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
Wolfsherz: Back to abandonware. I know how to configure DosBox on my own.
There are plenty of free, open source games that could catch your interest as well. Donate what you want at your discretion, you can modify the code as you please, and so on.
avatar
Khadgar42: Actually 'Regional Pricing' is quite old-school. Perfectly fits a "good old games" site.
I wonder what's next, will you accept only hand minted tetradrachms as payment?
Next will be "fair income pricing" where everyone has to hand in their income statement or welfare documents to determine the fair price they will have to pay.
avatar
jamotide: What is all this talk about VAT? That is not charged at all if you sell to other countries.
Lost my first post :(

In South Africa, VAT is levied on all imports.

If I imported a physical game, the post office or courier company would withhold delivery of goods to me until I paid the VAT to them.

If I buy a digital game, there is no way for the SA tax authorities to automatically intercept the transaction and I am thus apparently required by law to visit my nearest tax office within 30 days and declare the import and pay the VAT (this is rather onerous if my purchases are frequent but low value, e.g. a mp3 song).

Accordingly, foreign suppliers of digital goods are required to register as South African VAT vendors and collect the VAT from me at the time of sale and pay it over to the SA tax authorities.

EDIT: Replaced "eletronic" with "digital".
Post edited March 05, 2014 by agogfan
avatar
skeletonbow: Except that nobody is forced to buy anything at all on GOG.com. People choose to do so, or they choose not to do so, there is no forcing going on at any price. If someone pays more for a game than the game returns to them in entertainment value, or more than they can budget for games in a given timeframe then I'd say they might have chosen poorly. Nobody should pay any more than what they personally feel is a fair price for them. Not just at GOG, but anywhere for anything. Paying more for something than you think it's worth is ripping /yourself/ off unless it is a life necessity. If a price is too high by any metric, one simply need not buy the given product in question at all as nobody is forcing anyone to buy anything here.

Now I have to admit that my above statements are under ideal conditions and I am making some assumptions. I'm assuming that nobody actually has a gun to their head with someone forcing them to buy games here, and that they're not being coerced or manipulated or having someone telling them if they don't do it they'll make them listen to Justin Bieber all day long. There are lots of other scenarios which could happen and I can't prove that any of them aren't happening. I just think it is highly unlikely, and that any money spent here was the result of a conscious calculated decision of the free mind of the purchaser with nobody forcing them to do it beyond their wishes.

But I could be wrong too. There might be sweat shops out there forcing starving children to buy GOG games or something. Foxconn? Who knows... ;oP
avatar
ForgetDeny: So your argument is that it's wrong to expect a business, with whom many of us have invested both money and time over the years, that we've promoted to others as a fairer alternative in the market to other gamers, to stick to the core values that enticed us to make our purchases, spend our time and sing their praises in the first place. Your entire attitude just makes me want to face-palm. MARKET AND CUSTOMER LOYALTY IS AN IMPORTANT VALUE. GOG HAVE BETRAYED THIS! What is so difficult to get about this for you? It seems like you've manufactured a blind-spot inside your brain.
Because one of this core principle means:
- if someone can not get a game at the same price as everybody then no one should be able to get the game
- because "one world one price" is not about the price (or we would buy the game at the first sale when the price would be right for us). Instead it seem to mean "god forbidden someone could buy this game cheaper than me".
Post edited March 05, 2014 by GabiMoro
avatar
agogfan: In South Africa, VAT is levied on all imports.

If I imported a physical game, the post office or courier company would withhold delivery of goods to me until I paid the VAT to them.

If I buy a digital game, there is no way for the SA tax authorities to automatically intercept the transaction and I am thus apparently required by law to visit my nearest tax office within 30 days and declare the import and pay the VAT (this is rather onerous if my purchases are frequent but low value, e.g. a mp3 song).

Accordingly, foreign suppliers of digital goods are required to register as South African VAT vendors and collect the VAT from me at the time of sale and pay it over to the SA tax authorities.

EDIT: Replaced "eletronic" with "digital".
And if they don't? It is like that here as well and when I import stuff I have to pay extra VAT to the customs office, but it is up to me the buyer to pay the tax,the seller has no part in this. And as a seller you have no reason to pay this tax to a foreign government. I run a business that is obligated to charge VAT. But my gov only cares about the VAT I am obligated to pay to my gov. To other countries I sell digital goods without VAT. I don't care if the buyers there pay the tax to their gov or not, it's not my problem.
avatar
jamotide: Sales tax is VAT^^
Not quite. Sales tax is a very generic term that describes a taxation on sales, but typically a sales tax is only levied at the point of retail sale. VAT is a form of sales tax that targets the added value at each link of the production chain. In general talk, the difference between the two terms is minor, but they don't actually mean the same thing. The US has no VAT but there are vrying sales taxes. I'm not sure how they apply to online sales of intangible products, though. But I'm fairly sure that whatever sales taxes you have in the US, they're nowhere close to the 25% VAT in Scandinavia.
avatar
agogfan: This is topical in South Africa at the moment as we have a pending change to our VAT law which would require GOG to register as a South African VAT vendor by 1st April 2014 if they wish to continue selling games to South African citizens.

