I think it is a fair point to bring up that GOG's managing director has said that "heavy discounts are bad for gamers" and has been critical of Steam sales despite the heavy Steam-style discounts of this sale.

That said, I'm not entirely convinced one way or another that deep sales are terrible for the game industry. I think many people, myself including, take these types of sales to try games that kind of look interesting to us or are very well liked by others, but in a low-risk manner. There may be some game that I've been wanting to try that I wouldn't have risked 10 or 20 dollars on, but I'll pick it up for a few dollars and now that developer has a chance to convert me to a lifelong fan.

As for sales eroding the non-sale value of games because everyone is waiting for a deal and not willing to pay full price, I'd be interested to see some data on that when the digital sales model has been around a while, but I think it may be too soon to tell yet. It seems that there are still plenty of people willing to pay full-price or pre-order a new game to experience it when it's new and the GOG community also seems pretty willing to pay full-price for games that they love. And obviously many of the sales are going to be from people who wouldn't have tried the game at full price.

They often said that they still think that big and frequent discounts are bad for the industry, but that they have no choice, but to offer this discounts as well if they want to stay in business. When it comes to prices and discounts, the industry and bundle sites spoiled the gamers and now everyone expects 85% off a few months after release. Many people don't even buy before a game is 75% off.

Can't be healthy in the long run (for everyone), but for the moment GOG has no choice.

The right thing to do after voice her opinion is try to change the things they are trying to eliminate from the industry, not to do the same.

It is all business. Also, GOG is not CD Projekt RED. They're related, but not the same. Also, CD Projekt RED isn't a distributor -- that's... who is it for them? Namco? Whoever it is, they determine where it's sold. And likely for how much.

I for one am not against big discounts. The term "backlog" never existed 15 years ago when games cost $30-$50 each. People purchase games for entirely different reasons now. People get a $5 game b/c it looks interesting and they want to try it out. And if it's a dud, no big loss. They move on. And if it's not a dud, then they might purchase the sequel -- possibly for more than they purchased the original.

Although pricing has gone down and there are far more releases, almost every human with a computer is a gamer now. Even grandparents are tinkering with farmville or peggle. There's no such thing as a "gamer" anymore. Now it's just "people." Because computer are ubiquitous in a lot of our lives.

So these days, it's normal for people to buy games they desperately want to play NOW (usually for deeply involved stories, games they figure will devalue slowly or games that rely on a healthy multiplayer group) and pay higher for them. And pay less for other games. But at the end of the day, the same amount of $ is being spent. More or less.

I spend more on gaming than I used to because it's far easier to throw a dollar at a developer for a few games to try 70 times vs 1 time for 1 game for $60. So I think we're seeing gamers actually spend more. It's just being divided up a little differently now.

So, are deep, deep sales bad? Not necessarily. You sell your game for what people will pay for it. And these days, an expensive game is $25 to a lot of people and a cheap one is a penny or free. So if you want to make any money with a game, you need to get it to a lot of hands or make it very compelling.

In the Atari games day, you just had to make a game. People would buy it b/c there weren't 100,000's of them to choose from. And when people bought 10 duds in a row for the equivalent of $1000ish today (for the lot of 10 -- not each), they decided that video games just weren't good anymore and quit buying. They also went outside and played badminton with socks up to their knees. Both were poor decisions.

Nintendo changed the game plan. And I don't think we'll see a day where video games are not not enjoyed and treasured so long as we have functional computers. I think it's possible to see a type of crash, but there's so many options now that people will continue to make what people want to play and people will continue to buy what they want to play.

So, rest assured that your hobby will be around for a while. And feel grateful that you won't have to pay as much for it if you only want to play a few games

I still fail to see how selling the game on all possible stores to maximize profits is a bad thing.

No, bad thing is saying that Steam and his DRM are the Devil, but late sell ur games on Steam. If Steam is so bad, and u DONT WANT to support DRM games remove it from Steam.

But they will not do such thing. Money is far better than etics.

That's business suicide, and stupid at the same time.
And I hope you realize witcher 1 and 2 were also sold on steam. GoG and cdproject are not the same thing. This is almost on the level of a hooker refusing to give blowjobs on the account of morality.

As several peoplehave already mentioned, GOG, is NOT the maker of The Witcher. That is CD Projekt RED.

The reality of PC gaming is that there are far too many customers that are mentally locked in to having all their games on Steam to not put the game up there. Principals are good, but at the end of the day you still have to pay the bills.

I feel like someone should point out that GOG doesn't decide where to sell Witcher games.

Witcher is made by the company that owns GOG. That company decides to let GOG sell The Witcher; but it also decides to allow other places to sell it, too. GOG does not get to make that decision, so it is not in any way inconsistent that GOG would say that Steam is not a great place to get games, but then you would see games on both GOG and Steam.

From this sale, I have bought several games digitally that I own working physical copies for already. I guess I should ask for my money back since this has hurt the gaming industry...

Where did they say "... that Steam and his DRM are the Devil..."?

Or is that your paraphrasing of your own take on what GOG and individual posters in forums have said?

GOG said they won't sell DRM'd games (that's why I have purchased hundreds of games here).

CD Projekt RED did not say that if you are one of those that likes steam then too bad you can't go there and buy it. Looks like instead they offer a CHOICE of getting it there for those that feel they just must have it on the Steam closed ecosystem.

GOG is a retail business. They have no control over what Steam sells. CD Projekt RED produces it and give YOU a choice where you want to buy it - on GOG or in the big cuddly Steam cloud with 'his' DRM if that's how you like to take it.

Srsly, what is the issue?

Some will as soon as the OP's mom gets home and makes a post.

What a ridiculous thread. As been pointed out, GoG has no say on where Witcher is sold. As a matter of fact, GoG has no say on any title that is sold on their service because **newsflash** GoG is neither a publisher or a developer. They are a digital games storefront. The same thing goes for Steam, no matter what people want to believe, Steam has no say what titles are sold where, except for Valve titles. The biggest different here is Valve runs Steam, CD Projekt RED does not run GoG.

As to the reasons why titles are sold on Steam...business' like earning money.