soulgrindr: [...] 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.

michaelleung: I'm fine with GOG changing price points as long as they're LESS than $5.99 or $9.99.

Mnemon: it just as much could be the no-DRM attitude that causes more problems) sends a wrong message to everyone.

michaelleung: I'm fine with GOG changing price points as long as they're LESS than $5.99 or $9.99.

Starkrun: I support the option since having my fav games DRM free is worth the price. I would pay more for bigger better titles. Psychotoxic, Shadowgrounds, AvP, Max payne 1,2 ((drools on self for Max payne))

Mnemon: 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.

Mnemon: 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.

Navagon: GOG have stated in an interview that they agree with increasing the pricing options they have available. Both for cheaper titles that don't justify the $6 and titles that are worth more than $10.
So you're definitely not on your own here. Maybe we'll see this implemented in March? Although I don't know what it will mean for existing titles.

TheCheese33: I'd imagine existing titles will remain the same price. I can't see many games going up beyond the $9.99 mark, though.