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
Prydeless: I'm not affected by this monetarily, but wow. Witcher 3? You guys talk about leading by example and you can't even get your own parent company to drop region pricing for their OWN game for their OWN store? I could understand if you were selling PS4 and XBone copies, but this is just PC. I mean CDP even teams up with Namco Bandai again... Are they like they only viable publisher in that region?!
avatar
gooberking: You do realize that the Witcher 2 was region priced as well, but only after fighting really hard to prevent it after getting sued for trying to sell it at a flat rate? What precisely do you expect them to do in a situation where it's not only illegal, but they have already been legally chastised once over it?
I am aware of what happened with W2 and unless it was a multi title agreement, I would have expected CDP to learn from the past and avoid making the same mistake they seem to be getting into at present.
Post edited February 25, 2014 by Prydeless
avatar
gooberking: You do realize that the Witcher 2 was region priced as well, but only after fighting really hard to prevent it after getting sued for trying to sell it at a flat rate? What precisely do you expect them to do in a situation where it's not only illegal, but they have already been legally chastised once over it?
Yes, I remember, but I think the court battle was actually over GOG not enforcing geo location. They were going to use regional pricing and then let anyone say that they are from x country when they purchase the game. It's been a few years, but I remember the geo location being an issue.

Edit: Again, it's been a while and I might be off there.
Post edited February 25, 2014 by JohnnyDollar
avatar
gooberking: You do realize that the Witcher 2 was region priced as well, but only after fighting really hard to prevent it after getting sued for trying to sell it at a flat rate? What precisely do you expect them to do in a situation where it's not only illegal, but they have already been legally chastised once over it?
avatar
Prydeless: I am aware of what happened with W2 and unless it was a multi title agreement, I would have expected CDP to learn from the past and avoid making the same mistake they seem to be getting into at present.
Right, from what I understand they didn't know about that when they decided to get the title, then said it would be a one time only thing.

This time they have no excuse for it.
avatar
RawSteelUT: And this is what enrages me. People act like something's being hidden, when in reality, GOG's being more up-front than any other store would be.
Fair point--sensors are detecting dangerously high levels of hipster rage--but that first announcement was some major flamebait.
I have a theory (unsupported, hard to prove). In the US or places where regional pricing doesn't affect people much, customers are here for DRM Free. The prices are similar or a bit higher, but people who consider DRM Free important purcahse here and get involved in the community.

In places where prices are much higher people are much more likely to purcahse from GOG purely because GOG provides the best price. These people may not care at all (or just less) about DRM free and are less likely to get involved in the community.

If this (unproven) theory is correct, it suggests that sales will be impacted even more than this thread would indicate (which is to say, a lot). Thoughts?
avatar
GOG.com: Hey Goggers;

“Best DRM-free wishes,

Guillaume Rambourg,
(TheFrenchMonk)
Managing Director -- GOG.com”
Thanks - I know we would never get anything like that from any Digital Distributor, Developer, or Publisher.
avatar
groze: You're in Germany, at least according to your forum tag, so it's likely the sale price actually said €39.99. I have a screenshot of that page that you can check for comparison.

Not saying it's "fair" and "fine and dandy", just trying to clarify this for people as much as possible.
avatar
RawSteelUT: Thank you. I've seen no attempt to hide anything here. If anything, Mr. Rambourg has been so much more honest than we'd ever seen before. There's that, there's the announcement page for the game, there's so many things that make it clear what's going on.

And this is what enrages me. People act like something's being hidden, when in reality, GOG's being more up-front than any other store would be.
I wasn't trying to make baseless accusations. I am sorry if it was a mistake on my part. However, it did show me that I trusted gog.com blindly because of their previous "core values". This trust is broken. I do not care why they did that or if they think it's vital to do that. They lost my trust as a customer. They dropped something they unmistakably said is an unshakable part of their deals. And from what I see, they silently dropped the point of Fair Prices being one of their core values. They tried to cover up and now they say it was never as important as DRM-Freeness. They avoid at all to touch the topic of trust in their products. They just say what's profitable. If their honest opinion is that money is worth more than a promise, I do not think they are bad businessmen, I think they are horrible people themselves.
avatar
_Bruce_: I have a theory (unsupported, hard to prove). In the US or places where regional pricing doesn't affect people much, customers are here for DRM Free. The prices are similar or a bit higher, but people who consider DRM Free important purcahse here and get involved in the community.

In places where prices are much higher people are much more likely to purcahse from GOG purely because GOG provides the best price. These people may not care at all (or just less) about DRM free and are less likely to get involved in the community.

If this (unproven) theory is correct, it suggests that sales will be impacted even more than this thread would indicate (which is to say, a lot). Thoughts?
Correct.
This bites. I get that having special cases for pricing puts a wrinkle in the ol' business plan, but it still kinda stings.

