As some of us have been a bit concerned about these new changes it would be great if GOG could make it their policy that these new price points are only to be applied to games that are less than a five years old and that they will be automatically discounted after that time has passed. That way there would be incentive to the publishers to release newer games earlier here as the more they wait the less they can ask for them and the customers can either buy them right away at the premium price or choose to wait for the guaranteed permanent price drop.

I myself welcome this new direction as it will be the only hope for certain publishers to sell me their activation infected games as mere post release issued DRM removing patches are not enough for me unless the games are re-released with that patch already applied to them. Otherwise I just get a used copy and hope that the seller doesn't use my money on supporting any other DRM using game.

I actually wasn't very pleased at first on hearing the AC's futuristic parts and only later bought it used from a friend only to soon discover that the sequel was going to be one of the first of Ubisoft's titles with the always online requirement. As I hadn't had the time to even install the first game I just lost interest in playing at all until that said friend gave me one of his mistakenly double pre-ordered copies of AC2 black edition and I was motivated enough to find out that the DRM was ridiculously easy to bypass and ever since have been worried if the series futuristic plot will be finished before Ubisoft starts to use OnLive as the only release platform. Now I am starting to be hopeful that the rest of the series will someday be released here even if Ubisoft may still try all sorts of DRM methods in their new games. It While improbable, it would be nice if Ubisoft would actually give us an estimate on when the sequels are to be released DRM free as otherwise I will be buying those earlier in used copies with money I could use to invest in Wasteland 2 etc.

By the way, is that Ottoman Edition of Revelations any better than the regular version if I am going to install it on an "offline" computer and never ever log in to Ubisoft's server? As in do I get any additional single player content that runs locally with OE or should I buy right now the cheapest used copy of the earlier versions that I can get shipped to my door instead of waiting a few months more?

No matter what GOG does, they can't please everyone. Just a bit earlier people were complaining about GOG releasing indie games. Also it is wishful thinking they could just go on releasing early and rare Win9x games, because there is a reason they are rare (which probably makes it that much harder for GOG to obtain both the game and rights to them), and maybe GOG has already had to reject lots of wishlisted games because it is near impossible to get them work reliably on most modern PCs. Maybe they've learned from the beating they've gotten from Interstate.

I am very happy that e.g. AC and HOMM5 appeared here, even if they are not from the previous century and cost considerably more than older games here. I don't buy them from Amazon because they are US-only company, GOG is not.

On the whole, I am happy for any commercial DRM-free game GOG can get to their catalog, even if not all of them are universally great or classics. As long as they don't start pushing all Android/IPhone level indie games here, then this place could easily become far too cluttered because there are so many of those games. These two high-profile games (AC + HOMM5) sit here very well.

I haven't yet made up my mind if $20 for AC is ok, though. I think I paid more for an older game (Vampires: Bloodlines) from DotEmu half a year ago (20€ I think). $20 for both AC + HOMM5 sounds pretty good to me, but then I guess I could get them separately for half the price whenever the next summer or winter GOG sales starts, so I am unsure I'll go with this bundle yet. But I might just as well, same discount.


I think a much better and simpler solution is that people vote with their wallets. If the asking price is too much for what you are receiving, don't buy it now. Then, if the game does not sell at certain price point (but sells well on promos), maybe its default price will go down, like it has for many other games.

Look on the bright side, as long as GOG is DRM Free the annoying Steam heads should stay away. GOG is the anti-Steam. I view this whole change in philosophy as GOG saying, "Hey, we're going to continue to put out classic games at the same rate we've done in the past. But, we're also mixing in newer games for those of you who enjoy modern titles as well but don't want your games attached to Steam or other DRM."

That, to me, can be only a good thing. They're treating their own customers, inviting a few more in, and keeping true to their roots. And again, I don't see the "CAN I USE IT ON STEAM I NEED MY ACHIEVEMENTS AND ALL MY GAMES IN ONE PLACE BECAUSE I CAN'T CLICK A BUTTON IN ANOTHER PROGRAM" crowd really coming over. They can continue to let Steam own their games and have the authority to shut down their account at any time. ;)

In GOG I trust!

