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: 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.
Well, I have been sucked up into work today and haven't been following this thread, I am missing something or we are still yet to get some answers ?

avatar
TheEnigmaticT: That's a bizdev question, and while we do follow Steam's conventions (for the most part) with the new game we've put up for pre-order, I do not know what that team is planning for classic games.
*Sigh* If I wanted Steam sales-model, I would just go to steam ;_;
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: Mostly, we couldn't keep up with the number of comments and also figure out sensible replies, so rather than post something sort of coherent late yesterday, we're regrouping and working on this now.
avatar
PaladinWay: Not being able to keep up with the number of comments on a thread like this is...well...just human. Anyone who expected you to read and reply to everything clearly isn't being rational. Personally, the thing I'd expected you to do is open the forum and look for comments on the current or last page or two and start replying. Saying, "I can't read as fast as all of you are commenting" is very human and very valid and any reasonable person would accept that as valid. No comments at all, when you've already lost trust and know you've lost trust and started the thread because you lost trus, and not starting to comment until AFTER someone points out how to find all the staff comments in a thread...well, that's not going to inspire additional trust.
I can understand that; what happens when things go awry in most any company is that things keep getting escalated around. Normally I can handle most questions and answers in a thread like this because I know answers or I'm empowered to make decisions and then make sure that they come true. The questions and the nature of them from this most recent piece of news require that people who are not normally involved in answering questions on the forums get a chance to answer them.

Some of those people, for added difficulty, are not currently in the same country as the rest of us.

So the timeline for replies here is very, very long compared to how we would like it to be. It's not great, and I'm sorry it's taken so long to get answers ready and back to you all.
low rated
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.
avatar
Darkalex6: Well, I have been sucked up into work today and haven't been following this thread, I am missing something or we are still yet to get some answers ?

avatar
TheEnigmaticT: That's a bizdev question, and while we do follow Steam's conventions (for the most part) with the new game we've put up for pre-order, I do not know what that team is planning for classic games.
avatar
Darkalex6: *Sigh* If I wanted Steam sales-model, I would just go to steam ;_;
if you are expecting answers , dont hold your breath - they wont be coming as these guys dont really care and will try and plead ignorance or shift the answer to someone else
waste of time them even typing on here

we need another md annoucement , not a shitty dissection of some points raised in this thread by some half assed pr guy
avatar
moonshineshadow: So after a few days of thinking about this (and cooling down, since I was very unhappy at the beginning), the onliest thing I really want is that they promise us not to bring regional locking and censored/different versions for different countries. If they promise that and keep it, I think they should go on with their new AAA titles with regional prices, I don't need to buy them if I think it is to expensive.
But I still don't see why they need to change the pricing system for the whole catalogue especially when probably not all currencies will be supported or will they? And that about they people in Europe not using Euro, will be be charged in Euro or Dollar?
I personally see a problem with such approach: we are again relying on GOG promise, not to bring regional locking (which I see as "must have" with regional pricing, otherwise everyone will just buy via friends in Russia), not to bring DRM, etc. And of course, a promise not to do it out from the blue, just like the regional pricing thing ;d
avatar
Sallen: I didn't realize everyone's objective in this world was to become rich. Why should they aspire to have a large market share in comparison to Valve? Earn a (more than) decent living and promote good healthy values for the industry. Isn't that enough?
avatar
synfresh: The objective is to have a profitable business, not in the short term but in the long term. They are the ones that say they are competing with steam, you're not competing with Steam if you're only carrying 5% of the pie:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/186940/Defenders_Quest_By_the_Numbers_Part_2.php
Actually, GOG has said they are not competing with Steam but with pirates.
avatar
Darkalex6: Well, I have been sucked up into work today and haven't been following this thread, I am missing something or we are still yet to get some answers ?

*Sigh* If I wanted Steam sales-model, I would just go to steam ;_;
avatar
paulrainer: if you are expecting answers , dont hold your breath - they wont be coming as these guys dont really care and will try and plead ignorance or shift the answer to someone else
waste of time them even typing on here

we need another md annoucement , not a shitty dissection of some points raised in this thread by some half assed pr guy
Dude, be civil - I have not yet lost hope on GOG, furthermore I don't see any reason to get angry at someone who is trying to talk to us.
GOG have been successful to date inspite of what they have done , not because of what they have done

i have a feeling that will all change and pretty quickly
avatar
paulrainer: if you are expecting answers , dont hold your breath - they wont be coming as these guys dont really care and will try and plead ignorance or shift the answer to someone else
waste of time them even typing on here

we need another md annoucement , not a shitty dissection of some points raised in this thread by some half assed pr guy
Hey now, no need for that. TET is doing the best he can with what the higher ups have chucked down. He also is one of our best lines of communications with GOG. Get frustrated and angry at the message, but don't shoot the messenger.
avatar
Bloodygoodgames: Unfortunately, it's a failing of a large percentage of the US population. They're such an insular country, most Americans don't really care about what happens outside their own country, as long as it doesn't actually affect them.

I should know. I lived there for 23 years and was always amazed at the lack of empathy of many people around me when it came to what people in other countries had to deal with. Not all Americans, but many.

It shows from the response of many Americans in these threads, as the majority have said "they don't care about regional prices" .

Sure, it doesn't affect them.

