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
JanIIISobieski: And on a more serious note, come on, $5.99 is close to 3.49 pounds or 4.49 Euros, so I don't really see the problem with "fair local pricing" ...
I bet so that you have no problem with that damn thing; you pay exactly 5,99$ for a 5,99$ game. Only €-payers are just f***ed then! It's not the more cents at the end, it's the principle!
I sort of understand the logic about the regional pricing for the AAA games and such, but why the change for the classic titles? They aren't competing for shelf space from brick and motor retailers, and if they were able to get the catalogs and sell them at their current prices then it means they have enough clout with those who own the IP to do so.

Or would those regional prices just be for the classic games they are currently trying to get a hold of that they have been unsuccessful at getting their hands on due to this reason? Not complaining, just legitimately asking as I don't really understand that part.

Edit: Didn't realize this was page 99 of a thread! That'l teach me to make my first post on an announcement. After investigating it looks like it's just a simple currency conversation + exchange rate difference rather than an actual price change to the classic titles.
Post edited February 26, 2014 by Kurses
avatar
silentbob1138: And they still claim they had to accept regional pricing to get these games on Gog. It's almost funny.
avatar
KMJX: OK, I think most people here didn't get the actual message.

But let me clarify one thing first: I absolutely despise the way GOG.com dropped one of their core principles.

Now to the actual message:

- In that video of the conference that was linked somewhere in the other Thread, the GOG guys say, that in order to convince new publishers to join in on the GOG market, especially for the big ones, they need to do case studies to prove their model works and is profitable

- In the letter this is mentioned again, conveying the message that these 3 titles are the base for the case study they want to be able to present.
- Witcher 3 of course makes sense as it's their parent company's product, but that alone won't convince anyone. Having NAMCO/Bandai as distributor will still be a plus (name a company that your target can recognize and respect). Pretty sure the regional pricing thing could not be avoided, and getting another distributor didn't work, so they had to stick with what they had
- They went wit Divinity:OS, because they were already going to publish DRM Free, and as GOG supporters they want to help GOG grow. Regional pricing here is probably the result of wanting to keep the criteria for the case study consistent.
- for a case study to be taken seriously the needed at least one more Title, preferably in the "recognized brand/franchize" category. AoW3 presented itself as a good candidate because it overlaps with GOG's target audience. Quite possible that Regional pricing was asked as a conditional here too, in exchange for the DRMFree compromise.

So basically this whole Regional Pricing shitstorm is a case study that is aimed at proving the GOG concept as valid and profitable to the big names in the industry.

This is speculation on my part, but the reasoning appears sound to me.
Again, I'm not supporting the change, I'm trying to get people to understand why the move was necessary in the eyes of the GOG Team.
I still think the regional pricing on classics was not part of the "necessary", though it may still need to appear in the case study as a way to reduce the OMGNODRMPANIC!!11oneoneleven effect when presenting the concept to the next group of representatives.

Still, I'm afraid this case study might quite well end up not producing the expected results, as alienating existing loyal customers rarely does.
Nope. I doubt it. Seems too far fetched. They simply wanted to acquire new titles and companies asked them to change their fair price policy because otherwise they wouldn't be able to ripoff customers by making them pay more then the actual price+VAT thanks to the moronic 1$-per-1€ scam. They desperately want to be the new Steam so they reluctantly agreed. And that's it.
Invest in Pitchforks!
avatar
bmihoric: ...
avatar
pacciulli: So much win! :D
So much fail, and so much inability to understand the reasons why people is complaining.
avatar
Shendue: ...
I am sorry, but others are entitled to have their opinion of your views, just as you are to have of theirs. Maybe you should read the polite, sincere, and considerate posts which mention why it's futile to keep going on like this, and why going on despite the futility is a mark of belligerence.

It has been established that regional pricing is the industry standard, and there are forces much bigger than GOG which control that. So, what exactly do you hope to achieve here? GOG is pretty awesome, but they're not capable of redefining the whole playing field by themselves.

We can't hold it against them to want to do something they think is best for their vision (preserving DRM-free w/o flat prices), not anymore than they can hold it against you for not spending money at their store.

Moreover, I keep seeing "one price, one world" but how is that even fair? People don't all have the same income, if that's our concern; though, I think it doesn't make sense to demand so-called "fair" pricing on non-necessity items, but whatever.

The best thing is to realize that you don't have to spend any money that you don't want to spend.
avatar
KMJX: (snip)
avatar
Shendue: (snippety) They simply wanted to acquire new titles (SNAP)
Hence why this is a case study. They may have gotten to the point where negotiation with bigger publishers requires a case study catering to their "needs".
And please stop with the $1 = €1 speech, which only holds true for the new releases (so I guess you're partially right on this one), but should not affect the classic catalog.

I'll repeat myself though, I too am not happy about the change, and I would be affected by regional pricing, usually even more than you EU folks. I'll just circumvent it if I feel the need to.
Really funny (although comparing Guillaume seems harsh on the surface, this is just meme fun). I would have liked to see something like "Director Rambourg" instead of just "Mr. Director", but I'm just being picky. ;) (I guess I'm a fan of "specific comedy" or whatever one could call it, saying "Werther's Originals" instead of just "old-people's candy".)

I'm not familiar with iWi and w0rma staff members, though. Can somebody fill me in on them, what they do for GOG?
avatar
Shendue: Seems too far fetched.
I'm more likely to believe that Larian's publisher (or themselves) and Triumph are using regional prices elsewhere for those games, and told GOG they can't bring them here on launch day unless they change that. (Edit: And these are the only "big launch day" titles GOG can bring here in this time frame.)
Post edited February 27, 2014 by JohnnyDollar
avatar
Shendue: ...
avatar
cmdr_flashheart: I am sorry, but others are entitled to have their opinion of your views, just as you are to have of theirs. Maybe you should read the polite, sincere, and considerate posts which mention why it's futile to keep going on like this, and why going on despite the futility is a mark of belligerence.