DRM-free AC1 was $2.50 just a week or so ago with the Ubisoft DRM free sale on Amazon. Buy one get one free for $5 games.
Only hitch in that is that they only a day ago announced Witcher 1 for MAC... on Steam only ... xD So they do seem to have some Steam connections at the very least. I imagine they used their Steamworks to facilitate the Mac port or something.

^ Oh wow haha. I didn't know that about Witcher 1 on Mac being Steam-only. That surprises me because the Witcher devs are hardcore about no DRM.

Seems like an odd thing for GOG to do. Okay, I understand the concerns a bit better.

I despise the Steam monopoly and would hate for it to infest GOG.

I have no problem with the Steam 'monopoly', for as far as you can call it that, but I highly doubt GOG will be going that way any time soon.

At the moment I see it more becoming a portal for Indie games and DRM-free 'commercially outlived' games. Which is still quite a big market. That could entail basically all Indie games and hopefully most games that are 1-2 years old or more. I really don't see the new high cost AAA games going DRM-free/One price for all any time soon . If anything Witcher 2 was already a harsh reminder of that.

However, it would be nice if it became standard for games to go DRM-free once they outlived their main commercial period. Perhaps if GOG grows big enough on that it'll even spread to the other portals.

I just listened to the soundtrack for assassin's creed and it is great, I am putting this on my wishlist for now. I would get the HOMMV/assassins creed bundle but I already have heroes so i will wait till it drops to at least 9.99..............

Not until we get the infamous AssCreed: Bro. ;) Seriously, whoever started these ridiculous abbreviations needs to be bitch-slapped. Every time I see someone do the AssCreed thing now I can't help but think of gay porn.

TW2 did the best on Steam, but from the reports and stories I read, it did the second best on GOG, I don't understand what you mean by this.

The way you keep going on and on about Steam you might as well change your subtitle to 'Steam Defender'. ;) Although, with your current one you shouldn't even theoretically own any GOG games besides the free ones. =P

While I don't think Steam is as bad as some make it out to be, I still avoid it when I can. I just prefer my games not to be tied to any one platform when possible.

I'm talking about the fact that it wasn't possible to keep the One World, One Price thing going, despite this being their own site and their own game.


I tend to jump in when others mention it, especially when I disagree, sure.
I've made no secret of the fact that I'm fine with Steam. If that makes me a 'defender' in some people's eyes, then let them ^^

And yeah, that's kind of Outdated. During GOG's beta it seemed possibly somewhat feasible, and on Steam I managed to, but since I've bought most of my wishlist on Steam already it's mostly newer games now so I don't often wait till it gets to that point anymore ^^ And the post-beta sales for GOG don't reflect that standpoint anymore either I agree ^^

Ah, yes, unfortunately.

That only happened because they were FORCED by some stupid court law (at the pressure of some greedy publisher) to do that.
Not because they wanted.
It's ALL the difference in the world.

And regarding that mac-steam mumbo jumbo its because they offer support (at least for now) ONLY for the windows platform.
That's all.

Ok ... and this changes ... what exactly? Fact is, they didn't even manage to do it on their own game, on their own site. So do you think it's strange that I use that as an example of it being unlikely that it'll soon be happening for similar games from random other developers? Does that sound particularly far fetched or something? I'm not exactly sure what your point is.

Nowhere did I say they did not want to. Yet they also don't want to limit their publishing to just GOG, so they have to rely on other publishers in other Regions. And those publishers will have certain demands. One will obviously be that GOG doesn't undercut their own efforts to sell it in the region they are publishing in.

It's the same lock Retail has had on Digital retail for ages now, because the simple fact is, retail is still relevant, and you can't publish retail worldwide on your own with any sort of ease, you have to rely on others.

That was a SALE on amazon, not the regular price.
Wait for a sale here on gog to compare them.
Right now you're comparing apples with oranges.
In order to play (good) chess you have to plan several moves ahead.
In order to win the war you might want to strategically loose some battles.
I'm sure GOG had their own reasons for doing that and for sure I'm not questioning their motives and i'm not even a little bit concerned.