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
TheEnigmaticT: Did you...read the letter? The pricing for classic games is going to likely be better for most everyone once it's implemented.

I understand that other stores have trained a basal ganglia to fire that "regional pricing = BAD", but we're trying to do something new here.
This response is a tad aggressive and not necessarily true by current currency conversions.
Basal ganglia firing or not, it was a mistake to promise flat pricing (in all past conferences and announcements) as a standard on GOG if this is a necessary "evil". People tend to dislike it when you change supposed core principles.
Post edited February 27, 2014 by MrAlphaNumeric
avatar
cmdr_flashheart: GOG just made playing games so much easier for me, and they were literally the first people I saw who provided something like this- this is why I appreciate their DRM-free value more than anything else.
Yeah, I can totally understand that because it was a lot like that for me, too. Regional pricing isn't something that is going to affect me any time in the near future and I always thought of GOG as "that DRM-free place" above all. The whole concept of unfair regional pricing seems so backwards that it drives me crazy, though, and watching the "good guys" jump into that pool with everyone else is disheartening.

Obviously this is a business and doing so might be a good move overall, but GOG sold itself as something more than a business and a lot of people bought into that idea. Not me, personally, but I can't help but be sympathetic toward the less cynical who thought that this place stood for ideals over profit because of how often it cast itself in that role.

avatar
cmdr_flashheart: I do agree that regional pricing doesn't make sense, especially from a consumer perspective, so here's hoping that maybe one day we don't have to have it. I don't think that time is here, though. Maybe I am wrong. But here's why I don't think I am wrong- there are a lot more other sellers at this point who are also doing DRM-free gaming, but it seems that everyone is kowtowing to regional pricing. When DRM-free sellers start dropping, then I think it will be the beginning of the end.
I'd actually turn that around as an argument against bringing regional pricing here; if there's a general shift toward DRM-free (and it appears that it's starting to take hold more and more over time) then more stores offering DRM-free games means that GOG suddenly has nothing unique differentiating it from those other stores. Combined with GOG's general reluctance to do the kind of 80-90% sales other sites manage and their propensity to turn the whole thing into a game like the Insomnia sale (as well as that "buy all the games in this bundle or get a worse deal" thing), this move strikes me as far more non-competitive than not bringing a bunch of new releases here.

avatar
cmdr_flashheart: Though I also agree that these three games aren't that amazing (because they were very expected, and not because they are bad games), but I think these are just a stepping stone- GOG is playing the long game, here, I think.
Yeah, definitely only because they're expected. Personally, I'm excited for Original Sin beyond all reason. Frothing at the mouth and all.

Anyway, stepping stones are fine, but it just seems like common sense that the first games to be rolled out under the new policy would end up being the initial measure of how "worth it" enacting that policy is. Going with titles everyone expected was some spectacularly bad planning, and I worry that it runs the risk of making potential publishers tune out or lose interest by the time something truly unexpected and surprising shows up.

I suppose that fear is based in the fact that publishers are a lot like chipmunks: reactionary, prone to hoarding, easily distracted by shiny things, and incredibly skittish. Maybe they'll end up surprising me, but that's been my observation over the years.
avatar
Redfoxe: EA is onboard. So why arent the C&C franchise here?

Oh wait. Maybe those are the games tsomeone refered to as "crap"

EDIT: im really sorry, but i have become quite bitter these past days...
avatar
CarrionCrow: EA's like Blizzard and Ubisoft - they have their own virtual kingdoms carved out. Command and Conquer is a pretty massive series, even with how badly they botched it all at the end. All roads on that one lead to Origin for the classic games, unless there are more venues I'm just not noticing at the moment.
True, darn bloody u-play and origin :(
avatar
trusteft: That was his point.
If you want to install a game you have bought, you can't do it unless you connect to the servers to request their permission to install the game you bought.
That is DRM.
That is Steam.
That is not DRM- Free.
avatar
skeletonbow: You're absolutely correct about that. There is a backup feature in Steam though too which can allegedly back up an installed game so you are able to install it again on the same computer or another computer without having to download it again. I've never used it myself so I don't know how well it works in practice, but I did find this:

https://support.steampowered.com/kb_article.php?ref=8794-yphv-2033

So it looks like it is at least possible to backup game installations for future reinstall, which is nice to know it exists even if it requires you to install the game in the first place. It'd be nice if Valve extended it in the future to allow just downloading without installing though so that people had that option from the start.
The backup feature is as good as not being there.
I tried to use it once and not only you HAVE to connect online to Steam, but if the backup was made with a much older Steam version, then it fails. So yeah...
I think you can buy all the classic game that you want now, so the problem is completely avoided.

