Yes, the same story about Humble Bundle came up before GOG's announcement (but not long before, just a few days). I still wonder is it a confidence?
In all seriousness now, I AM curious to see how GOG will manage to implement regional prices without DRM. And I am curious to see how long they will manage to stay DRM-free.
About the Humble Bundle, that's not really a big deal since a lot of what they sell are simply Steam keys. We need to see examples of DRM-free regional pricing before we start handing out tinfoil hats.
About the Humble Bundle, that's not really a big deal since a lot of what they sell are simply Steam keys. We need to see examples of DRM-free regional pricing before we start handing out tinfoil hats.
They already did that with TW2. Site detects your region and shows you a price proper to your region. That's all.
Not that worried about how they'll implement it, as Aver said, they already have the system in place, it's your second question I'm more concerned with. So far, the changes gog have made seem to have led to exactly what people feared most. Let's just hope they think twice before abandoning other goals, considering the amount of negative feedback this is generating.
Again, with the slippery slope. Being DRM-free was always the flagship value of GOG. They know very well that regional pricing for some games is not something that will do them any harm in the long term - abandoning their main policy however that would be really BIG, with major gaming sites writing about it. I don't really see them allowing some games with DRM either - they're not THAT blind.
Would be kinda hard to get rid of all this, wouldn't it ?
True.
Though I have to say whenever I read about GOG on the internet it's always either in the context of old games or its DRM-free policies. The majority of people who speak up against regional pricing seem to be Australians, who always get screwed by it the worst. The rest of the internet... seems to not care [and I don't mean GOG forumites here]. I guess that's why they took the risk.
People tend to talk about whatever concerns them. After AC2, Diablo 3 and Sim City etc, DRM became a hot topic so it's no wonder that most people focused on that aspect of gog. Regional pricing used to be quite a big deal in the early days of digital distribution, too. In fact, the first few things that I knew about gog were that they were selling old classics and that they didn't have regional pricing. Question is, what happens when DRM is no longer as relevant?
Last edited:
The times move on and some companies do abandon DRM, but GOG still deals mostly in games from the past that are often stuck with DRM forever. The kind that either makes them not work anymore or is just a simple pain in the ass to deal with. Eventually I imagine that source of old games drying up, but I still don't see them abandoning that principle. It made them TOO famous, almost paragons in the eyes of many.
And they are still "the good guys" in my eyes, still much better than the competition - that side of PR hasn't failed so far, with their new 30 days game return policy being something that comes to mind. Though of course I agree that they shouldn't have went with the whole regional pricing thing like they did.
And they are still "the good guys" in my eyes, still much better than the competition - that side of PR hasn't failed so far, with their new 30 days game return policy being something that comes to mind. Though of course I agree that they shouldn't have went with the whole regional pricing thing like they did.
The regional pricing tactic is, so far, only for those three games. This does not suggest to me that they have given the lie to any of their core business principles.
GOG's original business model was to sell "old" games. They were like a bookstore that deals in remaindered titles. Copyright holders of such games usually consider themselves fortunate to get anything at all for them. Regional availability and pricing don't matter and don't enter into negotiations to distribute such titles.
But if GOG is going to distribute new games, or distribute games belonging to copyright holders who make an issue of regional marketing, they have the difficult choice of playing with the copyright holders or not stocking their titles. And in this game, the copyright holders hold all the high cards, and nothing we can say will change that.
GOG's original business model was to sell "old" games. They were like a bookstore that deals in remaindered titles. Copyright holders of such games usually consider themselves fortunate to get anything at all for them. Regional availability and pricing don't matter and don't enter into negotiations to distribute such titles.
But if GOG is going to distribute new games, or distribute games belonging to copyright holders who make an issue of regional marketing, they have the difficult choice of playing with the copyright holders or not stocking their titles. And in this game, the copyright holders hold all the high cards, and nothing we can say will change that.
Copyright holders don't seem to be too fond of no DRM either. That's the concern, I think a lot of people value gog's "ideals" more than their library. So sacrificing goals in favour of a larger library seems counter-productive to me, if gog wishes to keep those people on board.
Why do those holders make such issue? It especially doesn't make sense when they declare that for example Australia has to pay the most. Just because (I've never heard any valid explanation really).
@ReptilePZ: yes, it's part of the issue. If GOG mean that they refocus on people who don't care about values, that would mean that their average userbase might not worry about DRM either once that refocusing will affect them more.
Enigmatic T: "We do, actually, have some games that I'm pretty sure will have people giddy with glee once they show up on GOG that will be available thanks to this change. But for the most part we're probably best off awaiting TheFrenchMonk's letter to you guys that's to be published tomorrow."
Discuss.
Discuss.
What's there to discuss, Reptile ? We will have to wait till tomorrow. Nice of them to finally do some damage control though.
Yes, let's wait until tomorrow for details. It's clear that this policy is their way forward anyway.