Exactly. That's why it can easily end in the same kind methods as DRM. Because it discriminates.
@ReptilePZ Dude, what the hell are you talking about ? The thing that made GOG stand out from numerous other digital stores was the fact that is was basically the only place where you could buy OLD games that would actually WORK. DRM-free and fair price was like a cherry on the top of it for most of us.
Besides, I think they realize perfectly they can't go against Steam and that's not what they are trying to do. You won't be seeing Call of Duties or other blockbusters there anytime soon. What they want to do is sell new games to people who already use GOG or want to get them DRM free. And since there will always be people like that, those who will choose GOG over Steam that's what they decided to do. There is always a buck to be made doing that.
@ReptilePZ , I think @Luxorek is right, and that you may be a bit overestimating how much the purchasers of GOG do it thanks to the site's principles. More than that, I'm not even sure how many of them care or even know about these principles, but rather just found GOG because they wanted some good old games they couldn't find elsewhere. This is just a gut-feeling of mine, I don't really have any data about how the buyers from GOG are split, with their reasons for choosing it.
Though even if this is so, it still begs the question why should these "casual" purchasers purchase an AAA game from GOG rather than Steam, if they don't care about the principles. My only speculation is that GOG reached a point where they decided they're not making enough in their current format, and then, hopeless as it may seem, this transfer to more modern games is a do-or-die point for the site.
The reason I see this is an act of survival rather than greed is, well, because I'm having a really hard time imagining that someone there rationally thought they could compete against Steam with modern games.
Though even if this is so, it still begs the question why should these "casual" purchasers purchase an AAA game from GOG rather than Steam, if they don't care about the principles. My only speculation is that GOG reached a point where they decided they're not making enough in their current format, and then, hopeless as it may seem, this transfer to more modern games is a do-or-die point for the site.
The reason I see this is an act of survival rather than greed is, well, because I'm having a really hard time imagining that someone there rationally thought they could compete against Steam with modern games.
For me GOG was always about DRM-free. Old or new isn't important to me, as long as those games are good (I buy both). And GOG gained a lot of such users (see GOG forums). A lot of people who don't use Steam because of DRM buy on GOG.
@eliharel: Their point was not to compete with Steam directly 1:1, but to slowly advance DRM free front. With time it will start burning Steam. But that's still in the future. DRM lysenkoists are still many amongst the publishers and Steam will have that unfair advantage for the time being. Adding regional pricing won't give GOG any major advantage against Steam.
Last edited:
That's a rather doom and gloom assessment. We can't just assume the whole thing comes tumbling down, and now they're selling out to EA and slapping online DRM on every game, and they have lunch with the devil and kill kittens. Besides, some folks thought adding newer and indie games was a mistake, that they would abandon old games as a result. That never happened. If the goal is to make DRM free an industry standard, they have to find ways to push that agenda with bigger companies and new releases. Otherwise the only DRM games we'll see will be old ones and the occasional indie.
I am sorry, but the last time I checked all of their promotional material was about being the 'good guys', staying 'DRM-free' and being fair to customers. They've rebranded, branched out, gog no longer means 'good old games.' Now they're trying to branch out again, but the problem is that this time, they can't do it without some major sacrifices. Either they should have thought about this earlier and used a different strategy, or they should just stick to their strong sides that their current plan has.
Right now, they're going for the middle ground and it's not really working out great for them. I don't know if you've looked at the fan feedback, but it certainly doesn't look like 'DRM-free and fair price was like a cherry on the top' really applies to most of their customers, as you have suggested. Claiming otherwise is just denying obvious facts.
Judging by the community uproar at this change, I really don't think it's worth it. Yes, people want DRM-free games. DRM-free games is one of gog's core values. And what are they sacrificing to get those big DRM-free titles? One of their other core values. They can't seriosuly expect a good reaction to such a poor decision. If they are so willing to break promises, I - and a lot of other people, it seems - can't really trust them. Apparently it's a big deal for a lot of people, big enough that it's forced gog to screw up their PR in a major way. Which is the core of the issue here. Those people want the full package that gog was supposedly fighting for. 'No compromises' is a phrase they use often. They actually expect to get what it says on the tin. Well, guess gog need to be more careful with their wording in the future.
And I personally am not one to be taken in by PR talk. I am fully aware that they're not about to achieve some 'DRM-free Revolution.' The reason I support them is not because they're 'Rebels,' I support them because they have a fair overall model - talking about the whole package, not just DRM - and because they were offering what I was looking for. Their recent announcement has me doubting that they can continue to deliver on that in the future. Not a good move in my book.
No, they will not, because casual purchasers are already using Steam and are not even aware that DRM is a thing. One of their recent videos showed a steady growth in their profits, that hardly supports the theory that they are in a financially difficult situation. The truth most likely is, Witcher 3 is coming and it will have regional prices so they thought they'd make an extra buck by sneaking in more and more such games.
Last edited:
They have different distributors for different regions, don't they? Like they did with TW2, which is the only title on gog to have had regional prices. They've only promised it to be DRM-free. More often than not, what PR doesn't mention is what they don't want to talk about.
Last edited:
So, your expectation is that Witcher 3 will have regional pricing on GOG. May be this is indeed a preparation for that step. They can ignore other games, but they can't ignore their own Witcher 3... I don't get it though. Why can't they set the rules? They own it. Other distributors work for them, not the other way around.
Gee, look at that! It seems social justice is not anybody's core value nowadays. So what, it is fair to set the same price for rich and poor countries, does not matter that it will make games inaccessible luxury for some but something that is everyday purchase for you, and not fair to set different prices for different regions and make their games more affordable? Only because it might lead to something bad?
