I'm big fan of strategies but current price is, sadly, definitely a no-no for me. And I understand that's not GOG's fault. I can anyway wishlist it for some unforeseen purchase in very distant future.

That point really does depend on what your own, unique version of classic is. For me it's anything pre 2002. I don't consider this game in that category. I'd say, imho, that it's an aged game but not old, or classic. A newer release. Which fits in with his newer game price point statement.

However, the point you made DOES make the picture clearer as to the debate over the price. But I'd question the notion of only a 5-6 year old game considered as old. What highlighted this issue is the recent release of Soul Reaver on the service. A classic game like that is $5.99. Which enforces the post you highlighted.

Lets consider SC1 too, early 2002(?) and at $9.99, again backing up TeT point. It's cutting close to my notion of pre 02, but it's a fiver. Which is a very low amount.

But, again all this is down to personal preference. It's fine that people consider this an old game, it's fine that people think 20$ is too much. I hope they buy it when it's lower or somewhere else to push the issue to GoG. Let GoG know of their dissatisfaction, personally. But it's the lowest price of us UKers digitally, and for that GoG has done right.


aaaand yes, people comparing it to sale prices unfortunately does noting to prove the point.

Part of the problem is also that games have been released as 'old' games on here prior to the site update that are just as old if not newer (some aren't even good.) Spellforce 2 for example (though it is a good game.) However instead of releasing it complete GOG charged for the expansions to get around their price limitations. Ok I know the expansions are quite standalone but if they can't all be bundled in at $9.99 then the game isn't old enough as GoG had worked on building up a rep for offering complete packages.... something that has gone awry, especially since EA.

GoG has a bad habit of bending their rules. No doubt they're playing devil's advocate with the Publishers to try and maintain a good relationship but these kinds of actions do disappoint a lot of the community.

They should expect this kind of a backlash from disillusioned long-term customers because they've heavily marketed themselves as by gamers for gamers and go on about their high principles etc every chance they get... that's largely what has made their business do so well.

Was there any case on GOG since it's founding that a game was lowered in price yet? Does anyone remember?

I've thought about getting into this series for ages now(plus that Train game by the same company) for a while now, starting with the previous two, but I didn't because the concept seemed just a bit stupid. But I think nothing should be out of the scope of a gamer willing to try, and it's isometric and I like simulation games so.

You could've just said 4-8 xD

Yes, at least 5 times.

Arx Fatalis, Creatures games, and one or two Divinity games. Also one or two Oddworld games.

Or better, maybe I should have used a few integrals. :D

They Informed us of the new price point. yes. The 15 dollar one was logical step forward I was willing to accept for certain obscure indie games.

When they announce assassin's creed and Heroes 5 was when I took issue, I can buy the retail base game of heroes 3 for £3. I also already own it, so I'm not going to be in a rush to drop £12 or whatever it is to re-buy it.

This is the same issue I have with steam, I don't buy Triple A titles unless they're on sale.

Rollercoaster tycoon 3 should not retail at that high a price, the game is by most standards one of GoG's 'old' games.

GoG missed the perfect opportunity to play champion of the people, refusing to sell at the 20 dollar mark would garner positive feedback for GoG, while simultaneously put pressure on Atari for over pricing.

Of course we're putting our money where our mouth is by not buying it, but it's not on us, the consumer, to start chasing Atari or GoG we express our issues in a (relatively) open manner with other people who share our interests, it's up to Atari to spend the time and money fishing the data to see why people aren't buying into their product.

I've seen a few posts whining about the amount of whining and I'd like to address those by saying, GoG is in a state of change, it's natural for people to start becoming concerned about matters when so many other gaming companies have made questionable business decisions before. In fact it's these questionable business practices that drove most of us here to GoG, of course we'd be passionate about the way things work here.

Not surprised you didn't find. You need a brain to detect yourself.

One of the key differences of GoG is that people actually support it. A lot of us buy games here we already have, primarily to support GoG.... I've done it myself with quite a few... we've also done a lot of word of mouth advertising, maybe even buying people games to get them on here. How often do you hear about people doing that with Steam, Direct2Drive, Amazon, Gamersgate, DotEmu etc? It's this extra helping hand that has gotten GoG this far.

okay thanks, i haven't interpreted the post you link to as a "no" to my question, but it makes sense.

A question for GOG would then be:
Is it possible for you, GOG, to get in touch with the publishers after some time and propose a lower price? after some years it would, for example, make sense to change splinter cell 1 to 5.99, if two or three other splinter cell titles with 9.99 or higher price tags have been released till then.

Its obvious that GOG can't put this game in their catalog without the 20 $ price, same as Heroes 5 and Assassins creed, So it comes down to having it or not, I would rather have these here. Did i buy any at $20 no, but when they go on sale I will pick up Assassins creed because I want the extras and having a stand alone installer.

Awesome game! I bought it before Christmas, wish it had been on GOG back then! :-(