1. Doesn't stop one from pushing for it. Only way to have any chance that it eventually will.
2-3. More idealistic than 1, you mean? :)) But what about the countries with extreme income inequality then? Or the fact that in many places few, and getting fewer lately, are "average" in that respect, the average being largely just in statistics? Also, if you do this for one type of product, or a few types, where it is possible, doesn't it actually encourage continued disparity between the economic realities of countries, which can't be mitigated in such a way for the vast majority of other types of goods (including the computers to play the games on, for one)?
4. Don't see how that can be questionable. They hammered on it time and time again, very explicitly, as a core value.
5. Missing one of your points, not of mine. So again, I'm asking what of the people who had more values as non-negotiable? And the free games part could never have been taken as a proper value because a proper value should have applied to the entire catalog, and obviously not all games were free... And in fact, considering the temporary freebies, we got way more free games recently than back in the day.
Doesn't stop you from hearing it IN TET's voice :p

But their "divide and conquer" sure is working. Always does, with people being as they are.

PS: Back to RadonGOG, about the "goodies": I always wondered whether they were really free (and even sent a message and wrote a blog post at the time, after they no longer restricted themselves to the 2 initial price points), because if they're not and they could sell a game for even $1 less (maybe even cents less in theory, but they don't do that sort of prices) without some "goodies", they probably should, and have another version with the "goodies" for whoever wants it like that.
It's something they finally recognized now by removing the word "FREE" from the "goodies" list, since it's been darn obvious for a while that at least for some games they're not free as said games have different editions set apart just by the included "goodies", but even for the rest there is this difference and you have to wonder.
Also, I do wonder why do they allow games with NO "goodies" whatsoever when they could easily fix that. I mean, they could always make one forum avatar or make a slightly modified version of the cover, crop it to the resolutions they use, and call it a wallpaper, and include that and say it's a "goodie". The fact that for some games they don't do this says they specifically want those games to have no "goodies", and I don't see why that is. Again, if they wanted to they could still fulfill that promise very readily, as it didn't include a very clear specified lower limit of what "goodies" have to include to count.

1: But this "small" topic hasn´t got any influence on that big topic!
2 &3: This still doesn´t create an argument to actually support flat pricing.
4. It´s not about their presentation, it´s about whether it is possible/ legitimate to consider this as a value AT ALL!
5. Totally agree on your freebies-comment! The rest...
...well, it is linked to the problem 4; but it seems like I didn´t phrase #5 in a good way last time...
So, another try: If you break up the "value" into two parts, it shows off pretty well.
So the original one is the idea of "fair pricing" and the method is "flat pricing". As many showed (but I didn´t realize back in time) these two cannot go together unless the world improves significantly in terms of fair payment, equity, ...
...as this is not given, some part of that value was always bugged, always "poised".
Oh, and there is a new Number!
6. Agree on that part with the goodies! And yup, Ißm happy that the description now matches reality more closely!
Anyways, to have something to add: Nosferatu has been rereleased without goodies and Judas explained why: They had nothing HQ enough to advertise it as bonus content!

This regional pricing stuff always crumble (I intend a negative sense) in fairness, equality, ecc.
There are some wrong foundation about it.
I'll try to explain.

1) Poverty (or low salary) is seen as a universal thing. If you poor in UK, you are poor in Italy or Morocco.
2) Richness is seen as a regional based. But there are poor people everywhere.
3) Taxation isn't taken into account. Normally rich region pays lots of taxes.
4) The value of a product is not intrinsic but is based on how much someone is supposed to earn

so...

1) Poverty is not universal. I can ear 1000£ and be poor in UK, but good standing in Italy
2) Richness is a personal thing. I can be poor in Saudi Arabia or Kuwait
3) How taxation is factored in a fair price? Normally direct taxes are higher and VAT also in "rich" countries.
4) We are saying that a product has no intrinsic value. If I earn 0, the product value is 0 or 0+1.

Regional price are just marketing and exploitation.

Lately there were several news that the EU comission plans to introduce legislation against geoblocking (as they call it) in online commerce this year or the next. It may mean the end of regional pricing in this corner of the world - or it may not. Let's hope for the best.

Curious to see how this goes. I suspect there will be hue and cry regardless of what direction the change goes in, as either it will be an attempt to override national governments, or otherwise will accommodate national governments by implementing a "lowest common denominator" approach. I'm skeptical of any bureaucracy coming up with an optimal solution, but will reserve judgement until the day thereof.

I remember The Witcher 3 being regioanally priced before. I now see that the price changed and it doesn't provide the fair price package anymore. Can anyone confirm me that the game is no more regionally priced? Anyone recall when that changes happened?

I remember also that at some point there was some fair price thing going on for me too. When I few days ago bought it with roughly 43 euros (I had previous games so -27%) there wasn't any mention of it.

It isn't a bad price at all but was it a different price before? I kinda remember it being quite the same.

The EURO getting weaker, and GOG adjusting their prices based on exchange rates fluctuations, may be the culprit behind this.

Well that's true, euro has seen better days..

I preordered it more than one year ago. So I got it with the 27% discount and fair price package.

However, doing the math, counting the fair price package, if I would buy the game now, I would spend roughly 1$ less.

I also thought of that, still it's strange that the change wasn't comunicated (well thinking about it it's kinda normal here).
I also see a lot of regionally priced games with fair price package of less than 1$, so I don't understand why TW3 is that way. Also TW3 expansion is regionally priced and has half the price of the regular game.

I'll probably make them refund my preorder anyway due to the lack of communication from CDP RED about graphic downgrade to release on console and other issue.
I was however curious about the price.

And they made us pay for it every day.

Don't do that, you are only few days away of perhaps a best game this year. =)

We don't know that and they have made clear they don't want us to know that.
Every year is full of game of the year. Actually they are more than normal games in number and are usually worse than those.
What actually makes a game the game of the year is an aggressive advertising campaign and still lack of usefull information. Exactly like this time. In this condition is too dangerous to put blind trust in this one.
The most recent game of the year was Mortal Kombat X, that at least on pc is an epic fail.

I wasn't talking about some goty nominations. I don't care about those.
Yes PC releases has been pretty bad lately. I haven't played latest Mortal Kombat but surely a fighting game can't be a game of the year for me. I'm more in to rpgs and I'm a witcher fan.
Yes they did go a bit overboard with the hyping and daily screenshots and whatnot.. =P

But of course, you choice, you don't have to explain it to me. =) I'm just hoping it to be really good and that it will run well. I get it, there is a lot of unknowns, especially the PC version.

Sure. However I don't mind explaing it to you, we are just talking. I play different genre and I hope TW3 will be good too, I'm just not so hopeful to keep blindly trust them about this game (and everything related to them and their sister company actually).
The reason why I preordered the game years ago (an already risky practice) is the same reason I'm willing to cancel the preorder now. I preordered because I had enough trust in it given past experience. I've not changed, but they gave me more and more reasons to trust them less. There's no hint they are doing a good job on this game and that they are willing to give an insight of how the final product will be. They are not giving me real information on the game but I can observe how they act and that's enough to be wary of their doing. Expecially when they have the means to give those informations.
A little hype is good, but a good cure to too much hype is just simply to ignore the whole mess.