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
Wishbone: You completely missed the point. Hedwards wasn't referring to the typo, he was referring to the fact that your PR Manager (or whatever his official title is) just officially referred to your customers as "complete tools". Which, from a PR point of view, could be said to maybe not be the best way of winning back your alienated customers' affections.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: If we're seeing some crazy 40% of revenue from a game coming from RUS buyers, it's because people in Russia are reselling our game codes on some forum somewhere. And, yeah. The guys who are breaking their ToU to make some money? Tools.
While that's definitely indelicately stated, I'm going to call it being fair, clear, and blunt. But also, as I understand it, you probably get roughly the same amount of profit from each new release game sold regardless of localized price, with the possible exception of VAT-included countries, but as they're higher I'm assuming probably not the case. That or you were lying previously when you said that you'd lose money adding the regional price difference to an account credit. So I would expect that GoG's incentive to crack down on this sort of cheating is going to be very, very close to their interpretation of their legal and contractual obligation to crack down on this sort of cheating. Which probably increases the more often a GoG staff member points out the ways someone can cheat as opposed to just saying, "We aren't interested in putting any more effort into enforcing this than we're legally required to. We, and the publishers, accept there will be some no matter what precautions are taken. As long as it doesn't get to a degree the publishers can validly threaten to count us liable and/or sue us, we'd rather put the lawyer's man hours into trying to get new games. If we get to a point where we think we're going to run into problems for users doing things that should be simple, like sending a gift to a user in another country, we'll consider addressing it before we're forced to in order to make the whole experience transparent for our users. If we can avoid spending the man hours for that and just trust our users, then we'd greatly prefer doing that."
avatar
turin1988: Reading over their letter again, it bothers me a little how they suggest that they already have a big percentage of the classic games out there and won't have much left to add if/when they bring LucasArts, Microsoft, Take2 and Bethesda on board.

Are they kidding? The current GOG.com catalogue is great and certainly a lot of really well known classics are already there, but they don't have more than a very very small percentage of all the PC games made during the 80s, 90s and early 00s, let alone all the potential console games that could be ported over.

You could probably pick any year from the early-mid 1990s and find more DOS games for that year alone than there are in the entire GOG.com library currently. Sure, not all of them are going to sell like the Infinity Engine games, but it gives some idea just how much is missing from the catalogue.
To be fair, TheEnigmaticT did explain in some of his posts earlier the reason why a lot of titles haven't appeared on GOG.com yet.

Most are due to the absolute mess around who holds the IP rights to a lot of titles, which is apparently a big can of worms. Others are down to issues with expired licenses for certain content, like in-game music. Then he hinted that some of the games they have attained rights for they simply cannot get working as they want to due to technical difficulties.

I recommend going back and reading over some of his posts. He explained it a lot better than me, and I have to say I hadn't realised just how much of a headache it was trying to secure a lot of the older games.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: Okay, y'all. It's 7.30 here, and I've been at this for a touch under 6 hours. I'm pretty much done for the night, because the monthly company party is going on and I promised Judas that I'd teach him how to juggle flaming chainsaws.

Thanks for talking, I hope I answered the most pressing of your questions, and I'll check back in on Monday--or possibly earlier, although I make no promises--to see if there is anything I've left unanswered that I actually know the answers to.

EDIT: I don't know how to juggle, but Judas doesn't know that. I think I'll let him go first. >.>
Definitely seemed grueling for you just reading your replies (I could tell you were getting a bit tired on some of them, and not just your are/aren't typo). I would appreciate any answers that were hashed out for communication that didn't come out in the answer to a question. I had been curious if your "we're getting things together for an official answer tomorrow" was a formal post or not. Not saying your answers are insufficient (especially with the ?staff=yes link to check them all), but was thinking it'd go the more formal route.

Considering the pace of this post and that not everyone will have checked in a time to see the ?staff=yes URL trick, it might be nice to see a summary post sometime next week for the people who missed some of these answers seeing them spelled out clearly (for example, the fact of having an exchange rate difference, nominally set to 5% to start with, which triggers re-evaluation of old game regional pricing is something a lot of people would probably be interested to see stated officially, and they might not all have been on this thread at a time to see it without the staff URL trick).
avatar
Niggles: Bear in mind there are also a LOT of old games which are actually crap as well...but ur right there are plenty of old classic games not caught up in legal hell etc which they havent brought onboard...
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: Counting the Moby Games Catalogue: 66555 games from 1971-2014, so even if you discount "crap" and "new" games, there are probably some classics left, which they could sell.
Sure, but from a business perspective, they have to consider it a good bet that the man hours spent to bring the game to the site (research on who all licensees are, negotiations and lawyering to get rights which will involve the need of lawyers versed in several different sets of copyright laws, development time to port/fix/test games so they'll run on modern operating systems, finally packaging the games and findable extra goodies for the site and posting).

