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
Davane: Hence hiding the true value of the product. I guess I am suddenly becoming Russian then...
avatar
blotunga: Join the dark side :)
It really doesn't make sense to try and piss off your customer base like then when at least half of them are probably Anonymous... and you will never know which half! :p
avatar
StormHammer:
A nice summary of the issues were wasting our breath to bring onto the table.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by blotunga
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

Gotta love grim realities of a situation. 8 names listed as 31 flavors of screwed, and personally interested in 5 of 'em.
avatar
CarrionCrow: 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

Gotta love grim realities of a situation. 8 names listed as 31 flavors of screwed, and personally interested in 5 of 'em.
Atleast now I know not to get rid of my Blade Runner, AvP 2, Heavy Gear 1 and 2 discs... :(
avatar
skeletonbow: Wait.. are you saying that the people who create a product are also getting to decide how much they will charge people who want to buy it? This is a horrible outrage! How dare someone decide what price they should receive for a product they've spent thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of dollars to research and develop spread over many months/years!

Companies that do this should be put in jail! The price we pay for things shouldn't be the price a company thinks is fair, or a price that a company thinks meets the profit margin they find acceptable to bother producing the product in the first place! No, that's all wrong and ridiculous!
avatar
Selderij: You have to admit that a publisher being in total control over retail prices is not how things should work in a healthy market because it creates a situation similar to retailers cooperating to go for the same price (which is called a cartel by the way). In normal business, the supplier of a product gets a certain amount of money for the goods it delivers and the retailers take over from there, offering the goods at a price that they deem strikes an acceptable balance between competitive (people want to buy from you) and lucrative (you get a reasonable sales margin). In the digital distribution business, the norm is that everywhere you go, the price is the same, and as a consumer your option really boils down to whether you find that one price acceptable and if yes, which store you want to give your business to. It's a consumer-hostile situation to be sure.
Sure, I can agree that price fixing is illegal in many places and existing laws protect against that in those places at least. If game companies are guilty of price fixing then someone simply need start a class action lawsuit and sort it out. If they aren't, or if nobody files suit, then it isn't happening (or if it is, nobody is overly concerned about it or they would file a lawsuit). Even if price fixing isn't illegal somewhere it is still bad for customers and bad for business morally and ethically as well. But it is illegal, and if they're doing it that is what courts are for.

The problem with many online business models however is that it is easy to shop around with one mouse click (or three) and find the cheapest price there is, and lots of people do just that and the store that has the consistently lower prices eventually gets all the customers. WHo cares where you buy a Steam key from for example? I don't. I've bought maybe 2 or 3 games on Steam out of the 200+ I own. Gamersgate has a game on sale cheaper, I buy it there and get my Steam key. Greenman has one cheaper, I get it there and get my steam key. Those are sale prices of course and who has the best deal at a given time largely depends on who has it on sale at that time, but if you go to every site you'll notice that they all practically have the exact same price offered. Why? Because if they did not, one single company can decide to lower the price by 50 cents and draw the entire lot of customers globally in a short time and all the others don't sell anything at all, so they lower their prices by 75 cents and then people go there. One retailer after another lowers their prices to compete and eventually they've all dropped their prices down so far that the profit margins are eliminated practically. One retailler is highly optimized with the lowest overhead and they're able to perhaps drop their prices another 25 cents. The others end up unable to cover their overhead at that price and it's not worth it to them to sell the game at that point as it'd be selling it at a loss.

Then, they remove the game from the catalogue as being "unprofitable" and the game is no longer available for purchase there or anywhere else in the same boat. The number of retailers able to keep selling the game at a low price profitably is reduced, and perhaps they slowly start raising their prices knowing there isn't any other competition out there. Or more slyly, they keep the prices the same but over time they just don't lower them much, and where games would normally drop in price over time - they're able to keep the same price as they're the only place you can buy them.

This is true for many online things and the reason why places like the USA have the "MAP" or minimum advertised price laws. It is to prevent retailers from continuously underselling each other and drawing all of the customers out there to one store to the point where the other retailers stop selling the product as it has low profit margins they find unacceptable, and the company that makes the product sells less of their product and possibly has to lower the price they offer it for also.