If the shoe was on the other foot, and the rest of us were getting a 33 percent reduction in the cost of games while Americans had to pay the full price however, you'd hear them screaming in Ljubljana :)
avatar
Matruchus: Agree with that they are spoiled with low pricing and we have to pay more because of that.
No this does not affect me, but this American is still disgusted that certain places are forced to pay so much more. I can imagine if I was forced to pay $15 more for a product than everyone else that I would be just as incensed. I am not rich in the slightest and can easily empathize with not wanting a higher price. To say every single American is lacking in empathy is just wrong.
Post edited February 28, 2014 by SleepyOwl
low rated
avatar
paulrainer: if you are expecting answers , dont hold your breath - they wont be coming as these guys dont really care and will try and plead ignorance or shift the answer to someone else
waste of time them even typing on here

we need another md annoucement , not a shitty dissection of some points raised in this thread by some half assed pr guy
avatar
Melhelix: Hey now, no need for that. TET is doing the best he can with what the higher ups have chucked down. He also is one of our best lines of communications with GOG. Get frustrated and angry at the message, but don't shoot the messenger.
no , im really sorry

if he was a marketer guy as per his forum titel then he really is half assed.
He should have given the MD letter a quick once over before that dropped. If he did ..well..oh, dear.

He has no answers , just more "good news " spin
avatar
synfresh: The objective is to have a profitable business, not in the short term but in the long term. They are the ones that say they are competing with steam, you're not competing with Steam if you're only carrying 5% of the pie:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/186940/Defenders_Quest_By_the_Numbers_Part_2.php
avatar
Melhelix: Actually, GOG has said they are not competing with Steam but with pirates.
But that's not true. They are competing by offering a lot of the same products Steam does, especially when it comes to Indie games. It may have been true back in 2011 when it was originally said because back then the catalog was unique in that it was classics that were not offered anywhere else. Not the case today.
avatar
GabiMoro: Quit spreading lies about GOG.
Last night you said that TET consider games he didn't like to be rubish while in fact he said the adventure games form MobyGames are rubish or are very hard to obtain. And most of them are, they look very bad (they were made for Commodore, Amiga and so on) and it would sell very bad, not worthing the effort.
avatar
PixelBoy: How does "made for Commodore Amiga" mean that games look bad, or are bad games otherwise?

Making a statement like that means that either you have very unique preferences, or know absolutely nothing about gaming history. Either way, I think you are making a statement which is not true. MOST gamers would actually prefer Amiga versions over same period PC version, because they have better graphics, better audio and sometimes better controls (for instance some Sierra title had mouse control for Amiga, keyboard only for PC-DOS). You are entitled to think otherwise, of course, but Amiga versions would probably sell more than the PC versions which are being sold today.

And I repeat my earlier comment on the subject:
I think it shows arrogant intellectual superiority on GOG's part to be deciding which games are good and which are bad, and which we would consider gems and which we consider rubbish.
Of course, what they really mean is that some games are not profitable... to them.

What GOG should say is that some games sell so bad, that they don't want them in the catalogue. Plain, honest and simple statement, which would be matter-of-factly just as things are. Trying to present absence of certain games as a service, "keeping rubbish away from you" mentality, is not sounding at all right.

And with that mentality, certain titles would never be on sale.
Old text-only adventures? Rubbish. No graphics, and all you do is type. Take 'em and shove 'em. It doesn't matter if that happens to be the very foundation of the later adventure genre.

I think it's very disappointing that these days GOG is telling us that
- regional pricing is good, because we get new games which help GOG staff to keep their jobs
- adding conversion rates to game price is a good thing, even though some users have never been affected by that, and now some users get charged for it twice, first by GOG and then by banks
- not being able to buy certain game means that we are being protected from rubbish, because someone has decided what is good for us.

This certainly is not the GOG I was glad to discover back in 2009, when I followed a link from ScummVM site.
Very true, for me it's a sherry on the top of broken principles - that somehow, they know better then us what we would like to have ^^
avatar
paulrainer: GOG have been successful to date inspite of what they have done , not because of what they have done

i have a feeling that will all change and pretty quickly
Hmmm. So, GOG is successful in spite of taking classic games that had been left to rot in the pits of pirate sites and torrents, making them economically viable again, in spite of taking the time to make sure the games work, in spite of running sale after sale after sale, in spite of spending money to give away games to hundreds of thousands of people, in spite of working to have good customer service, in spite of allowing people to actually backup their games and be able to play them without needing a client or net connection, in spite of finding more games to sign, then maintaining them so they'll work on newer computers?

That phrase....I do not think it means what you think it means.
low rated
avatar
CarrionCrow: snip
fanboy - yawn
avatar
SleepyOwl: No this does not affect me, but this American is still disgusted that certain places are forced to pay so much more. I can imagine if I was forced to pay $15 more for a product than everyone else that I would be just as incensed. To say every single American is lacking in empathy is just wrong.
Don't you know, we're born without souls, sell our mothers for a cheeseburger, and eat babies with a side of fries? Oh, and we are all illiterate and completely intolerant of course.

avatar
synfresh: But that's not true. They are competing by offering a lot of the same products Steam does, especially when it comes to Indie games. It may have been true back in 2011 when it was originally said because back then the catalog was unique in that it was classics that were not offered anywhere else. Not the case today.
Actually that interview was from July, 2013. *shrug* I do think they are competing with Steam, but the official line is they are competing with pirates. Either way they are in the business to sell games.