Link to article.

GOG would thus have to levy 14% VAT on any sales to South Africans, and hence they need to be able to price their goods differently for the South African market.

However, GOG may decide it's not worth their while to continue to sell to South Africa, which means this could be the end of my game purchases as there are no DRM-free PC game retailers based in South Africa that I'm aware of.
My immediate reaction is that this seems impossible to enforce. South Africa doesn't have any legal jurisdiction in either Cyprus or Poland.

In every other (non-EU) country, it is the buyer's responsibility to report the imports. I expect virtually no one does so voluntarily, which seems to be why this is happening, but IMO, this seems even less likely to help.
Post edited March 05, 2014 by Pidgeot
avatar
skeletonbow: Except that nobody is forced to buy anything at all on GOG.com. People choose to do so, or they choose not to do so, there is no forcing going on at any price. If someone pays more for a game than the game returns to them in entertainment value, or more than they can budget for games in a given timeframe then I'd say they might have chosen poorly. Nobody should pay any more than what they personally feel is a fair price for them. Not just at GOG, but anywhere for anything. Paying more for something than you think it's worth is ripping /yourself/ off unless it is a life necessity. If a price is too high by any metric, one simply need not buy the given product in question at all as nobody is forcing anyone to buy anything here.

Now I have to admit that my above statements are under ideal conditions and I am making some assumptions. I'm assuming that nobody actually has a gun to their head with someone forcing them to buy games here, and that they're not being coerced or manipulated or having someone telling them if they don't do it they'll make them listen to Justin Bieber all day long. There are lots of other scenarios which could happen and I can't prove that any of them aren't happening. I just think it is highly unlikely, and that any money spent here was the result of a conscious calculated decision of the free mind of the purchaser with nobody forcing them to do it beyond their wishes.

But I could be wrong too. There might be sweat shops out there forcing starving children to buy GOG games or something. Foxconn? Who knows... ;oP
avatar
ForgetDeny: So your argument is that it's wrong to expect a business, with whom many of us have invested both money and time over the years, that we've promoted to others as a fairer alternative in the market to other gamers, to stick to the core values that enticed us to make our purchases, spend our time and sing their praises in the first place. Your entire attitude just makes me want to face-palm. MARKET AND CUSTOMER LOYALTY IS AN IMPORTANT VALUE. GOG HAVE BETRAYED THIS! What is so difficult to get about this for you? It seems like you've manufactured a blind-spot inside your brain.
Anyone reading my words can see that my argument is that the word "force" has a meaning, one which anyone can easily look up in a dictionary and find a definition of which is pretty universal, and that none of us regardless of what our views are on any particular topic can redefine what the word "force" actually means on our own whim. My argument is that nobody is being forced to do anything using the dictionary definition of the word force. I haven't stated anything regarding what people are expected to do or not do anywhere, nor have I implied anything.

Quite explicitly, people have choice - the choice to spend their money or not, using their own decision making metrics. A person's feelings about a change like this to the website are not right or wrong, they are just valid feelings either way for that person's own perception of how it affects them or whatnot. Their decision on whether or not to continue to spend money is still a choice, and they can choose to do so or not regardless of whether they are happy about the changes and I'm sure there will be people who are upset and refuse to shop on GOG anymore and there will also be people who are upset and continue to shop here. Everyone's different and because nobody is forced to do anything in particular, everyone will do whatever they deem to be right for themselves. Furthermore, I'm not saying that anyone is wrong for having any particular viewpoint on the matter, or making any particular decision about whether or not they'll spend money. I am saying that everyone should do what they think is right for them, but that in doing so they are making a choice and not being forced by gunpoint whether or not to spend their money.