It's ugly to say the least, but if you create something why shouldn't you get to choose what price you are going to sell it for? Either your product is worth the value you're asking in price and people buy it, or you've overpriced it beyond what people value it for and you have to lower the price or it wont sell. Games are not necessities like water or food, they're frivolous expenditures that people don't technically need. If a game is too expensive for someone at whatever price it is wherever it is being sold under whatever pricing model and someone doesn't think they'll get a fair price per hour of value of being entertained, they have the option of siimply disagreeing about that price point and not buying it. If all of the retailers are in collusion on the price and making massive profit at that price there is a totally realistic viable argument to say that the game's value is worth that price because when it comes to non-necessities at least, the price you choose to pay for it is exactly what it is worth in value by simple means of you agreeing to buy it at that price. If you don't buy it at that price and enough other people do, then it is still that value and will be sold at that price.

Supply and demand economics really. There are games that are out for many years now that have pricetags $20 or more that I don't want to spend that much money for. If everyone felt that way the game wouldn't sell and in order to keep the cashflow machine churning they'd drop the price. But if they don't, then that's it's value. The same is true with or without regional pricing too, in the case of regional pricing the value is simply the value within that region. If nobody in the region buys the game at that price, no profit is made. If a game costs twice as much in some country and stays costing twice as much, as hard as that is for people that can't afford it - the game must be producing profit there at that price or I would think they'd lower the price no? Perhaps in such a country there is a huge divide between income levels and the pricing stays high because their are enough high income earners buying the game there to sustain the price level in spite of there being a lot of low income earners angry about being gouged.

How come nobody has asked for per-neightbourhood or per-household geared to income pricing where you have to send in your monthly paystubs and expense sheet to find out what special price you get? Hey, there's an idea! ;oP

There's a lot of talk about "fair" pricing thrown around out there. I have yet to see any definition of fair pricing that is fair across the board for anyone anywhere. Fair for who? The customer? The distributor? The publisher? All 3? Is it always going to be one of them has to be a victim by either paying too much, or suffering from not enough profit margin or somesuch? Is it possible to strike a balance even?

Personally - I think not. There will always be disparity, there will always be a situation where a company creates a product whether it is a game, a car, a potato, whatever and some people can afford it and some can not. This is sad in the world where there is so much abundance - but it is not distributed equally to all people, but it is a sad reality nonetheless and we all have to try to survive in it and work with the hand of cards we've got in front of us even if it can be painful at times.

On the upside, there are more games available for purchase online now than ever before in history, there are more free games available than ever before, there are more game giveaways/promos/etc. on various sites out there including GOG, Steamgifts.com, and various other places and games themselves are cheaper than ever with 60-75-80-90% discounts being frequent and common, bundles etc. Regardless of this whole regional pricing thing, games are cheaper everywhere than ever before and more available than ever before and it is a great time to be a gamer no matter where or who you are. Could things be better? Sure! And if the trend continues, they will be better in the future too but Rome wasn't built in a day...
avatar
CarrionCrow: 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

Gotta love grim realities of a situation. 8 names listed as 31 flavors of screwed, and personally interested in 5 of 'em.
avatar
Ekaros: Atleast now I know not to get rid of my Blade Runner, AvP 2, Heavy Gear 1 and 2 discs... :(
Guard them like gold, sir or madam. Like gold.
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: You know, even now, I still don't think that they are motivated by greed.

I think they genuinly believe it's a good idea to abandon one of their core values to get these games onboard.

I obviously don't agree with them, since "We will stick with our core values!" is...sorry, was such a big part of their identity.
avatar
mrkgnao: I believe they indeed believe that they are not motivated by greed. Few people would admit it to themselves. It's called rationalisation.
It's not politically correct to be greedy. Except in the US, where it seems to me that "making money" can serve as the moral justification for practically anything. That is why there appears to be a higher propensity among Americans to "understand" GOG, more so than because they are less affected by the regional pricing, or so I believe.
I guess in the end, how much of their motivation comes from this or that source, isn't something we can know with a lot of certainty, unless we saw open their skulls and examine their brains. ;)
GoG - If you absolutely want to have different pricing, then please considering:

1) List game prices in one currency only, like dollars. Like we are used to.
2) List prices without TAX/VAT so that people get to pay the different taxes that apply to their country.
(you cold show the both prises then one before and the on after Tax/Vat)

But demand one international list price for a given product listed at GoG.

