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
Just a couple quick comments in response to TET's earlier posts.

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.
As I posted earlier in this thread, using deep discounts to soften the reality of regional pricing isn't a convincing argument.

Sticking to flat pricing simply guaranteed that new games cannot come to GOG.
And I think people get that. The major issue is how the change was communicated. Not to mention, the "big preorders" ended up being games people knew were coming to GOG anyway.

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.
I think this is quite possibly worse than the "wait for sales when the regional differences are smaller" argument. It's disappointing that GOG has gotten so big that now they are willing to alienate customers by making comments such as this and encouraging them to go to the very competitor GOG is effectively challenging on these preorder titles.

And while I value DRM-free, I think arbitrarily assigning "less value" to games on Steam is a very misleading and even untrue claim. Steam dominates game distribution because their client and the services it offers (e.g. auto-updates) make managing and playing games very easy for its users. If you're going to try and claim that games on Steam have "less value", you should back it up with details regarding why. Let's not ignore the countless threads every week of people complaining about GOG's broken update notification system. In this case value is subjective - what one gamer values is different than what another gamer values.

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.
This is spin. If ONLY these new games were the ones to have regional pricing, you might have a point. But you guys have confirmed that you want to regionally price the entire catalog by the end of the year. Stop acting like the regional pricing is confined to these "big preorder" titles.

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.
But it's not the same, and there are differences however small you might consider them. It does constitute a "bump" in prices that you previously claimed was not GOG's intent a week ago.

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.
Stop blaming lawyers, and stop using the passive aggressive "I'm sorry you feel that way" tactics. Nobody is in disbelief that these games have regional pricing. They are in disbelief that GOG went back on their "core value" after one sniff of potential profits with selling these games.

I think at this point GOG has said their piece, and it's clear that they are counting on the incoming customers who purchase these titles to outnumber the outgoing customers who are dismayed by the whole situation. They've gotten big enough to a point that they don't need to worry about stepping on the toes of their long-time customers. They are and always were a business. Nobody will hold that against them, but what they will remember is how GOG treated its customers like idiots and talked down to them with things like "You can buy the game on Steam with less value" or "Wait for a sale if the differences bother you".

Simply put, there is a certain degree of arrogance and lack of self-awareness coming out of all these posts by GOG staff. An "if you don't like it, there's the door" type attitude - is that really what it's come to? Either they don't understand or don't care about why people are truly disappointed - the poor communication, the bullshit PR spin, and the treating customers like fools who will get over it. I can already see that many people have given up trying to get the points across about why this policy change is so concerning, and how it undermines much of the trust and good will GOG had built between its customers.

The attached image is meant to be a joke, but it also highlights the reality of how swiftly GOG parted with one of their "core values" to increase their profits.
Attachments:
3kdig6.jpg (66 Kb)
Post edited February 28, 2014 by oneworldoneprice
avatar
weissel: [[lots of maths]]

Just sayin', the "identical USD value" may be "easy", but not necessarily fair.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: Thanks for the full breakdown there. I think it demonstrates our point as well as anything I could offer.

And you're right; there's no "fair" approach that's always fair for everyone. PWYW is fair, kind of, although I'd argue it's pretty crap for the game makers. Unless we require you submit us your tax statements for the last year and use that to evaluate what we should charge you, it will never be "fair" in the social justice sense of the word.

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.

For new games, we're offering competitive pricing (as in, it costs the same price on GOG.com as it does at any other store in the world.). Then, beyond that, we're offering something from our own pockets to offset the fact that, yeah, regional pricing can suck when it's not done fairly. But the argument over what's a bigger fight (DRM or flat pricing) was one that we worked on for a long time, here, and our decision was that to advance the cause of DRM-Free gaming.

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

Some of you feel betrayed by this change. I understand that. Some of you are incandescently angry about it. I'm sorry that we've made you so upset. Every change that we've made in the last 5 years has been a change that we believe will help make GOG.com bigger, bring us more gamers, and help us sign more big content DRM-Free on GOG. We're sorry if you feel we've betrayed everything that made us special to do so. It's your feelings, and it's your right to feel that way. I hope that, when you've had some time to cool down and some time to see what we're actually doing, you'll feel that we haven't let you down, in the end.
There's one very good and very interesting takeaway to this, and especially the grandparent post that you edited for brevity. Hard facts and clear numbers make everyone feel better about what's really going on. Generalities, not so much. I know you can't post some numbers, but things like the aiming for examining the localized price if it gets past 5% difference is exactly the type of number I've seen several posts saying, "Yeah, that made me feel much better, why didn't you say that in the first place."