Oh, and I hate VAT, but it is unfair to ask GOG to pay them for us; probably the most "onest" solution is a single price for everyone, then add the local VAT when you checkout
Aaaaaand GOG have gone quiet again. Just a hint guys, we're not going to get tired of calling you out on your shit. Stop hiding.
avatar
CarrionCrow: EA's like Blizzard and Ubisoft - they have their own virtual kingdoms carved out. Command and Conquer is a pretty massive series, even with how badly they botched it all at the end. All roads on that one lead to Origin for the classic games, unless there are more venues I'm just not noticing at the moment.
avatar
Redfoxe: True, darn bloody u-play and origin :(
If you want C&C, go on Amazon and get ahold of C&C The First Decade. Not the most recent compilation, the one before that. It's got enough CD keys to choke a horse, but you can at least put the games on your system without any Origin garbage.
Well at this point I think that GOG should just change their moto to GOG.com is made by capitalist for capitalists thats all it is now in my view point.
avatar
skeletonbow: Yeah, GOG is constantly adding updates to old games such as FLAC soundtracks, additional installation and gameplay language selections, floppy/CD verisons of old games, new expansion packs for old games that have been liberated, maps, strategy guides, artwork, the occasional bug fix, support for new versions of operating systems as they come out (ie: Windows 8.x), and possibly in the future new platforms as well (Linux). To delete ones account is locking a permanent one way door to never see these enhancements on the possibly hundreds of products they've already purchased. It'd be sad to see someone make a highly emotionally driven decision like this now at the heat of the moment and then regret having done so a day/week/month/year later and have no way to reverse the decision. Personally I'd encourage anyone remotely considering this to simply not log into GOG anymore and leave their account in tact. It costs you nothing, harms you in no way, and gives you more options in the future than does closing your account prematurely.

I've had friends do things like this before at other places online and then greatly regret it a few days/weeks later and be upset with themselves for acting emotionally rash in the heat of the moment. Throwing away dozens or hundreds of games seems rash to me.
avatar
Matruchus: Yeah will leave the account as it is for now and see what happens. But at the moment i dont see myself buying here again.
Yeah I think it's a good idea to keep the account at least. It's possible that we don't know what the future holds and tomorrow or the next day or a week or month from now whatever happens might end up not being as bad as people think. Perhaps the pricing thing isn't as bad as expected... or perhaps they change their mind and revert it based on feedback, we just don't know yet.

I dunno if you remember the prank GOG pulled years ago announcing the site was going away which scared everyone, and then a day or two later they relaunched their new website. This was just a joke intended to get a bit of publicity but meant in a humourous manner and not intended to make people angry really. But they weren't able to predict just how people would end up reacting to it in advance and I think it was a bad miscalculation on their part. Then to try and clear things up they made a funny video dressed as monks where they tried to atone for their sins and admit they made a mistake and that it was bad judgment at publicity through humour. In the end, I think they made an honest mistake by that whole stunt and I don't think they had any bad intentions. But it fired up people's emotions none the less who felt cheated as they didn't know it was a big joke. It was simply a miscommunication and a miscalculation. I'm sure that they lost some customers from that stunt forever and that they feel bad about that. They probably gained a lot more customers than they lost mind you simply from the publicity, but I'm sure they were more upset about losing people than they were happy about what they gained or they'd repeat such a stunt again just "for the numbers".

I'm not suggesting this new change is a joke stunt mind you - I don't think it is and I don't think they'd do such a stunt like that again. But time has passed and they've done a heck of a lot of good for everyone since and shown good company values IMHO in trying to fight the good fight for gamers, and have continued to show their good sense of humour along the way too, albeit by being more careful as to what is or is not appropriate. Great intentioned people and companies can sometimes make bad decisions/mistakes though too, that's just part of being human and doesn't mean anyone is bad or evil or greedy or whatever negative one wants to throw out there. Sometimes we make decisions we think are good and others think are bad but later they come around and think we did the right thing. Other times we make decisions we make are good and others think are bad and WE come around and realize we made a mistake and hopefully try to correct it.

