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: 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.
avatar
StormHammer: 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.
These are the questions (and more not given here) that perfectly illustrates how GOG from simple clear and friendly became just another games store where you have to play the system to get a game for a reasonable price and not get fooled on the way. And that is one reason why it might be much simpler to just pirate the game and throw it away if it proves to be crap. GOG might as well start selling with DRM as convenience of the platform was destroyed here completely.
avatar
Agrilla: well look, here you see the new prising in effect.

http://www.gog.com/game/age_of_wonders_3_deluxe_edition
It's been like that since the preorders went up.
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
SirPrimalform: As much as I hate both DRM and regional pricing, they are not the same thing. DRM can be used to enforce region locking but that is not what is happening here. A GOG bought in any region will function in any other region.
At current time. It might change if people start buying from russian friends in amounts that publishers don't like...

Internet is free, customers can go after the best value pretty easily...
high rated
It's very frustrating reading the arguments in favor of regional pricing, because without exception all of them could be used to justify DRM as well. I'm not suggesting that GOG's decision is a slippery slope that will lead to DRM on GOG; I'm suggesting that when your argument could also be used to support GOG introducing DRM, you need to seriously consider what you're saying.

Take a look:

"Regional pricing is an industry standard and mandated by the publishers. GOG has no control over it. If they don't use regional pricing in these cases, they simply wouldn't be able to offer these games.

"DRM is an industry standard and mandated by the publishers. GOG has no control over it. If they don't allow DRM in these cases, they simply wouldn't be able to offer these games.

The point here is that GOG's entire business model has been pushing against the "industry standards" and "publisher mandates". If a publisher will only sell a game if it includes DRM, GOG will simply decline to carry that game. The same was once said for regional pricing, as it was also one of the core principles that GOG was operating under. So when they turn their backs on that, you can't just blame the publishers. It means that GOG has rolled over and compromised what they stand for.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Hatch
avatar
Darkalex6: 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: Of course I wouldn't feel great, because rather than just fumble on words, they'd actually do something quite unplesant. To stay with your analogy, what I'm saying is that I don't care one bit what official policies that medical company has, but rather what they do. It's not about rhetoric, it's about actions.

Human testing is actually quite okay, as long as it's done right. It's often necessary to perform human testing to learn if a medicine or a procedure works, but of course it requires informed consent and of course that consent can't be obtained under duress. If the medical company has previously made a big deal out of being against human testing, then it wouldn't bother me if they softened up under special circumstances. Massive outbreaks of antibiotic resistant bacteria our the next Spanish flu would arguably be such special circumstances, wouldn't they?

Some times you'll have to choose between two priorities. It's a shame but it happens. What matters then, at least to me, isn't the broken rhetoric in itself but how you move forward.
I do agree with you, and I know my example was sketchy.
What I don't agree on is that GOG needed to choose. And even if it did need to , GOG should at least tell us loud and clear, not trying to sell it as a great news. As it stands now, I still don't see any valid reason for making that choice - all signs I 've read say that GOG is income is growing. Not even ceasing to grow, mind you , but growing. How they can be forseeing losing their jobs if they do not introduce regional pricing, is beyond me.
avatar
Hatch: It's very frustrating reading the arguments in favor of regional pricing, because without exception all of them could be used to justify DRM as well. I'm not suggesting that I think GOG's decision is a slippery slope that will lead to DRM on GOG; I'm suggesting that when your argument could also be used to support GOG introducing DRM, you need to seriously consider what you're saying.

Take a look:

"Regional pricing is an industry standard and mandated by the publishers. GOG has no control over it. If they don't use regional pricing in these cases, they simply wouldn't be able to offer these games.

"DRM is an industry standard and mandated by the publishers. GOG has no control over it. If they don't allow DRM in these cases, they simply wouldn't be able to offer these games.

The point here is that GOG's entire business model has been pushing against the "industry standards" and "publisher mandates". If a publisher will only sell a game if it includes DRM, GOG will simply decline to carry that game. The same was once said for regional pricing, as it was also one of the core principles that GOG was operating under. So when they turn their backs on that, you can't just blame the publishers. It means that GOG has rolled over and compromised what they stand for.
QFT.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Darkalex6
See?
What did I tell you?

Don't say I didn't warn you gog...
Don't say we didn't warn you!