Just playing the odds, I'd bet there are games that I would personally want that GoG would lose too much money to try. From a business stance they'd have to have reason to bet on either a certain percentage or amount of profit or at least breaking even and that the games that go above that make up the difference for bad bets.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by PaladinWay
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: Counting the Moby Games Catalogue: 66555 games from 1971-2014, so even if you discount "crap" and "new" games, there are probably some classics left, which they could sell.
avatar
PaladinWay: Sure, but from a business perspective, they have to consider it a good bet that the man hours spent to bring the game to the site (research on who all licensees are, negotiations and lawyering to get rights which will involve the need of lawyers versed in several different sets of copyright laws, development time to port/fix/test games so they'll run on modern operating systems, finally packaging the games and findable extra goodies for the site and posting).

Just playing the odds, I'd bet there are games that I would personally want that GoG would lose too much money to try. From a business stance they'd have to have reason to bet on either a certain percentage or amount of profit or at least breaking even and that the games that go above that make up the difference for bad bets.
I'm not saying that their work is easy(work generally isn't).

I have a problem with the "If GOG.com didn't do this to get new games here, they would go bankrupt because there would be no more games for them to sell!"-argument.

Especially with all the Kickstarter + Indie games coming out.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Ichwillnichtmehr
avatar
oneworldoneprice: And while I value DRM-free, I think arbitrarily assigning "less value" to games on Steam is a very misleading and even untrue claim.
"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."

empahsis is mine

From my prespective the "less value" remark points directly to the aditional game you receive on GOG but not on steam.
avatar
oneworldoneprice: *snip*.
avatar
Niggles: 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.
Based upon the username, I'm assuming it's a new account an old user created in response to this change. However, region said UK. If region had been US or Russian Federation, it might've also been created as an attempt to get around some of the regional pricing. As it is, I think it's just a way the person is choosing to attempt to make a point, the way many others changed the description (which I think still says "New User" on mine because I don't care) but with a whole new account instead.
avatar
StormHammer: I wish I knew the reason why they've made this decision, because I backed them on Kickstarter for Original Sin. :/
Have you tried demanding an answer to that through Kickstarter? From what I've seen, game devs that get funded through Kickstarter have been at least a bit more willing to treat their backers similarly to their publishers in terms of feeling obligated to do right by them. You might not be able to get them to back down on AoW3, but perhaps if enough other backers agree on Original Sin you can do so there (with a proviso for VAT, probably).
Post edited February 28, 2014 by PaladinWay
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: Long live the mute button! ;)
Erasing what you replied to, because it doesn't matter. Truer words have never been spoken.
avatar
StormHammer: I wish I knew the reason why they've made this decision, because I backed them on Kickstarter for Original Sin. :/
avatar
PaladinWay: Have you tried demanding an answer to that through Kickstarter? From what I've seen, game devs that get funded through Kickstarter have been at least a bit more willing to treat their backers similarly to their publishers in terms of feeling obligated to do right by them. You might not be able to get them to back down on AoW3, but perhaps if enough other backers agree on Original Sin you can do so there (with a proviso for VAT, probably).
I might just try that. Thanks for the suggestion. :)
avatar
turin1988: Reading over their letter again, it bothers me a little how they suggest that they already have a big percentage of the classic games out there and won't have much left to add if/when they bring LucasArts, Microsoft, Take2 and Bethesda on board.

Are they kidding? The current GOG.com catalogue is great and certainly a lot of really well known classics are already there, but they don't have more than a very very small percentage of all the PC games made during the 80s, 90s and early 00s, let alone all the potential console games that could be ported over.

You could probably pick any year from the early-mid 1990s and find more DOS games for that year alone than there are in the entire GOG.com library currently. Sure, not all of them are going to sell like the Infinity Engine games, but it gives some idea just how much is missing from the catalogue.
avatar
StormHammer: To be fair, TheEnigmaticT did explain in some of his posts earlier the reason why a lot of titles haven't appeared on GOG.com yet.

Most are due to the absolute mess around who holds the IP rights to a lot of titles, which is apparently a big can of worms. Others are down to issues with expired licenses for certain content, like in-game music. Then he hinted that some of the games they have attained rights for they simply cannot get working as they want to due to technical difficulties.

I recommend going back and reading over some of his posts. He explained it a lot better than me, and I have to say I hadn't realised just how much of a headache it was trying to secure a lot of the older games.
I can't say for other countries, but I can say that here in the US, I've seen some of the same in wanting the DVD/BluRay release of shows I loved from over a decade ago. I remember an episode of the animated series The Tick was never re-released due to an animated character being too close to Cindy Crawford's appearance (though we got most of the series still). I also remember the sketch comedy show The State originally aired on MTV (back when they occasionally played music) took FOR-FREAKING-EVER to get released because the original broadcasts used MTV's license to use various music that didn't include re-releasing on DVD and they had to go edit out and/or replace a massive amount of background music. Background music is what kept me from having that series on DVD in my library 5-10 years earlier than I did...