While I know there are a lot you cannot give, I vote for all the numbers you can give (along with certainty qualifiers, of course).
avatar
ydobemos: P. S. I shall also post this letter as a new forum thread.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: Replying to this in depth apparently exceed the character limit of our forums. :( Let me paste my counter-essay below.
Thank you for answering this. I can't say you've restored my trust, but I do feel better.

It also drives home that having this discussion a few months ago as you were internally deciding your previously advertised Core Value B was getting in the way of Core Value A and that Core Value A was more important and you wanted to ditch Core Value B in favor of gaining more ground with Core Value A, THAT WOULD'VE BEEN A GREAT TIME TO START THIS CONVERSATION!!! If the meat of this letter had shown up, and the forum posts along with it, in, say, November, I think all of this would've been much tinier and I'd still be sitting here with as much trust in GoG as I had before it all started, which, to be honest, is the part I wish could be reality.
avatar
oneworldoneprice: *snip*.
Anyone else wonder about this user

a) signed up in Feb 2014
b) awfully negative when replying to TeT's comments?.

Are you actually new to GOG or a regular who set up a new account just for this reason?. Sorry have to ask - your comments seem very sure footed for someone new to GOG forums.
avatar
Niggles: Are you actually new to GOG or a regular who set up a new account just for this reason?. Sorry have to ask - your comments seem very sure footed for someone new to GOG forums.
I'm going with this one.
avatar
GOG.com: 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.
So you want to keep flat price but you are going to change price of classic games anyway depending on regions?
What kind of joke is that, and why do you have to do that since no one is asking to do it since those classic games arent on retail shelves anymore, other than your own wallet trying to maximize profit from non us customer? There will be always small difference in price unless you keep all game in a single currency like it is at the moment (in usd)
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Hawat
avatar
Niggles: Are you actually new to GOG or a regular who set up a new account just for this reason?. Sorry have to ask - your comments seem very sure footed for someone new to GOG forums.
avatar
1322: I'm going with this one.
Im not going to accuse anyone in particular but *if* it is a regular, then its cowardly to hide behind a secondary account name and go on the attack (i think i have an idea who it is but cant prove it. the tone sounds like a certain someone).
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Niggles
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: That's...actually pretty awesome. I hope you won't mind if we reply in kind. ;)
I appreciate both the original and the response in kind. Both made me laugh, and I appreciate being willing to not take yourselves too seriously to reply this way.

I'd also like to see a video of TheFrenchMonk punching a unicorn. Mustache optional.
avatar
1322: I'm going with this one.
avatar
Niggles: Im not going to accuse anyone in particular but *if* it is a regular, then its cowardly to hide behind a secondary account name and go on the attack (i think i have an idea who it is but cant prove it. the tone sounds like a certain someone).
Not to mention silly on an anonymous internet forum. Other than that, my thinking was more aligned with that they created the account with the 1World,Fairprice slogan username for the... well... for the sake of protest :S

I reckon the person is more angry than anyone else is, where circulating forum avatars and forum titles aren't "protesty" enough!
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: That's...actually pretty awesome. I hope you won't mind if we reply in kind. ;)
avatar
PaladinWay: snip
Hey, thanks for the bump, I almost missed that.
Well played gog, well played.

Sidenote : I wonder if our German friends appreciate those "burnt-subs" as much as we do, because understanding the dialogues must really mess up the immersion.
avatar
scampywiak: Absolutely, most of all Namco Bandai, who insisted on DRM and regional pricing for Witcher 2. I'm not sure Larian would care either way, those guys are very cool.
avatar
Vitek: I have the same opinion about them, but apparently Original Sin is going to be priced variously too.
Do they have publisher who would make them do it?
I don't think they have a publisher, but Larian have appeared recently as one of the indie developers bringing their games onto Microsoft's Xbox platform. We could speculate that maybe Microsoft wanted some assurance around regional pricing as part of the deal. Other than that, I have no idea.