Personally I think this one is a bit in the middle with no clear cut right or wrong either way. There are definitely both good and bad consequences to going either way on this issue and what is "best" is largely a thing up to the individual's own preferences, situation and opinions and also something that might change over time if it actually results in some positive changes big enough that people change their minds as a result.

Hold in there and wait and see what happens, even if that means you grip your wallet with an iron fist in the mean time! :oP
I used to buy a from GreenManGaming often. Then they completely gave everyone in my country the finger by forcing us to pay in pounds, meaning much higher prices for us. I haven't bought a single thing from them since. I used to recommend them to friends, but these days I only advice people to stay away from them, if I ever mention them. Suffice it to say that my support of GoG will end up the same way if you keep treating customers this way. You're not supposed to care more about greedy publishers than your customers. Remember how you, not long ago at all, advertised how you were "the good guy" compared to others because you treated your customers with respect? So much for that.

You claim you will never have DRM, but just how damn stupid would we have to be to believe you when you're going back on all your other supposed core principles?

But hey, who cares about those principles when you can make more money if you abandon them, am I right?
avatar
TheFrenchMonk: Regional pricing means that your bank will not charge you extra fees to convert your purchase from USD to GBP i.e. we can guarantee that what you see is what you pay. That's good for you guys in my humble opinion.
avatar
Fakum12: So let's see, paying 55$ instead of 40$ is a good thing because we save a few cent exchange fees?
Fair regional pricing looks different to me....
To be fair, that reply was about the regional prices for existing games and not about the rip-off prices for new games like AoW3. The price difference for the existing games is minimal. Of course, that doesn't make the statement more true. People have already pointed out that paying in Euros will incur higher fees in some cases. For those games the best solution would be to offer us a choice in which currency we want to pay.
avatar
SeduceMePlz: (Do me the courtesy of explaining why I'm wrong, please, instead of downvoting me, if you disagree.)
I for myself don't downvote you because you added in a perfectly valid way to the discussion and you also have every right to have your own point of view, but I can tell you why I disagree. I don't disagree with your numbers, but as you wrote: this is the case at the moment of your post. So things could change to the worse and it will be harder to tell the difference after a while if regional pricing isn't tied to a .. lets call it base price. Second thing is the people are angry because GOG betrayed a principle, a promise that was given to us: one world, one price. I for myself don't care about some cents, it's not for the money, it's for the principals the got thrown away, it's about being dishonest (if you followed the whole gigantic thread), it's about what GOG makes GOG and what we loved and what we are loosing as customers. THIS makes many people angry right now. Not everyone, of course. I also can't speak for everyone nor would I, but I can speak for myself and for those people which seem to have the same problem with the change of policies. Also, if you look at AoW3, it isn't about some cents and it's not about rich countries either. Tell the guy from Bulgaria for instance how fair the price is to him and the wages paid in Bulgaria. You can't make everyone happy and the universe isn't driven by fairness but to tell those people how fair regional pricing is and how we don't have to complaint ... this is sarcastic.
avatar
Somethingfake: Aaaaaand GOG have gone quiet again. Just a hint guys, we're not going to get tired of calling you out on your shit. Stop hiding.
Eh, they probably aren't hiding, there is over 100 pages with an assortment of questions, statements, concerns, accusations, and vitriol. It's better for them to take their time and come up with the right way to handle things, than it is for them to do anything halfbaked and draw more ire.
avatar
calverine: Some of GoGs customers are angry about the policy shift, completely justified, consider though, what was said. GoG will adjust the price to flat as soon as they are able. The only alternative to this for GoG would be to not sell the game until flat pricing was an option. in my opinion, waiting to carry the game would probably be better from a public relations standpoint but less beneficial to GoGs bottom line.
avatar
skeletonbow: Ah yes, you bring up another interesting conjecture I had not thought of. That games might end up being available on GOG with flat pricing sooner as a result of this, even if they're available with regional pricing for some period first.
UUuuuhhhmmm....
Have you guys even bothered to read what those GOG people are saying?

They are removing flat prices on ALL games in the catalogue!

So how is this supposed to help getting new games into flat pricing model? It is not. It will not. Those prices are gone soon. I suppose it may happen that once newer titles become older titles, the completely unfair ripoff prices get a bit more even, yet unfair conversion.

Of course, if that happens, it will only make the unfairness of the system all the more obvious, and will hardly receive any sympathy from GOG userbase.
avatar
tammerwhisk: for them to do anything halfbaked and draw more ire.
is that possible ? \o/ they have kinda fucked up good and proper