So, yes, I can easily see and believe the problems GoG has signing games, as I've seen it in so many other places that it's not so much funny any more as somewhere between facepalm and holding my head in my hands and bawling like an infant.
avatar
StormHammer: I wish I knew the reason why they've made this decision, because I backed them on Kickstarter for Original Sin. :/
avatar
PaladinWay: Have you tried demanding an answer to that through Kickstarter? From what I've seen, game devs that get funded through Kickstarter have been at least a bit more willing to treat their backers similarly to their publishers in terms of feeling obligated to do right by them. You might not be able to get them to back down on AoW3, but perhaps if enough other backers agree on Original Sin you can do so there (with a proviso for VAT, probably).
Indeed. We had a bit of a revolt over at the SRR KS page and so they issued some refunds. I'm guessing that the revolt also shook MS up a bit because they were ultimately able to free SRR from the DRM and it's now available here.

I didn't get it here because the version at the Humble Store was superior.

Companies tend to pay closer attention in cases like this when their faithful are willing to cut off their own nose in order to spite them over the treatment. Gog's just fooling itself if it thinks that it can continue to be successful without the support of the community.
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: I'm not saying that their work is easy(work generally isn't).

I have a problem with the "If GOG.com didn't do this to get new games here, they would go bankrupt because there would be no more games for them to sell!"-argument.

Especially with all the Kickstarter + Indie games coming out.
The thing I have a bit of a problem with is that games that promise over Kickstarter, especially before they've finished accepting funding, that they'll release on GoG, having regional pricing. At that point, GoG should be able to say to them, "We'll let you charge $60 US if you want, but no DRM and flat regional pricing is a must. Either do that or go tell your backers you're welshing on your promise to them. Not our problem. You should've asked before opening your mouth, because that's something we give a damn about."
avatar
hedwards: Companies tend to pay closer attention in cases like this when their faithful are willing to cut off their own nose in order to spite them over the treatment. Gog's just fooling itself if it thinks that it can continue to be successful without the support of the community.
Agreed.

Of topic: Your gamer tag says "Russian Federation", can you tell us what your local media says about the situation in the Ukraine/Krim?
Post edited February 28, 2014 by Ichwillnichtmehr
avatar
PaladinWay: Have you tried demanding an answer to that through Kickstarter? From what I've seen, game devs that get funded through Kickstarter have been at least a bit more willing to treat their backers similarly to their publishers in terms of feeling obligated to do right by them. You might not be able to get them to back down on AoW3, but perhaps if enough other backers agree on Original Sin you can do so there (with a proviso for VAT, probably).
avatar
StormHammer: I might just try that. Thanks for the suggestion. :)
Happy to help. I honestly believe that GoG would be happy to release things at flat regional pricing when and if they're legally allowed to do so, and if you can convince the devs that the backers are the publishers and if the backers don't demand regional pricing they shouldn't impose it, then I'd bet GoG will happily refrain from doing it.

Granted, Steam and others will probably get the same benefit, but if effort to make things fair for one subgroup happens to make things fair for the whole world, I don't see that as a net loss so much as justice properly served with one subgroup of people carrying the torch and extending a hand to the people who've fallen by the wayside.
avatar
Ichwillnichtmehr: I'm not saying that their work is easy(work generally isn't).

I have a problem with the "If GOG.com didn't do this to get new games here, they would go bankrupt because there would be no more games for them to sell!"-argument.

Especially with all the Kickstarter + Indie games coming out.
avatar
PaladinWay: The thing I have a bit of a problem with is that games that promise over Kickstarter, especially before they've finished accepting funding, that they'll release on GoG, having regional pricing. At that point, GoG should be able to say to them, "We'll let you charge $60 US if you want, but no DRM and flat regional pricing is a must. Either do that or go tell your backers you're welshing on your promise to them. Not our problem. You should've asked before opening your mouth, because that's something we give a damn about."
And that's the reason I don't buy GOG.com's explanation, especially with these examples.
avatar
turin1988: Reading over their letter again, it bothers me a little how they suggest that they already have a big percentage of the classic games out there and won't have much left to add if/when they bring LucasArts, Microsoft, Take2 and Bethesda on board.

Are they kidding? The current GOG.com catalogue is great and certainly a lot of really well known classics are already there, but they don't have more than a very very small percentage of all the PC games made during the 80s, 90s and early 00s, let alone all the potential console games that could be ported over.

You could probably pick any year from the early-mid 1990s and find more DOS games for that year alone than there are in the entire GOG.com library currently. Sure, not all of them are going to sell like the Infinity Engine games, but it gives some idea just how much is missing from the catalogue.
I haven't seen a classic game released on GOG in the last six months that I absolutely HAD to have. Yet I could give them a list of at least 100 games I'd instabuy if they appeared here (well, I WOULD have instabought before we all got treated with arrogance and condescension by just about every GOG staffer that appears on here. From now on I'll be taking my business elsewhere).