It has been established that regional pricing is the industry standard, and there are forces much bigger than GOG which control that. So, what exactly do you hope to achieve here? GOG is pretty awesome, but they're not capable of redefining the whole playing field by themselves.

We can't hold it against them to want to do something they think is best for their vision (preserving DRM-free w/o flat prices), not anymore than they can hold it against you for not spending money at their store.

Moreover, I keep seeing "one price, one world" but how is that even fair? People don't all have the same income, if that's our concern; though, I think it doesn't make sense to demand so-called "fair" pricing on non-necessity items, but whatever.

The best thing is to realize that you don't have to spend any money that you don't want to spend.
I find incredibly ironic how you are suggesting i should avoid complaining while the very first sentence of your reply is "others are entitled to have their opinion of your views", because not respecting my opinion of your views is exactly what you are doing with your post.
Having different weights for your rights and other people's rights is not at all a sign of politeness.
I respect any constructive criticism, even if i don't necessarily agree, but telling people what they could and could not express is a harsh violation of the very principles of freedom of speech, that your own constitution takes in so high consideration, for very good reasons.
I do have any right to express my opinion on the subject and i will do. And i perceive any attempt to disrespect those opinions as an act several grades of magnitude more belligerant then anything complaining customers may have wrote.
As a matter of fact, i did read the posts you mentioned. And i disagree with them. I do not think complaining it's futile. Actually, there are plenty of gaming sites all over the world that are reporting and discussing the subject PURPOSEDLY because of those complaints in this very moment. I do believe, as a matter of principle, and i'm not just talking about GOG, here, that people SHOULD (not could, SHOULD) complain when they have to suffer unfair treatment and fight in any possible way to remark their own rights as customers. Do you disagree? Fine. No problem. I respect your opinion. But that won't make me change my mind, and i'll keep acting accordingly.
Post edited February 26, 2014 by Shendue
avatar
KMJX: Hence why this is a case study. They may have gotten to the point where negotiation with bigger publishers requires a case study catering to their "needs".
Well, it can be looked at as a case study, I suppose. They want to attract new launch titles and other big publishers as well as their back catalogs and more recent titles.
avatar
Shendue: ...
avatar
cmdr_flashheart: I am sorry, but others are entitled to have their opinion of your views, just as you are to have of theirs. Maybe you should read the polite, sincere, and considerate posts which mention why it's futile to keep going on like this, and why going on despite the futility is a mark of belligerence.

It has been established that DRM is the industry standard, and there are forces much bigger than GOG which control that. So, what exactly do you hope to achieve here? GOG is pretty awesome, but they're not capable of redefining the whole playing field by themselves.

We can't hold it against them to want to do something they think is best for their vision (growing market share and expanding their games catalogue) not anymore than they can hold it against you for not spending money at their store.

Moreover, I keep seeing "No Cripled Software" but how is that even fair? Some people pirate games, and everyone loses then.

The best thing is to realize that you don't have to spend any money that you don't want to spend.
I changed the bits in bold to demonstrate the problem with your argument. Your personal opinion might be that region free pricing is worth the sacrifice for DRM-Free, but others have different priorities. How is what I have written here any less useful that what you wrote? Would you care if DRM games came here with a plan to make all games DRM by the end of the year?
avatar
Shendue: (snippety) They simply wanted to acquire new titles (SNAP)
avatar
KMJX: Hence why this is a case study. They may have gotten to the point where negotiation with bigger publishers requires a case study catering to their "needs".
And please stop with the $1 = €1 speech, which only holds true for the new releases (so I guess you're partially right on this one), but should not affect the classic catalog.

I'll repeat myself though, I too am not happy about the change, and I would be affected by regional pricing, usually even more than you EU folks. I'll just circumvent it if I feel the need to.
Right now that's the case. But, what if that's what it takes to finally get LA or MS on board? Seriously, for LA's back catalog, I'd have a hard time sticking to my principles because the Europeans are being screwed over.

What we have here is precedence, how it turns out is going to depend upon how strong the backlash is. If GOG winds up having to lure people back here by firmly committing against this silliness and bribing us with games, it will probably send a pretty strong message to the publishers that this shit isn't going to be tolerated here.

OTOH, if people go along with it, we're basically screwed.
avatar
Shendue: (snippety) They simply wanted to acquire new titles (SNAP)
avatar
KMJX: Hence why this is a case study. They may have gotten to the point where negotiation with bigger publishers requires a case study catering to their "needs".
And please stop with the $1 = €1 speech, which only holds true for the new releases (so I guess you're partially right on this one), but should not affect the classic catalog.

I'll repeat myself though, I too am not happy about the change, and I would be affected by regional pricing, usually even more than you EU folks. I'll just circumvent it if I feel the need to.
But they WILL change the price of the classic catalog, by changing the currency we'll be charged in. Sure, they may assure "fair prices", but:
1-at this point, they assured us of many things only to take their words back later on, so i can't trust them anymore
2-the prices in euros will be higher than the converted price in dollars + conversion fees. By a little, sure, but multiply that for hundreds of games
3-the price in euros will be fixed, which means we may pay more (or less) then other customers depending on the fluctuations of relative currency values; adjusting the conversion according to the actual conversion rate between currencies on a daily basis would be more fair

Also, how exactly will you circumvent it? By asking foreign people to buy games for you? By using proxies to fake being in another country? Then they'll just add regional tracking and restricions, which will be even worse, as those are a form of DRMs, kinda.
avatar
fr33kSh0w2012: I like my new avatar, I made this one myself! it's of myself!
Nice avatar. I like it.