Seriously, stop that crap.
Start a new homepage, call it vapour.com or cream.com or something, there you can try to sell all that new stuff nobody is really interested in.

Let gog be the haven it was...
People support you because they fear that you are swallowed by the big companies, selling plattforms and distributors if you start acting the same way you will lose their support...
avatar
tammerwhisk: The only thing I can think of at this point is either GOG needs to work on how it defines AAA games. Or they pushed these out thinking it was a good idea in response to the flack from the first announcement and they have some other deals going on in the background involving NDAs. I hope for their sake they have something a lot more impressive nearly finalized to support their decision rather than just these 3 titles people assumed would be on GOG anyway.
avatar
keeveek: The term AAA games was only used as a marketing spin. Noone with a clear mind would consider AOW3 or Divinity (a Kickstarter project!) an AAA game.

It was just an attempt to put a sugar coating on a turd called regional pricing. "Maybe if we tell them those are AAA games they will shut the hell up! What do you think, Mister Director?"
This isn't definitive or prescriptive but it is descriptive:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_A_%28gaming%29#Triple_A

I think that is a reasonable description of what a Triple-A game is that would likely be widely accepted by the industry, and that any game that meets those terms generally can be called a AAA game. Whether or not the aforementioned games qualify for that or not I don't have enough information to give an opinion about however. I defer that to those who might have the information as to budget, team size, company size of those behind the development of these new titles.
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
SirPrimalform: As much as I hate both DRM and regional pricing, they are not the same thing. DRM can be used to enforce region locking but that is not what is happening here. A GOG bought in any region will function in any other region.
How do you know, is my question. Because allowing for trading games between regions is defying the purpose of regional pricing.
avatar
dhundahl: Of course I wouldn't feel great, because rather than just fumble on words, they'd actually do something quite unplesant. To stay with your analogy, what I'm saying is that I don't care one bit what official policies that medical company has, but rather what they do. It's not about rhetoric, it's about actions.

Human testing is actually quite okay, as long as it's done right. It's often necessary to perform human testing to learn if a medicine or a procedure works, but of course it requires informed consent and of course that consent can't be obtained under duress. If the medical company has previously made a big deal out of being against human testing, then it wouldn't bother me if they softened up under special circumstances. Massive outbreaks of antibiotic resistant bacteria our the next Spanish flu would arguably be such special circumstances, wouldn't they?

Some times you'll have to choose between two priorities. It's a shame but it happens. What matters then, at least to me, isn't the broken rhetoric in itself but how you move forward.
avatar
Darkalex6: I do agree with you, and I know my example was sketchy.
What I don't agree on is that GOG needed to choose. And even if it did need to , GOG should at least tell us loud and clear, not trying to sell it as a great news. As it stands now, I still don't see any valid reason for making that choice - all signs I 've read say that GOG is income is growing. Not even ceasing to grow, mind you , but growing. How they can be forseeing losing their jobs if they do not introduce regional pricing, is beyond me.
I think the thought was, "If we don't expand, we'll run out of games that are acceptable to the service eventually. From there, we'll have to fire people since there won't be a reason to keep people around for tasks that are no longer needed with a static catalog. If we're at a point that we can't find more extras, we don't need someone here being paid to look for them, scan them, correct them, post them. If we're not hunting for more games, we don't need the people who try to secure new contracts with publishers. As we get to the point that our catalog is as fixed for compatibility as it'll ever reasonably be, the people doing those tech tasks won't be needed either." And so on. It'd end up being a barebones skeleton crew manning the site.

Additional - What comes to mind at the moment for what GOG will do about regional pricing/will they introduce locks/what are they going to do? And the answer is that, right now, they're trusting us, the customers. Just like with DRM-free in general. What's to stop us from uploading things so others can steal them? Nothing, except our own morals. What's to stop us from bypassing the regions and spoofing the system? Nothing. But they're trusting us not to. Going around it seems like a pretty good way to make sure that eventually things will be region-locked. With no trust, you have to lock things down.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by CarrionCrow
avatar
Agrilla: well look, here you see the new prising in effect.

http://www.gog.com/game/age_of_wonders_3_deluxe_edition
avatar
SirPrimalform: It's been like that since the preorders went up.
yes and it is part of the new prising - and exatly my point - Let me show it:

