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”
In my country it still shows the dollar price of 39,99$. Can anybody from austria confirm this?
avatar
necktoast: Look, there's a lot of complaining about this move, but I think it's fair for both consumers and for Gog, which is clearly trying to respond to market pressures in a fair manner.
avatar
silentbob1138: What's fair about a game costing 37,5% more for most Europeans, Africans and South Americans?
There is nothing fair about, but GoG doesn't have the ability to dictate what's fair or not when it comes to regional pricing. I do find it ironic that people are inflaming GoG for the same reasons they inflame Steam when it comes to regional pricing, when in the reality neither have the ability to dictate those kind of terms.
avatar
pbmacros: @GoG Stuff:
If you are overwhelmed by the responses I want to point out a specific one which adresses the issues with regional pricing very good, just in case you missed it.
http://www.gog.com/forum/general/letter_from_the_md_about_regional_pricing/post438
The linked post is written very well, and sums up many of my own questions.
avatar
JudasIscariot: AFAIK, the plan to reprice the older games in the aforementioned currencies is to offset, for the most part, the fees incurred by currency exchange.
Well, for the older games, you can define the regions yourselves, yes? If so, does that mean that EU countries not in the eurozone will still pay in USD?
avatar
JudasIscariot: Wow that is weird O.o
avatar
NetAndy: Hmm, I see the same thing (Firefox) when I do not maximize the window.

EDIT:
I forgot to add attachement;)
Please write to us about that, OK? :)
This has probably already been brought up in the preceding 132 pages of this thread which I haven't had the inclination to read, but I just *looooooove* the new "fair local pricing" for classic games.

As usual, Europeans not residing in the UK will get screwed over. USD 5.99 does not equate GBP 3.49 and it certainly does not equate 4.49 EUR! If anything it should be GBP 3.59 and 4.39 EUR. Oh, but it's just a matter of pence and cents, you say. That might be, but why should I have to pay more?

Also, I'm living in Denmark and we do not use Euros as currency. We use Danish Kroner, so not only will we have to pay more. We will also still have to pay exchange rates.

I only have utter contempt for business practices such as these. Shame on you guys at GOG!
avatar
JudasIscariot: AFAIK, the plan to reprice the older games in the aforementioned currencies is to offset, for the most part, the fees incurred by currency exchange.
avatar
Wishbone: Well, for the older games, you can define the regions yourselves, yes? If so, does that mean that EU countries not in the eurozone will still pay in USD?
Wishbone, I really can't tell you the answer to that one because I don't know. The best thing I can recommend is saving that question for TET, OK?
avatar
Darvond: My price isn't that high. Sure, GOG would probably have to find another publisher and that other title was DRM free anyway, but that's a small price to pay considering the outrage this has caused.

Also, I'm still wondering why the hell CD PROJECKT went with Namco again after they bastardized the release of Witcher II.
Read and [url=https://secure.gog.com/forum/general/a_reply_to_guillaume_rambourg_md_of_gog_over_regional_pricing/post36]here, crazy_dave explains it quite nicely.
high rated
avatar
mobutu: This answers just shows you that GOG does not care anymore about their principles it just money for the now.
avatar
Matruchus:
No, I mean that they're legitimately either not games we want or are games that are very challenging to sign. All the games with +500 votes on the wishlist? We've been trying to get them. We know you want them. We want them, too. But they're the cream of the crop, if you will. The best games from history. Most games aren't as good.

To explicate, I just looked up 12 games from the "A" part of Mobygames' adventure listings by advancing in counts of 5 (to try and avoid grabbing just grabbing a bunch of sequels), only counting games that were released before 2005, and only picking two games per pages of results, and then discarding any games that had no review ratings. I paid no attention to if these games were ever released on any PC-type platform. So it's a pretty weakly chosen random sample, but I think it will serve to illustrate my point. Let's see the scores are (adjusted to a 100 point scale):

ADAM: The Double Factor: 70 MobyScore
Adventure 3: Haunted Mansion: 28 MobyScore
Adventure in the Fifth Dimension: 80 MobyScore
Adventures of JP and Cosmo: A Friend Indeed: 74 MobyScore
Adventures of Robin Hood (DOS): 68 MobyScore
Africa Trail (Windows): 66 Moby Score
Agatha Christie: And Then There Were None: 69 MobyRank; 70 MobyScore
Agharta: The Hollow Earth: 53 MobyRank; 56 MobyScore
Aisle (DOS): 90 Mobyscore (with 58 for the browser version; I dunno why the split)
ALICE: Interactive Museum (Windows): 76 MobyScore
Alida (Windows): 60 MobyRank; 54 MobyScore
Alien Rape Escape: 44 MobyScore