I wish I knew the reason why they've made this decision, because I backed them on Kickstarter for Original Sin. :/
I appreciated these answers and found many fair, but a few bring other questions/concerns to mind.

avatar
StormHammer: 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?
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: It hasn't come up yet, so we don't know.

avatar
StormHammer: - 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?
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: Let's say that we have our reasons to believe it will not fail.
While I can believe these two are the truth, the first sounds like "we don't want to make a promise because we'll go back on it" and the second "we haven't considered getting rid of it." I doubt that's the message you were hoping for/intending.

avatar
StormHammer: - 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?
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: It has not really come up yet. That said, I don't know that regional availability of a game is crappy treatment from us. Preventing you from playing a game you bought because of your physical location is definitely crappy treatment and would fit under any definition of DRM I can think of. So that's certainly not in the works.

I guess the question is one of philisophy: if we can get a game, but are not allowed to sell it in a few countries that collectively make up less than 1% of our users, should we? Is a DRM-Free game (classic or new) for 99.5% of us worth denying the .5%?
I'd suggest maybe an explicit vote on this sort of thing before releasing it. It'll probably come out to 98% saying "Yes, do it!" It'll certainly make us feel better that your actions are in accordance with what people want and that you're giving a damn to ask.

avatar
StormHammer: - How will you prevent people from simply faking accounts in other (cheaper) regions to get around the regional pricing system?
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: The same way we prevent pirates from downloading our games from torrents. :)
What about if this is the same way you tried to offer The Witcher 2 at a flat price? Lawsuits forced that. I'd like to appreciate your answer, but I don't like the potential subtext.

avatar
StormHammer: - 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?
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: That's more or less unanswerable, since I'm sure we will sign games at E3 (which is in June) which we don't even know exist today.
In some sense, any question regarding the future is unanswerable. This is a dodge. Can we get something more honest? Maybe something like one of the following:

1) "We consider that a bonus and would never think of trying to discourage it. We want high pre-order numbers to argue we're a viable reseller and we think this will help. Also, if other sites have pre-order bonuses, we'd be offering less value not to have them."

2) "It's not worth being any kind of an issue to us. We don't even ask about it as part of negotiations, past wanting to make sure that it matches what other distributors get. Honestly, whatever they tell us to send with the game as a pre-order we just send along. As long as it's not kiddie porn or decomposing puppies or something like that."

3) "We argue against, but they generally already have signed with other distributors and aren't going to budge, so we accept it and pass it along to you guys as part of the package deal. We made the choice that we wanted new releases, and this is just part of the package deal in that world."
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: That's...actually pretty awesome. I hope you won't mind if we reply in kind. ;)
Now that's a response that you wouldn't normally expect. Usually something like that would be ignored, I would think.

Kudos to the GOG staff for having a sense of humor. ;)
Post edited February 28, 2014 by JohnnyDollar
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: That's...actually pretty awesome. I hope you won't mind if we reply in kind. ;)
Hey, you kept your sense of humor intact, That shouldn't have been easy with the wild barrage of criticism coming from this very forum thread. Either that - or you are devilish, soulless emotional engineers - but I don't think so.

I honestly sympathize with you GOG staff for having to deal with such an avalanche of enraged comments.

However, I still think you did very, very little to avoid it.

However, I still think you're making a mistake. I still think you broke your promise, a promise that was spat on my face every time I visited GOG's homepage as the second most important aspect of your own identity as an enterprise. You know, now it feels like in Animal Farm, when they started changing the rules painted on the barn side. I still think you lost my trust, and that of many other gamers.

I make an appeal: use whatever pricing scheme is needed to get those new games full of A's that you're after to to keep your business going, but leave the classics' pricing alone (beacause that's what got your business going in the first place). We, the users, will handle the conversion fees from our banks/credit card companies/whoever. Let us deal with that. It has been like that until now, and it worked so smoothly-- please, please don't change it!

PLEASE!
Post edited February 28, 2014 by theMole4
avatar
PaladinWay: snip
avatar
Potzato: Hey, thanks for the bump, I almost missed that.
Well played gog, well played.

Sidenote : I wonder if our German friends appreciate those "burnt-subs" as much as we do, because understanding the dialogues must really mess up the immersion.
Long live the mute button! ;)