From a google search one get:
Age of Wonders 3 - Deluxe Edition for download $44.99 - GOG.com
www.gog.com/game/age_of_wonders_3_deluxe_edition‎
Download the best games on Windows & Mac. A vast selection of titles, DRM-free , with free goodies, customer love, and one fair price for all regions.

now in denmark the top of the page reed
pre-order €44.99

that is the infamous 1 euro = 1 doller scrow over we normal see in steam. Now also starting to show up on GOG.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Agrilla
avatar
Darkalex6: I do agree with you, and I know my example was sketchy.
What I don't agree on is that GOG needed to choose. And even if it did need to , GOG should at least tell us loud and clear, not trying to sell it as a great news. As it stands now, I still don't see any valid reason for making that choice - all signs I 've read say that GOG is income is growing. Not even ceasing to grow, mind you , but growing. How they can be forseeing losing their jobs if they do not introduce regional pricing, is beyond me.
avatar
CarrionCrow: I think the thought was, "If we don't expand, we'll run out of games that are acceptable to the service eventually. From there, we'll have to fire people since there won't be a reason to keep people around for tasks that are no longer needed with a static catalog. If we're at a point that we can't find more extras, we don't need someone here being paid to look for them, scan them, correct them, post them. If we're not hunting for more games, we don't need the people who try to secure new contracts with publishers. As we get to the point that our catalog is as fixed for compatibility as it'll ever reasonably be, the people doing those tech tasks won't be needed either." And so on. It'd end up being a barebones skeleton crew manning the site.
It's good they worry about it, but there is still a ton of games people would like to see on gog - by the time they will put them onto gog, there will be another dozens of them because new games came yearly. GOG would then could not sell new titles, but that is not what GOG was about.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Darkalex6
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: but with the convenience of the fact that we're now charging in local currencies.
So how do you plan to deal with the little problem of local currency called euro not being local currency for members of EU who are not member of eurozone, viz. Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Croatia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Sweden? And I can assure you euro is not more convenient currency than dollar for many of them.
@TheEnigmaticT:

Are you still going to treat residents of new EU-countries (Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria etc) like inhabitants of old EU (France, Germany, Spain, Italy etc.)? I'm asking about this, because I would like to know, if I could start buying new games on GOG. Unfortunately I can't do it right now, because prices are too high. Average Polish wage =/= average Western European wage. VERY FAR from it. You live in Poland, you should know it better than any other Westerner.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by vojtasass
avatar
AngryAlien: One question about the billing in regional currency, am I missing something? So far all the games I´ve checked are still ticketed in (or with?) USD. Will I see the price in € once I check out and then actually pay in € or how does this work? And if this is true, why not showing prices in the respective currency right from the start?
avatar
SirPrimalform: Read the letter, it's their stated intention to do this (a promise even). It's not in effect yet, but they've said it's what they want by the end of the year.
Thanks for the clarification! I´ve read the letter, but I´ve also read a forum post from TET were he says something along the line of "we are charging in regional currency", which got me under the impression this is already happening.

At least this would be a small plus, since right now there is the disadvantage of living in a country which always gets the short end of the "fair regional pricing" deal AND the extra conversion charge we have to pay.
high rated
avatar
ydobemos: P. S. I shall also post this letter as a new forum thread.
Replying to this in depth apparently exceed the character limit of our forums. :( Let me paste my counter-essay below.

Thanks for the well-written query. I know you addressed it to Guillaume, but for my sins I'm the guy who gets to answer these. :)

We certainly understand why many of you feel like we're making a decision that's not good for you. Part of that is because "regional pricing" has traditionally meant "unfair pricing". Another is that it's a big shift for us. You're correct. This is a change. This is a change we're undertaking for a few reasons. Firstly, because it's a requirement for us to release games like these three (and more) on GOG.com without DRM. This is bandied about a lot in the comments here, in the other announcement thread, and elsewhere around the site and the 'Net: we could have elected to simply not sell these games. You're correct. We could have.

