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”
high rated
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: For our catalog of classic content, I think we can make it really damn close to flat pricing everywhere (and we will, of course, re-adjust the currency exchange if something goes titanically weird with them. I believe our current target is that if the price difference between <<local>> and <<USD>> gets to be more than 5%, it gets looked at? The numbers aren't final yet, of course...), but with the convenience of the fact that we're now charging in local currencies.
See, this is the sort of explanation that should have been made as soon as you said "we're also converting the classic catalog to regional pricing".
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: 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.
But you have let us down. Even if this change turns into a huge success, you have let us down. If nothing else, then by the spectacularly incompetent way you went about introducing this change.

After having spent five years harping on about how one of your core values is "one world, one price", how regional pricing is grossly unfair, making fun of other distributors who used regional pricing, and saying how important it is to be open and honest with your customers, you choose to announce that now you are introducing regional pricing for new games in a "Good news!" news post.

Then you tried to remove evidence that you had ever spoken out against regional pricing... From the internet...

Then, after 4 days you said that "oh, by the way, we are also converting the classic catalog to regional pricing". Then you clammed up for a couple of days.

From all of this, I can draw one of two conclusions:
1. You are idiots. Or...
2. You think your customers are idiots.

Neither conclusion really appeals to me, but I can't really interpret it any other way.

I don't actually think you are all evil corporate moneygrubbing bastards, I do believe you are acting from the best of intentions, but I also believe that you truly are out of touch with your community. Otherwise, you would have known exactly what kind of reaction you would get from this. The notion that you did know, and just didn't care, is one I am not prepared to entertain just yet. So far, I'll have to go with "incompetent".
avatar
Matruchus: It is drm just they would not see it as that.
We will rule the empire as father and son :)
Working undercover?
avatar
Matruchus: It is drm just they would not see it as that.
We will rule the empire as father and son :)
avatar
blotunga: Working undercover?
lol well i think im finally steamed off from all the anger with gog

My decision is the same as of many people in gog community - not buying here anymore.
And thats my final post. Goodbye!
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Matruchus
avatar
Davane: all you really have is a rather cumbersome way of hiding the real value of the product for the consumer.
avatar
Screamshield: 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".
There will be no "real value" in the first place.
high rated
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: 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).
What about complete editions? How come preorder-only DLC is not only on the "what's cool about it" list on the AoW gamecard, it's the first thing? It's well established that day one DLC is not cool. Preorder-only DLC is outright offensive.
low rated
Amazing. I finally managed to catch up with the topic. I suppose I should start out with an apology. I was a bit over the top involved last night and acted a bit like an asshole. It probably will happen again, but I promise I'll try harder to not to be an asshole in the future.

That said, I really don't get the crowd around here.

GOG says "Great news, we're releasing big title games DRM-free. But we've had to compromise with regional pricing on the big title games to release them DRM-free. In other news, we're probably going to do some fair price version of regional pricing on the classics. The details aren't quite set in stone, but we think bla, bla.

The response from some people?

I FUCKING HATE YOU, GOG!!!! BURN IN HELL, DIPSHITS!!!! DIE FROM CANCER!!!!!

Come on? I can appreciate that GOG used to stand for something that they're not currently standing quite as much for, but what exactly do we know so far? We know two things.

1) AAA titles (I'd say Larian, Triumph, and CDPR qualify but call it AA if you don't) on release day with no DRM. Downside is regional pricing but it isn't a perfect world just yet.

2) The pricing of classics will change to local currencies in a model that will be slightly regional pricing based.

Those two things are what we know. Everything else is speculation. Every. Last. Thing. Speculation from people who probably think they're smart but who really don't know the actual details. Speculation from people sitting in comfy armchairs, completely isolated from the business context.

There's a time and a place for everything, including a massive 3000 post shitstorm, but I personally think we're somewhat premature in our interpretation of the significance of the reported news. If and when GOG starts screwing us over with 1€ = 1$ = 1£ then I'll happily join the lynch mob, and please believe me when I say that I can write some seriously angry rubbish if push comes to shove, but are we there yet? How many people have gotten screwed so far? A time might come to pull out the pitchforks, invade Poland, burn down CDPR's buildings, drink their vodka, and take all their women, but is now that time?

BUT THE AOW3 PRICES ARE MESSED UP??!
Yes, they are. But they're messed up like that everywhere. You cannot buy AOW3 without running into those messed up prices. GOG aren't messing up those prices, they're just providing an same price DRM-free alternative. Yes, they want back on that pillar that was fair price. They decided to prioritize DRM-free over fair price. They did that and it's fair to be unhappy about it. But they've done that with a title that was NEVER going to have a flat price on release anyway. GOG could've sat down and refused to participate, letting the money go to competing distributors while leaving the customers no DRM-free alternative. This is the super-idealistic approach and GOG decided not to take it.