You don't agree with the price in your region - just go and buy somewhere else. It is only for a few games that will not be available otherwise. What exactly are you loosing? And don't present me all these slippery slope apocalyptic scenarios about what might happen. Right now it is simply like in that Jesus tale where someone was upset that Jesus paid the same to a guy who worked less, and Jesus said - why do you fucking care? You got what we agreed upon, and it is not you fucking business what agreements I make with other people. I actually agree with Jesus on this one.
You don't agree with the price in your region - just go and buy somewhere else. It is only for a few games that will not be available otherwise. What exactly are you loosing? And don't present me all these slippery slope apocalyptic scenarios about what might happen. Right now it is simply like in that Jesus tale where someone was upset that Jesus paid the same to a guy who worked less, and Jesus said - why do you fucking care? You got what we agreed upon, and it is not you fucking business what agreements I make with other people. I actually agree with Jesus on this one.
Last edited:
Last time they tried to do something their distributor wasn't particularly fond of, they had to go to court. Doesn't look like they hold all the cards.
Anyway, I think that one of the 2 big RPGs with regional prices they're going to announce pre-orders for in a couple of months, as their announcement goes, is most likely 'The Witcher 3.'
@new&improved_vivaxardas I care because they're not Jesus. Instead, they're a service provider that is no longer providing the service I signed up for.
Anyway, I think that one of the 2 big RPGs with regional prices they're going to announce pre-orders for in a couple of months, as their announcement goes, is most likely 'The Witcher 3.'
@new&improved_vivaxardas I care because they're not Jesus. Instead, they're a service provider that is no longer providing the service I signed up for.
@new&improved_vivaxardas: This was discussed already. Regional pricing is not used for adjusting the value for poor countries. It's used to rip people off. Just see it in practice. Theoretical speculations worth nothing when practice disproves them.
@ReptilePZ @Gilrond
What's up with Witcher 3 having regional prices? As you mentioned, TW2 already had that so TW3 going the same route will not come unexpected. Seems like contracts with publishers regarding AAA title's releases have their own conditions.
What's up with Witcher 3 having regional prices? As you mentioned, TW2 already had that so TW3 going the same route will not come unexpected. Seems like contracts with publishers regarding AAA title's releases have their own conditions.
Yep. And TW3 is the one exception I can actually understand, you can't not sell your own game on your own platform. But using the exception to try and bring in even more exceptions until they've become the rule isn't something I agree with or look forward to.
@gregski: I thought the whole situation with TW2 was handled badly (up to the point that some wanted to see DRM in it). May be TW3 won't be any better, but I thought CDPR have more control really.
That it was misused does not mean that the idea is bad. Some people will benefit from it. Again, you don't agree with prices on these THREE games - go and buy somewhere else. Without regional pricing these games will not be available on GOG at all.
Let's say, Europens won't buy them because these games are priced not to their liking. But in other regions people will actually buy them because they are cheaper. I don't really worry about Europeans because they have a crap-load of alternatives. If people in poor regions get more agreeable pricing, I do not care that Europeans will feel screwed. THERE WON'T BE THESE GAMES ON GOG OTHERWISE, so they are not REALLY screwed, you know.
All I see is rich kids from the Western World are inventing some terrible scenarios to keep costs of their hobbies down.
Others misused this idea, so what? The idea itself is good, and how it will be implemented remains to be seen. I don't get why everybody instantly lashes out at CDPR when they demonstrate time and again that they are good guys and respect their customers.
You mean the same community that raged when Good Old Games became gog.com and announced its intention to include newer games ? The same community that raged when GOG abandonded their old 5.99$ and 9.99$ pricing to entice indies and bigger publishers? The same community that now complains about THREE games with regional pricing ?
@new&improved_vivaxardas: First of all, how can you be sure that poor regions will have them cheaper? Steam disproves that left and right.
Secondly, regional pricing thinking is bad because it uses the same premise as DRM - control over users. In this case where they come from. Otherwise why can't everyone run to buy the cheapest option? Oh, one has to track users now. Here goes out your decentralized and free Internet principle. Regional pricing and regional releases in the digital world is a fallacy to begin with, which is always a close kin to DRM. Internet should have no borders drawn on the maps. Yet, such kind of practices do all they can to enforce them.
Secondly, regional pricing thinking is bad because it uses the same premise as DRM - control over users. In this case where they come from. Otherwise why can't everyone run to buy the cheapest option? Oh, one has to track users now. Here goes out your decentralized and free Internet principle. Regional pricing and regional releases in the digital world is a fallacy to begin with, which is always a close kin to DRM. Internet should have no borders drawn on the maps. Yet, such kind of practices do all they can to enforce them.
Last edited:
How are you so certain that this will become a rule? I understand that they are bringing in regional pricing for new, AAA titles, but it's not like they announced changing their policy for ALL games, right? Or did I miss something?
They probably cannot dictate the conditions of those contracts FULLY. They are probably some long, exhausting negotiations sessions going on between them and publishers and every time you want something from them you also have to give something up. So maybe they came up to WB/Namco etc and said "DRM in TW2 was a mess, we removed it anyway so let's not go into that again. We want TW3 to be DRM free." And the publishers, very well aware of how anticipated the game is and that it will probably sell like hot cakes are like "Hmhmhmhm, daaaaamn, that's a hard pill to swallow for us you know. We might agree to that but only if you keep the regional pricing".
Or there are many other factors involved that we all have no idea about, really.
The main issue that I have is that because of this move, the possiblity of games like those being on gog *with* all of gog's core values in tact no longer exists. And because they've made this exception, it makes their position in further negotiations even weaker. Them backing up certainly doesn't make me feel any more confident in their ability to provide the services they've promised.