So, yes. There are thousands and thousands of classic games that we could get on GOG.com. But absent any classic brand recognition that means that they might be interesting or culturally relevant to people, how many of those 12 would I want to put on GOG? There are a variety of elements we use to select games. Games with a MobyRank or MobyScore of over 70 are likely prospects. That's 3 of those 12. Maybe 4, if I investigate Aisle and see what's up with that weird review split. Wishlist is the next factor we look at:

ADAM: The Double Factor 2
Adventure 3: 0; maybe 5 if count some of the anthology votes.
Adventure in the Fifth Dimension: 0
Adventures of JP and Cosmo: 0
Adventures of Robin Hood: 0
Africa Trail: 4
Agatha Christie: And Then There Were None 30
Agharta: The Hollow Earth: 3
Aisle: 0
ALICE: Interactive Museum: 0
Alida: 9
Alien Rape Escape: 0 (<-thank heavens. That....that can't be a good game.)

So the only game with enough votes on the wishlist to stand out from the pack doesn't have a good enough MobyScore where it's a hot prospect. Now we could evaluate the game further and see if it just didn't get a fair shake in the reviews, but none of the 12 games I pseudo-randomly grabbed are the kind of thing that we would evaluate and immediately say, "Yes, that's going to sell enough copies that we can afford to go through the acquisition process."

My previous reply sounded dismissive. I'm sorry and that wasn't my intent. I wasn't saying that GOG.com has abandoned our efforts to bring back classic games to users. I was simply stating the fact that, out of the thousands and thousands of games that are classics that we *could* acquire, the number of games that *should* acquire is much lower.
avatar
silentbob1138: What's fair about a game costing 37,5% more for most Europeans, Africans and South Americans?
avatar
synfresh: There is nothing fair about, but GoG doesn't have the ability to dictate what's fair or not when it comes to regional pricing. I do find it ironic that people are inflaming GoG for the same reasons they inflame Steam when it comes to regional pricing, when in the reality neither have the ability to dictate those kind of terms.
They have....sorry had the ability to refuse publishers ripping off their customers.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: So we promised an answer for you guys today, and I've been hanging out at the office late in hopes it would develop; sadly, it seems that a few answers are still hung up on confirmations. Sorry about this, but we are going to be having a final go at it first thing tomorrow morning our time and will hopefully get all your questions answered by then.
Thanks for letting us know, colour me curious.
Okay so this is my main concern with older titles, and I apologize if I am repeating myself. But...

What if the value radically changes between currencies after these prices are set?
avatar
JudasIscariot: AFAIK, the plan to reprice the older games in the aforementioned currencies is to offset, for the most part, the fees incurred by currency exchange.
Which doesn't quite work as you will be charging people in Euros even though that is not their local currency. Some mentioned that they will be charged higher conversion fees for Euro transactions than for Dollar transactions.
However it is clear that you try to be fair with those prices unlike the much more troublesome regional prices for new games. It's very easy to actually be fair. Just add a drop down menu where we can choose the currency.
What kind of crappy bank do you have anyway if you still get hit with transaction fees like that? Any noteworthy credit card bank I know doesn't charge those anymore exactly because they know people use those cards mainly for online shopping.

The only credit suppliers I know around here who charge foreign transaction fees are the unscrupulous ones that advertise to people with bad credit histories to start with, in the hope that they later on can get rich from the penalties and interests they charge to those bad payers.

Since I got a good credit history and a trustworthy bank, the only transaction fee I'm subject to is 30 cents if I do a direct cash withdrawal from my credit line through an ATM. And even that can be circumvented by asking a brick & mortar to charge me X amount over my actual purchases and have them return the extra in cash ... since using the card in stores is free (though it's still easier to just get any cash I need in hand from my debit card rather than my credit)
avatar
Wishbone: Well, for the older games, you can define the regions yourselves, yes? If so, does that mean that EU countries not in the eurozone will still pay in USD?
avatar
JudasIscariot: Wishbone, I really can't tell you the answer to that one because I don't know. The best thing I can recommend is saving that question for TET, OK?
Sorry, I figured since you were here and were talking, you might have been given some answers.

I think it's pointless throwing more questions at TET right now. He probably has enough on his plate. I'll wait until he posts some of the answers to the questions they've picked up from this thread. It's possible he'll mention it, and if not, I can ask him then.