On the other hand, people might now actually choose to buy a DRM-free game. That counts for nothing, does it? Bringing a DRM-free big title game to the masses is absolutely worthless? That's not a very idealistic attitude, is it? Perfect change is better than non-perfect change but a positive non-perfect change is still better than no change at all, isn't it? At least that's how I see it. There are situations where the cost of compromise makes the benefit of the change moot but as long as GOG only uses messed up market prices on new releases then I'm not sure this is one of those situations.

Yes, policies matter, but ultimately they're just words and rhetoric. Some people think words are hugely important but that's usually also the same people who don't ever change anything. What is important, at least to me, are actual results. If GOG is looking to get certain things done then what matters to me isn't words on a website or specific phrases in a forum post, but actual, tangible results. And when I look at the results of GOG so far, I'm just not sure why I should hate them.


Edit: And of course the topic moved on a bit since I started writing. :-(
Post edited February 28, 2014 by dhundahl
high rated
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: For our catalog of classic content, I think we can make it really damn close to flat pricing everywhere (and we will, of course, re-adjust the currency exchange if something goes titanically weird with them. I believe our current target is that if the price difference between <<local>> and <<USD>> gets to be more than 5%, it gets looked at? The numbers aren't final yet, of course...), but with the convenience of the fact that we're now charging in local currencies.
I would agree to accept if "local" would mean truly local. But as it is now, we have about 5 buckets where people are assigned to seemingly randomly.
low rated
this is like watching a trainwreck

mildly entertaining whilst serious at the same time

the drivers of said train - well they are nowhere to be seen , probably drunk
Post edited February 28, 2014 by paulrainer
avatar
Redfoxe: Can i just fling in a list of maybe old games they could perhaps look into?
So that they arent crap or anything ;) (sorry gonna have a field day with that for a long time)

Age of Empires/Mythology Series
C&C Series
Civilazation 1-4
Eye of the beholder franchise
Blade Runner
Lucasarts games are probably their top priotity, so i shouldnt name that one ;)
heretic 2?
Knights of the Old Republic 1+2 (on steam yeah i know :P)
Mafia
max Payne 1+2
Elder Scrolls (up until Skyrim) guessed you have worked on negoatiation a bit already there.
Quake, Doom, Wolfenstein games
The first The Sims (yeah right :P like EA will drop that one)
No One Lives Forever
Aliens vs. Predator 1+2
American McGee's Alice
Bad Mojo
Black & White
The Dark Eye
Dungeon Siege
Throne of Darkness
Emperor of the Fading Suns
Heavy gear
Jazz Jackrabbit 2
Marathon seriers
Mechwarrior games
Classic Warhammer games (Shadow of the horned rat, Chaos Gate etc)
Motocross Madness
The Neverhood
One Must Fall: 2097
Outlaws
Worms World Party
The Wheel of Time

I guess im missing alot here. Well this is one of the reasons i mostly want old PC games here.
I didnt have a PC when i was a kid. It wasnt until maybe the 2000s i got one.

So i have missed alot of the history of PC games. But i cant say that you havent added games, i thank you for those you have managed to add :)

But dont get me wrong, not against tripple a titles being added in. The day i can play the Mass Effect/Dragon Age Series, maybe Might and magic X without draconian drm, i can be a happy lad.
(but i guess also thats when ill win the lottery...)
My previous reply seems to have people thinking I was saying that everything we haven't released is crap. Some examples of games from your list above that we would like to add but, if I recall correctly, the rights are a complete wreck:

Eye of the beholder franchise
Blade Runner
No One Lives Forever
Aliens vs. Predator 1+2
Emperor of the Fading Suns
Heavy gear
Mechwarrior games
The Wheel of Time

Are all extremely difficult to sign. As in, no one owns all of the rights to any of them. They're all licensed, and the licenses for them are no longer clear...
you should speak to fox and prodos games (more polish dude)as they have secured the rights to make a minaiture avp boardgame
Post edited February 28, 2014 by paulrainer
avatar
TheEnigmaticT:
I would be happy to see at least Warlords III (the turn based one) and Emperor: Rise of the Middle Kingdoms. Those 2 shouldn't be so hard now ?:P
Post edited February 28, 2014 by blotunga
avatar
dhundahl: Yes, policies matter, but ultimately they're just words and rhetoric.
My example will be drastic and overdrawn but... not allowing experiments on humans is also just a policy. Would you feel ok, if some medical company had announced "GREAT NEWS! Now we are testing everyting on humans! Even our stupides ides! That way we can quicker deliver better drugs!".

avatar
dhundahl: Those two things are what we know. Everything else is speculation. Every. Last. Thing.
Giving up on some polices is not speculation. And each and every other seller has a record of those. We though GOG was different. (Or at least would stick to it's guns with the core values). That's I think we are angry.
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.
avatar
blotunga: 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.
Well, that is a good point about Linux.
But then the answer is plainly obvious: start offering Linux versions.