We believe that DRM-Free gaming is a more important cause than regional gaming. While we will continue to fight to get new games at flat prices on GOG, this is a situation where we evaluated what was our major blocking cause for bringing new games to GOG. Given the contractual obligations that many devs work under, flat pricing was more worrying to many of them than DRM. For some devs DRM-free is a non-starter. For other devs, no regional pricing is a non-starter. We never discussed adding DRM to GOG, because that's the strongest element of what makes us different. Regional pricing can sting pretty badly on new games, if it's done in an unfair manner, but with us chipping in free games out of our own pockets to help compensate for that pricing difference, we think that we're making an offer that is more fair for new games that anyone else on the market does, and we're making them available DRM-Free.

If you don't like the regional pricing, then you are always free to elect not to buy the game. But for many people, DRM is more important than regional pricing, especially since the realities of the industry are that we all know that games will go on steep sale, and at that point the difference between prices will be a few pennies at most. A 100% DRM-free game is always 100% DRM-free, no matter the price it is sold at. A regionally priced-game can find that the pricing difference is pretty minimal when it's discounted as any game ends up being, and if it's DRM-free, then it's DRM-Free at any price.

Let's just say that it has become evident to us, in the two years since the Witcher 2 had launched, that the major blocking issue to bringing games to GOG.com was that the developers literally couldn't choose to put their games on our service if we charged flat prices. It's not like they were choosing to miss out on the revenue from us: they knew that if they put the game on GOG, the trouble they would get in would cost more than the money they would make from us. It's happened before with our sister company CDP RED, and we certainly wouldn't want to get any of our partners in the same trouble again. Sticking to flat pricing simply guaranteed that new games cannot come to GOG.

You asked why it is we can't offer the exact same value in store credit for all new games on GOG.com like we did for The Witcher 2. We have a special relationship with the devs at CDP RED. They work, literally, just down the hall. Other developers aren't able or willing to let us make offers like we did with The Witcher 2. Further, the cost for us to offer game codes is effectively higher for many newer games than it used to be for the classics; offering packs for the same value as the price difference would result in us actually losing money on the sales of games. We do want to do everything we can to treat our customers better than anyone else in the industry, but bankrupting ourselves is not a good solution. These new games with regional pricing are the same as they are in any other store in the world. The game that we offer you guys is at our own costs to help defray that. If the price difference here on GOG.com is too much for you, you can always:

1. Go buy the game from Steam, which is weird because you get less value and it has DRM, but I've seen a lot of people say that they will do that.

2. Not buy it at all.

To us, the compelling argument here is that the game is DRM-free on GOG.com where, in many cases that we're working on, it won't be DRM-free anywhere else. If you don't want the regionally-priced game from us, we're not forcing you to pick it up. For classic games, the fair regional pricing means that we're charging you just about the same as we would have in USD, but in your local currency. Which takes me to your next point.

I'm sorry if it beggars disbelief that these games needed to have regional pricing to be on GOG.com; much of what happens in business is nonsensical simply because lawyers got involved. I would note that Witcher 2 explicitly needed regional pricing. Indeed, CDP RED got sued in order to make sure that they enforced it on GOG.com. Given that they were compelled by the force of law to use regional pricing on GOG.com once, how is it remotely unbelievable that they may be compelled to do so a second time?

You mentioned that many users were unhappy with the local prices because they were slightly higher than (or lower than) USD on Tuesday. I'd say on a given day the exchange rate between our currencies may go one way or another. Sometimes the exchange rate will favor us a tiny bit, and sometimes it will favor you guys. In any case, it's a matter of a very few pennies on the dollar (pound, Euro, etc.). A user later on in the forums notes that the Euro prices we proposed, for him, were actually a slight savings over USD prices.

Finally, to answer your last two bullet points.

1. I mention above why that's untenable. We did the analysis on our end and it came out to losses for us every time. That would mean that if, for some reason, our local pricing became really popular, we'd slowly gift ourselves into bankruptcy. We still feel that, given that launch-day games are at this price everywhere and--for reasons explained above--must be at these prices, we have done everything we can to offset the higher prices to make it a much better offer here on GOG than anywhere else in the world.

2. That's problematic as I've mentioned in other posts. This would mean that the price for every game in the catalog would change every day. Also, we would be unable to advertise anywhere, send emails on the weekend to tell you what's on sale, or even post prices in sales to social media. It also means that anyone who comes to GOG.com will be unsure what price he or she will be asked to pay today, and in general results in a bad experience for the end users. For the majority of people who use any website, complicating the checkout process is a surefire way to make them not want to buy.