Otherwise we. You customers will feel cheated. In the same way we are when buying it at steem.
And as a consequence I believe you will lose some of us. Becase some incitement for using GOG will be gone.
high rated
avatar
Matruchus: Well will have to see but at the momen everything points that way.
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.
Whether or not it's significant isn't really the issue. You (GOG) are proposing regional pricing for the entire catalogue, if I've understood correctly then there will be no games that aren't regionally priced. This in stark contrast to the "one price" policy you've had for all these years.

Lots of slightly different prices is not "one price". A much more honest way to handle multiple currencies would be to apply a conversion at checkout, one that is based on the exchange rate (of whoever you have doing the conversion for you).
Post edited February 28, 2014 by SirPrimalform
avatar
blotunga: Wow... how nice, here in Romania (don't look at the forum location - that's because of the protest)... physical copies are extremely expensive. Prohibitively so.
avatar
Ekaros: For Finland it's pretty good. Some places like Amazon delivers free over certain threshold and inside EU there is no import duties. On other hand there is even chance to get cheaper titles duty free if total value is under 22€... Due to EU and how Aland is handled for VAT...
It's good when it's good.
It's bad when it's bad.

Finnish customs can be very random about these things. I bought three CDs from Japanese sellers through eBay. Each of them was expensive enough to get hit by 24% VAT + import fees.

CD 1: I got it without problems, because seller had apparently put (lower than real) $20 value on package (didn't ask for that, but was nice).

CD 2: Got stuck in the customs, and I had to pay about 12 € taxes for it. The real value of $59.99 was printed on the package.

CD 3: I got it without problems, was from the same seller as CD 2, but sent on a different day. The real value of $49.99 was printed on the package.


So yeah, they track these things. But there's a random chance that they will pick a package and force it customs cleared. Or then they don't, if you're lucky. And as can be seen, marking on the package lower than the real value probably gets it through without problems*.


* = Many years ago, I bought an unopened LucasArts Archives vol. 1 from eBay. The value of the game was exactly right on the package, but I spent closer to 30 minutes with the customs official lady. She first refused to believe that a package of that size can be so cheap. After I first taught her how to use Internet browser, we checked the actual sales price from eBay. And I got the game without taxes... that time. No apologies for inconvenience were offered, of course.
avatar
Ekaros: 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...
You explain to me why the publishers use the preorder exclusivity shit. I know that. What I don't know is GOG's justification for not bringing complete editions, after having promised the opposite.

I mean, GOG's entire business is founded on the premise that it's better to buy a game than to get it from a digital preservation society. Preorder exclusivity pushes people to get exclusive content from a digital preservation society. What is the incentive to not get the full game while they're at that?
avatar
Starmaker: I mean, GOG's entire business is founded on the premise that it's better to buy a game than to get it from a digital preservation society. Preorder exclusivity pushes people to get exclusive content from a digital preservation society. What is the incentive to not get the full game while they're at that?
Maybe their only goal now is to get some parts of some popular games DRM-free?
With the new policy, is there anything actually in place to prevent the IP holder's of potential classic/older titles from requesting bullshit regional pricing, and saying screw "fair" pricing of any form.
And if my bank dont charges me with conversion taxes.. why i have to pay more now? O_o
Post edited February 28, 2014 by SpiderFromMars
high rated
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.
At the moment that may be.
But the moment you find out how much Russian users gift games to other regions, which is very likely to happen, you are either willing, or forced, or both, to implement some technical solution to prevent that.

And that means that a customer can no longer freely choose whom he/she gifts the legally bought games to.

So "with the intent to control the use of digital content and devices after sale" is happening then, no?
Or are you only allowing people to buy, if they know beforehand who they are gifting it to?
How are you going to verify that?

The only possible outcome that I can see is that regional pricing ends up being massively abused and thereby publishers (and you too, GOG) actually end up earning less than with flat pricing, or you are going to implement restrictions on gifting, which is a form of DRM.
And after that, your one and only "core value" has been gone too.

If market pressure has forced you to fail where no one else has succeeded (flat pricing), how are you going to manage to avoid DRM? Doesn's sound like a likely thing to happen.