It's also possible for people to have differing views on a particular subject to which there is no ultimate right or wrong and to do so respectfully of each other without resorting to insults. That too is a choice of course. I'll demonstrate that by saying that while I might respectfully disagree with you about whether or not people are being forced against their will on this issue, I personally am not going to lash out at you with insults as you have towards me as I think it is possible for people of differing opinions to be able to communicate in a civilized manner without resorting to that. Likewise, I've chosen to not take offence because I have the freedom to do that as well. :)
avatar
dhundahl: Not quite. Sales tax is a very generic term that describes a taxation on sales, but typically a sales tax is only levied at the point of retail sale. VAT is a form of sales tax that targets the added value at each link of the production chain. In general talk, the difference between the two terms is minor, but they don't actually mean the same thing. The US has no VAT but there are vrying sales taxes. I'm not sure how they apply to online sales of intangible products, though. But I'm fairly sure that whatever sales taxes you have in the US, they're nowhere close to the 25% VAT in Scandinavia.
Yes I just googled that as well, but how is it relevant? It's not like we are talking about B2B transactions here.
avatar
jamotide: And if they don't? It is like that here as well and when I import stuff I have to pay extra VAT to the customs office, but it is up to me the buyer to pay the tax,the seller has no part in this. And as a seller you have no reason to pay this tax to a foreign government. I run a business that is obligated to charge VAT. But my gov only cares about the VAT I am obligated to pay to my gov. To other countries I sell digital goods without VAT. I don't care if the buyers there pay the tax to their gov or not, it's not my problem.
There are penalties that would be imposed upon them listed in the last paragraph of the article I linked to earlier, but I don't know how they could be enforced if they never set foot in South Africa.

I would thus expect that our local banks and credit card companies would be told to block local payments to any foreign companies identified as selling digital goods and who are not registered as South African VAT vendors.
avatar
agogfan: GOG would thus have to levy 14% VAT on any sales to South Africans, and hence they need to be able to price their goods differently for the South African market.
avatar
Pidgeot: My immediate reaction is that this seems impossible to enforce. South Africa doesn't have any legal jurisdiction in either Cyprus or Poland.
I'm not sure either. I suspect they'll simply tell the local banks to block payments to any foreign companies they've identified as being non-compliant.
Post edited March 05, 2014 by agogfan
avatar
ForgetDeny: So your argument is that it's wrong to expect a business, with whom many of us have invested both money and time over the years, that we've promoted to others as a fairer alternative in the market to other gamers, to stick to the core values that enticed us to make our purchases, spend our time and sing their praises in the first place. Your entire attitude just makes me want to face-palm. MARKET AND CUSTOMER LOYALTY IS AN IMPORTANT VALUE. GOG HAVE BETRAYED THIS! What is so difficult to get about this for you? It seems like you've manufactured a blind-spot inside your brain.
avatar
skeletonbow: Anyone reading my words can see that my argument is that the word "force" etc
Your argument about force has literally nothing to do with the issue at hand. Force doesn't come into it. The issue is that GOG marketed themselves on the principle of a fair "one world, one price" system. This was not a shallow thing either, they marketed themselves on this heavily. They have now backtracked on this, and done so in the most condescending and disingenuous manner possible. Whether I'm being forced to pay their new prices or not is completely beside the point.
avatar
Khadgar42: Actually 'Regional Pricing' is quite old-school. Perfectly fits a "good old games" site.
I wonder what's next, will you accept only hand minted tetradrachms as payment?
avatar
jamotide: Next will be "fair income pricing" where everyone has to hand in their income statement or welfare documents to determine the fair price they will have to pay.
Excellent idea. "individuallly behavioral pricing" might also be a possibility. So you tell all your likes and dislikes and posts on social networks and they tell you what price the game will be for you.

Alternatively maybe party membership could also result in a discount or how good you were in school. Why stopping at selecting only the geography.

Now they are still laughing but wait some time until all this is industry standard.
Post edited March 05, 2014 by Trilarion
avatar
Future_Suture: I think Linux users would have gotten support by now wih over 14 500 votes and debunking myths like "distro fragmentation" spread by ignorance and FUD if those community requests mattered. :-(
Hell, they don't even have to go to a specific version, supporting for Debian and other root distros wouldn't be too hard would it?
avatar
jamotide: Next will be "fair income pricing" where everyone has to hand in their income statement or welfare documents to determine the fair price they will have to pay.
avatar
Trilarion: Excellent idea. "individuallly behavioral pricing" might also be a possibility. So you tell all your likes and dislikes and posts on social networks and they tell you what price the game will be for you.

Alternatively maybe party membership could also result in a discount or how good you were in school. Why stopping at selecting only the geography.

Now they are still laughing but wait some time until all this is industry standard.
Sexual preferences, color of skin and social status works well too in all of this. It's pure and simple discrimination.
avatar
Future_Suture: I think Linux users would have gotten support by now wih over 14 500 votes and debunking myths like "distro fragmentation" spread by ignorance and FUD if those community requests mattered. :-(
avatar
Darvond: Hell, they don't even have to go to a specific version, supporting for Debian and other root distros wouldn't be too hard would it?
One distro would be enough. Instead, GOG chooses to introduce regional pricing, higher prices, and all for games that are DRM free regardless, spouting lies to insult us even more.