funny, when I work, I'm often times paid to shit.
of course, if I'm just shitting on the clock, that certainly counts as being paid to shit.
I'm a professional pooper.

as someone who doesn't care whatsoever about the extras, I am going to say hell no.

sauce plox

^ This. If a publisher demands a higher price point, tell them to go get bent. In a nice way, though, with more tact than I would have, but still.
$5.99 and $9.99 are very reasonable levels of pricing considering the variables involved. I don't see revenue for GoG (or the publishers) necessarily getting better with an increased price point. Also, it is obviously true that some publishers almost default to the highest available price point, oh hello there Ubisoft. I'd buy something like Settlers Heritage of Kings for $9.99 in a RTS-starved moment, but I probably wouldn't for $14.99.
Also, there's the < $10 psychological effect. Since $10 is about the price of a decent lunch in this country, that makes a notable difference when buying impulsively.

I've bought so many games here for that reason, even ones I've had little or no interest in previously. The deals only make it worse...

If the higher price points would be only for game packs, I agree. But for single games, well, as some people have already said, I'd have to think about it.

This.
Stop suggesting a higher price point, Seeming Suck-Up Majority. It's bad enough when ya go "WOO I'M BUYING THIS!!!! THX GOG! YR THE BEST!!!" when they release a bad game.

Keep in mind that this "bad" you're talking about is completely depending on each person's preferences.

QFT

I think some people from GOG said that already - they are not planning (at least for now) to introduce new prices, since one of their goals was to keep games at 5,99 or 9,99 usd.

As long as the prices stay USD, I would be willing to go up to $14.99 for certain games, even without extras. Though I would be hoping only the newest titles would be kept at prices $9.99 and higher.
$7.99 and maybe even $3.99 would be very welcome too.

Willing, maybe, but if you open the gate it will be hard to ever pull things back to where they are currently.
I would rather they stay the way they are, and GOG keeps doing what they have been doing for over a year now.

Where/why does that suggestion come up? I'd understand the request if the GOG release schedule would have stopped working, i.e. there'd be no new titles released; if it'd look as if GOG was struggling to get more deals in. Not the case, at least the way it looks from an external perspective.
So, what's the point?
I have the feeling (don't know, of course) that GOG's strategy is centred a lot around trying to prove that their way of selling games works; that GOG attempts to win over the more difficult to deal with publishers by the ever increasing amount of games there are on GOG. Suddenly caving in to requests of a higher pricepoint (which, you know, might not even be the problem behind negotiations; it just as much could be the no-DRM attitude that causes more problems) sends a wrong message to everyone.
I, as a customer, also perceive GOG to have a pro-consumer right stance. GOG seems to position itself with a certain philosophy, and that, rather than just what they sell, is part of GOG's capital. I think (don't know, of course) that GOG understands that, as well. Diluting what GOG offers (Simple and cheap pricing, no DRM, good customer support) would undo a lot of goodwill GOG gained.

...and in the end, there's no reason to do it. For example, i live in Europe and i got retail a better deal of HoM&M III and IV, both complete, for less that individual HoM&M III complete on GOG. I will still support GOG 100% since their business filosofy (<sp?) is very much in tandem with a modern videogame business model IMO (and i do get value out of purchases in GOG on several other games). So, it works, depending on item and geographical place.
The thing is, about pricing, the only reason to go higher *now* is because publishers interested in GOG would demand so, and as we've all seen, publishers are doomed in a digital distribution model. They struggle for survival, because they are the middle man that in this sort of business is not necessary anymore. What exists today are the 'left-overs' of a recent age where games couln'd be out to the general public by a studio, without a publisher to do the job. When more studios appear or change to a digital model, more will make money directly from digital sell, and publishers will disappear (except maybe a diferent form of digital aglomerate kind of publishers for indie projects... but that's higly debatable).
So, classical publishers in gaming = dead. Its a matter of time. THey are just using these last decades to milk out of their position on the industry until they inevitably go under. This will happen all the faster with improved digital distro models, streaming videogame feed being possibly one of them.
On this perspective, if GOG pushes prices up, is in the end to favor not their business, but to catter to [deadman walking] publishers. So, i don't agree. Keep prices. Keep promotion policies.

I think it'd be a bad idea. It's nice to have fixed, simple pricing, and a nice upper limit.
I'd be tempted to say we should have a $7.99 point too, but then we might never get a $5.99 game again.
While a $3.99 point might be good too, it's probably better to bundle up a couple of games to $5.99
PS/ I can't believe gog hasn't gotten more old dos games to bundle up at $5.99. You'd think publishers would be jumping over the chance to get a little cash from all their abandoned games.... and ensuring compatibility is much easier than windows games thanks to dosbox.