You've still got my business, GOG - no immediate hipster rage here - but you don't have my implicit trust anymore. I've been burned before.
avatar
_Bruce_: I have a theory (unsupported, hard to prove). In the US or places where regional pricing doesn't affect people much, customers are here for DRM Free. The prices are similar or a bit higher, but people who consider DRM Free important purcahse here and get involved in the community.

In places where prices are much higher people are much more likely to purcahse from GOG purely because GOG provides the best price. These people may not care at all (or just less) about DRM free and are less likely to get involved in the community.

If this (unproven) theory is correct, it suggests that sales will be impacted even more than this thread would indicate (which is to say, a lot). Thoughts?
I came to go because of the promises they made, both the prices and the DRM. I trusted them blindly that I would never get the short end of the deal. Now they destroyed this trust and explanations like this letter won't change that. If I want a place that pretends to be a fellow friend just to get my money, I would go to Gamestop, not here.
avatar
_Bruce_: I have a theory (unsupported, hard to prove). In the US or places where regional pricing doesn't affect people much, customers are here for DRM Free. The prices are similar or a bit higher, but people who consider DRM Free important purcahse here and get involved in the community.

In places where prices are much higher people are much more likely to purcahse from GOG purely because GOG provides the best price. These people may not care at all (or just less) about DRM free and are less likely to get involved in the community.

If this (unproven) theory is correct, it suggests that sales will be impacted even more than this thread would indicate (which is to say, a lot). Thoughts?
I think you may be on to something with this. I'm an American and my main concern is glorious DRM free as it has become such an irritating issue over the years. I'm sure if global pricing affected me more, I'd be outraged to some degree.
avatar
_Bruce_: I have a theory (unsupported, hard to prove). In the US or places where regional pricing doesn't affect people much, customers are here for DRM Free. The prices are similar or a bit higher, but people who consider DRM Free important purcahse here and get involved in the community.

In places where prices are much higher people are much more likely to purcahse from GOG purely because GOG provides the best price. These people may not care at all (or just less) about DRM free and are less likely to get involved in the community.

If this (unproven) theory is correct, it suggests that sales will be impacted even more than this thread would indicate (which is to say, a lot). Thoughts?
I don't know. GOG have had a ripple effect in the industry. They've opened the doors not only for old games from publishers' back catalogs that have turned up at other DDs, but they've also opened the doors on them being DRM-free elsewhere. Additionally they have raised an awareness among the greater gaming community about DRM. How much I don't know.

DRM-free is what brought me here. What % of GOG customers hold that as a top priority I have no idea. A lot of gamers apparently don't care about DRM unless they get burned by it, and even then...

GOG probably have an estimation, but I don't. If DRM-free is among the priorities but not necessarily the top one, that could still sway someone. Plus the fact that everyone is doing regional pricing for digital stuff, so it's not like GOG aren't still being competitive with the rest of the field.
Post edited February 26, 2014 by JohnnyDollar
avatar
RawSteelUT: And this is what enrages me. People act like something's being hidden, when in reality, GOG's being more up-front than any other store would be.
avatar
NovusBogus: Fair point--sensors are detecting dangerously high levels of hipster rage--but that first announcement was some major flamebait.
Hipster? Did somebody say hipster?
avatar
PaladinWay: I'd assume that'll depend on their backlog and other principles. My backlog and principles would have me do without, as I'll likely forget the game exists in a month or two anyway and have plenty of other games to occupy myself with.

Perhaps I'm not the demographic you're looking at though, as another fellow from the US. I'm not upset about regional pricing so much as leery how many more changes may come down the pike (CD keys are already present on some GoG games, and while that's a form of DRM I can accept as it's an unlock instead of active code screwing with my computer and isn't unduly burdensome for legitimate customers like constant online requirements, it is still a form of digital restriction). I see a backpedal on one of their initial core values as a reason to watch for more backpedaling. I can understand, and don't even fully disagree with, their current decisions, but they show a willingness to start down the slippery slope. To me, it's time to see if they can keep their traction to be above the mud enough to be respectable or if they go sliding right on down. If this is as far as they ever go backpedaling, I'll ultimately be ok with that but I'll still be less prone to trusting their actions without verifying.
avatar
RawSteelUT: CD keys for offline play? Uh, not that I've seen. The only serials I've seen, for Two Worlds II, Rise of the Triad 2013 and... I THINK UT2004, are only for online play. Not wanting pirates on your servers is hardly the same as DRM preventing offline play.

As to DRM, it's hilarious that people still think that's going to be something that's on the table. If they do that, why would anyone come here instead of Steam? At that point, GOG is over. They know it, we know it, and they've clearly got financial data to prove that their approach works, if the fact that they're still getting games at all is any indication.
Short answer: Quick look shows a few games on my shelf with keys but no multiplayer servers. I'm absolutely not boycotting GoG now, just stating my opinions to give them feedback. The argument that Company A has solid reason to be better than Company B doesn't reassure me when there's little-to-no limit to how badly Company B can choose to be/act.