This is not even that hard to do. Many newer games already have working Linux versions, which simply are absent from GOG. Many older games are easy to linuxify (is that even a word?). ScummVM games work simply by taking the data files and adding those to Linux version of ScummVM. DosBox games should work with few adjustments too. Other games are a bit more difficult, some maybe impossible, but you could have at least 100 Linux games here overnight.

Going to regional pricing is not getting here any Linux users, so a large number of potential users remain still unreachable. And I assume that many Linux users are idealists to some extent, and those of them who have been buying games here and then tweaked them to Linux on their own, simply stop buying here at all.

I have absolutely no idea how large potential Linux customer base is, but based on my Humble Bundle and Kickstarter experiences, they are actually willing to pay more for the same product, as long as they get it for Linux. So they may not mind paying the price, but they may mind paying an unfair price.


Indie games probably looked like a good idea at some time, but now there is at any given time some indie bundle running (Humble, IR, BIAB, Groupees, etc.) so competing against that is practically impossible. GOG loyalists would still buy, but with one price policy gone, buying from Humble Bundle (dollar prices and Linux/Android versions) is even more tempting now than before (Humble Store is a different story).
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: 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).
avatar
Starmaker: What about complete editions? How come preorder-only DLC is not only on the "what's cool about it" list on the AoW gamecard, it's the first thing? It's well established that day one DLC is not cool. Preorder-only DLC is outright offensive.
Preorder-only DLC or any reward for pre-order is just way to get people buy possibly shitty games when they don't have anyway to know better. It's evil business practice and shouldn't be supported...

If seller or publisher or devs were to trust in their product only gain from pre-order would be to get immediate access to game once it's released, which on other hand isn't possible without DRM...
high rated
avatar
weissel: [[lots of maths]]

Just sayin', the "identical USD value" may be "easy", but not necessarily fair.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: For our catalog of classic content, I think we can make it really damn close to flat pricing everywhere (and we will, of course, re-adjust the currency exchange if something goes titanically weird with them. I believe our current target is that if the price difference between <<local>> and <<USD>> gets to be more than 5%, it gets looked at? The numbers aren't final yet, of course...), but with the convenience of the fact that we're now charging in local currencies. This is a big deal because we can now also accept more local payment methods. Suddenly, entire countries that can't really buy games from us will be able to do so. I'd note that, in our new setup, we're still eating the costs of VAT, which means we make less from EUR and UK than we do from the rest of the world for every game sold. We believe that flat pricing is a better alternative (when we can manage it), so we're happy enough to take that hit to make it a better offer for you guys.
Thank you for adding further clarification on this point, TeT. It is appreciated.

I wonder if you are willing (or able) to answer some more specific questions?

- What happens if you cannot convince existing publishers to maintain the low prices you have outlined for 'classic' titles? Will you simply raise the prices if a publisher demands it? Or would those games be removed from the catalogue?

- Would the regional pricing policy still remain if you fail in your attempt to attract new AAA games from larger publishers (EA, Ubisoft, Microsoft, Activision, Disney, Warner Bros.) onto the site DRM-Free?

- Will gifting across regions still be allowed for regionally priced titles?

- Will certain games be region-locked, or not be available in a region, if requested by the publisher? If so, how will that be implemented?

- What currency will take precedence for a gifted game - the gift-giver's region, or the recipient?

- What further measures will be implemented (if any) to accommodate regular patching of games? I ask this because new AAA titles are notorious for requiring multiple patches.

- How will you prevent people from simply faking accounts in other (cheaper) regions to get around the regional pricing system?

- For European countries that do not use the Euro as their currency, will you be adding their local currency to the storefront in the future so they do not incur further conversion rate costs?

- You have agreed to offer pre-order bonus DLC for Age Of Wonders III, which means people who do not preorder will not receive it. Does this mean other games will now be offered for preorder with bonus DLC? Will such games be offered in the future with all DLC bundled together?

- How many lemmings died as a result of all these changes?

Thanks in advance for any answers you can offer.