GOG Returning "To Its Roots" After Regional Pricing Backlash

[Zac Jovanovic]

Flat rate pricing isn't fair and equal.

I just learned the other day that the min wage in Australia is close to $18 while our min wage in the US is $7.25. That means that an equal price for both countries would see Australians getting a $20 game in a little over an hour of work while in the US it would take us 3 hours. In short, it would make the game 3 times as expensive in the US.

I guess the squeaky wheel gets the grease though and there are no shortage of Australians squeaking about having to pay $100 for a new release.

That goes the other way around too. In my country minimal wage is between 1 and 2 dollars, and on steam and origin games are 20% more expensive than in US. How's that for fair and equal?

 

[Steve the Pocket]

In turn, in cases where the company is "required to have regional prices" it will make up for it by offering free game codes and, eventually, store credit to affected customers.

Or, you know, they could just tell the publishers of those games where they can stick it, like they've been doing since the beginning to every publisher who refused to sell their game without DRM.

 

[Amir Kondori]

GOG realized its mistake and went on and apologized and went back to normal pricing. Had this happened with any other publisher they would have strut around confused, tell us that we "just dont get it" and that we should "Deal with it" and continue to rape us with prices.

You know by disallowing regional pricing they are limiting their library, as publishers insist on regional pricing. I personally would prefer a larger available library than no regional pricing.

then you are part of the problem why we cant have fair trade. as long as you are unable to stand for equal treatment - there wont be any. Its like those people that preorder games liek colonial marines and then go on to preorder the same publishers games again.

In your view I am part of the problem, in my view your view is a problem. I don't think it is fair that a producer of a good can't decide what to sell that good for in any given market. I don't think it is fair that I have to have a smaller library of DRM-free games because people like you think it is some moral outrage that companies sell the same good for different prices in different markets.
If the good was priced too high for a given market people wouldn't buy it. In the Internet age people can get the price of another market if they really want to, even from GOG.com.
What you call free trade I call one step away from price fixing.

 

[Strazdas]

In your view I am part of the problem, in my view your view is a problem. I don't think it is fair that a producer of a good can't decide what to sell that good for in any given market. I don't think it is fair that I have to have a smaller library of DRM-free games because people like you think it is some moral outrage that companies sell the same good for different prices in different markets.
If the good was priced too high for a given market people wouldn't buy it. In the Internet age people can get the price of another market if they really want to, even from GOG.com.
What you call free trade I call one step away from price fixing.

there is only one market - the games market (for the game maker, obviuosly). any segregation is artificial and is only created to price-gouge and basicalyl be greedy.
Yes, its not fair that you have a smaller library. the companies that refuse to sell for same price are to blame here. they are at fault for not playing fair and being a greedy bastards. Idealy, this would be regulated by law, but in abscense of that moral outrage is all we got.