Long answer:
Twelve games I've bought from GoG in the last year have keys on my bookshelf. Two of those clearly state keys for multiplayer on their store page. Two don't have multiplayer servers by the store page description. The other eight are ambiguous. For specific games, those are listed in the last paragraph of this post in case you want to check my statements. My game backlog is large enough I bought them on sale and haven't installed any of them, so I don't have any info past that.

I'm calling the regional pricing a backpedal, not the CD keys. Also I'm not considering the CD keys unconscionable and looking for them and refusing to buy (as I am some of the extra EULAs like all the EA games have, which is the only reason I haven't re-bought the Kyrandia trilogy here). The CD keys, however, are a stance of "well, this form of digital restriction is ok and we won't discriminate against it." They also didn't remove the manual page/word-based copy protection from some of the games and just provide the answers instead (which I also don't disagree with, but it IS a form of copy protection). Are these and the regional pricing the final steps GoG will ever take, or will they compromise farther?

For the record, I agree with the decisions in this regard that GoG has taken so far. I'm ok with the CD keys and a very limited effort to strip out the manual-based copy protection. It's more that the sum total of their decisions also make me wonder/worry about where they'll draw a hard and fast line and where they'll make "just one more compromise."

I also consider myself a better customer to them by putting my thoughts, concerns, and purchasing decision criteria on their forum for them to see and others to argue against or agree with. Hell, look how much effort other companies put into trying to glean that from guesswork and statistics based on purchase history. I'm not saying these things to be adversarial, I'm saying these things to hopefully influence the direction they choose to go and the lines they choose to draw to keep GoG as a site I respect and can purchase from.

Note that any form of watermarking they may do isn't something I have tried to determine or have any issue with if they do, as that's something to track the source of games that are put up on pirate sites and not malicious code. At least I have no problem as long as there are sufficient protections against any consequences if that happened due to your system being hacked.

As for market reasons and competitive advantage over Steam, all that takes to allow GoG to get worse is Steam to take another step farther. I've actually re-bought a bunch of games I had on Steam via GoG because Steam did something (EULA-based) that has caused me to refuse to log in for several years with an option to go look later and maybe log in again someday but has yet to be worth the effort to re-read their current EULA to give them that chance.

Games with keys reference:
Looking through my library for the games I bought in the past year, which is certainly skewed to what was on sale in the past year as opposed to being representative, I have 12 games with serial number on my shelf (13 if you count Incredipede which has a key for a browser-based game gift code which I'm not counting as a key to play as opposed to a key for a bonus). Two of the twelve games (Far Cry 2 & DEFCON) state that the CD key is required for online play on the store page, so I'd agree those don't count either. One, Galactic Civilizations I (which amusingly enough is a Stardock game, and they had a fairly famous no DRM stance once upon a time but have now embraced Steam at the very least) has a CD key and is listed to not have multiplayer. Another, Setlers 2: 10th Anniversary, has a CD key and does have multiplayer but states that the game's multiplayer servers have been taken offline and multiplayer is only available over LAN. The last eight (Wargame: European Escalation, all three STALKER games, Eador Masters of the Broken World, Two Worlds 2, Settlers 3 Ultimate, and Heritage of Kings: The Settlers) are unclear as they don't state reason for need of a key but have multiplayer and don't state anything about the game's multiplayer servers being offline.
Post edited February 26, 2014 by PaladinWay
avatar
_Bruce_: I have a theory (unsupported, hard to prove). In the US or places where regional pricing doesn't affect people much, customers are here for DRM Free. The prices are similar or a bit higher, but people who consider DRM Free important purcahse here and get involved in the community.

In places where prices are much higher people are much more likely to purcahse from GOG purely because GOG provides the best price. These people may not care at all (or just less) about DRM free and are less likely to get involved in the community.

If this (unproven) theory is correct, it suggests that sales will be impacted even more than this thread would indicate (which is to say, a lot). Thoughts?
avatar
JohnnyDollar: I don't know. GOG have had a ripple effect in the industry. They've opened the doors not only for old games from publishers' back catalogs that have turned up at other DDs, but they've also opened the doors on them being DRM-free elsewhere. Additionally they have raised an awareness among the community about DRM. How much I don't know.

DRM-free is what brought me here. What % of GOG customers hold that as a top priority I have no idea. A lot of gamers apparently don't care about DRM unless they get burned by it, and even then...

GOG probably have an estimation, but I don't. If DRM-free is among the priorities but not necessarily the top one, that could still sway someone. Plus the fact that everyone is doing regional pricing for digital stuff, so it's not like GOG aren't still being competitive with the rest of the field.
If they try to use these games at an expo to present themselves and the sales turn out to be a failure, gog.com will lose the opportunity to ever get AAA producers on board. So it will be that their region pricing might as well be their death sentence on their moral crusade on DRM. And not only will they fail that goal, they will also lose a big part of their supporters. By this change, they really went all in, and if these threads are any indication, they are on the losing end of it.