hoping Your sights will widen eventually (or somebody creates a GOY, "Gems of Yore" or something and gets to it ;P).
Our net is as wide as it can be, practically. I think the thing that is least known by gamers is that the rights for pretty much every single 10+ year old game are complicated. The level of complication varies immensely, but the more old-school and indie that the industry was, the fewer details were handled with things like "contracts" or "documentation." The more obscure a game is, the harder it is for us to get it, because likely the odder the rights are.

Theodore Sturgeon proposed a law that suggests that 90% of everything is crap. I think he's probably pretty pessimistic, but I do believe that Pareto's Principle suggests that 20% of the games in any genre probably accounted for 80% of the revenue (and, thus, were probably the ones that were good enough to be the ones most worth having on GOG). To that end, when you say we have 5.35% of the adventure games market on GOG.com, I'd suggest that's we probably actually have 25% of all of the adventure games that would be most worth bringing to GOG. I would find it believable to say we're working on acquiring at least another 25% of them (based on who owns them and who we're talking to constantly), we've tried to acquire another 25% and couldn't get the rights, and the last 25% may never have even been released on the PC market.

We will never give up looking for more classic games. Fortunately as time goes by, more and more games become "classics". The challenge of releasing 2 - 6 classic games a week remains a pretty hefty one. We have found that adding in the revenue from newer games helps us acquire classics (by signing package deals with partners), helps give us enough size and legitimacy to deal with companies who might not deal with a small, crazy company from Europe, and gives us the resources to work longer and harder for the games that we know everyone wants to bring to GOG most, and which we hope we will be able to someday.
avatar
Matruchus: Gog already stated that we will only be able to pay in our national currencies and not able to see what the price will be in other currencies.
Except if we use proxy or VPN...
avatar
Davane: all you really have is a rather cumbersome way of hiding the real value of the product for the consumer.
Exactly.That is why people are so upset.The consumer is about to get it up the butt.Not only will the real value of the products will get mistified...me and alot of other people will have to pay the price for this "change".
avatar
Davane: Hence hiding the true value of the product. I guess I am suddenly becoming Russian then...
Join the dark side :)
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: Well, the definition of DRM is "Digital Rights Management (DRM) is a class of technologies[1] that are used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders, and individuals with the intent to control the use of digital content and devices after sale;(1)". Under any circumstance I can think of, regional pricing is by definition something that's occurring before sale (possibly during sale; I don't see how it's after the sale). For the moment, I believe my hat's safe; that said, tell me why you think it counts as DRM, because I'm curious what "DRM" means to you.
avatar
Darkalex6: And one more thing - so, if GOG would have a download client, which would authorise (or not) payments based on customers location and technical specs, which would work DURING/BEFORE payment... that is not DRM ? Come on.
It is drm just they would not see it as that.
avatar
Davane: Hence hiding the true value of the product. I guess I am suddenly becoming Russian then...
avatar
blotunga: Join the dark side :)
We will rule the empire as father and son :)
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Matruchus