sometimes developers stop making games, or sometimes they need more money to make more games.
I don't care if the developer or publisher is going to make new games, sometimes I just want to play a game, and I'd rather do it legally than illegally. If a person is the rights holder to a game, I'd rather it be sold than have it be locked down

I like that the games are always 5.99 or 9.99 here, except on sales. It's unique.
It's also right about where my own cutoffs are. I don't like to spend more than $10 on a game, and I won't even spend $10 unless I know it's good. $6 is on a borderline area for me if I know the game has mixed reviews. I can sometimes be convinced to buy an ok game for $6, though I know I would prefer it for less. Sales, frequently get me to buy.

But it's the best interest of customers to have better modern games, I'll gladly pay 200$ for a total revolutionary game if they actually manage to make it, it's just about stimulating creativity and money is a good way to do it. I don't see why we should allow them to make a living begin lazy rights owners.

I wouldn't say no to Final Fantasy VII for 14.99$.

Although the two-point pricing scheme has its appeal, I don't see a problem with allowing more expensive games on the service. Except for the blockbuster hits, PC games that are just a few years old tend to be difficult to find at retail (especially with bargain racks nowadays being stocked mostly with budget casual titles), and I don't see why such games can't have a place on GOG. Three years is a long time nowadays.
It's less a question of "would you rather buy a game for $10 or $15" and more a question of "would you like to see games that sell for $15 become available on GOG?" I would. After all, GOG is my first stop when I'm browsing for games, not my last. If I don't like the price, I just won't pay it.

I don't see why you think people don't deserve to be paid.

Introducing higher price points would be a step in the wrong direction for GOG.
Ten bucks is a much as games this old are worth (not counting personal attachment which will result in people paying several hundred for the PC version of Final Fantasy 7).
Ten dollars really should be as much as you've got to pay for games this old.

I'd like to see your MBA and your game development credentials, otherwise you need to realize that your opinion is just that, an opinion and that you are just as qualified as the rest of us.

That's bullshit, pure and simple. You're reaching.
No one can speak for anybody else and as such all we ever do around here is state OUR OWN opinions, but the only credentials anyone needs to decide if a price it's too expensive it's their WALLET credentials.

I think games are generally overpriced, the actual fun doesn't exceed around 20€ for me. So, no, I think this is a bad idea. Not all good old games are equally worth their praise, and many of them really lose a bit of fascination with their age. Anyway, I've never been a fan of this "let's force everyone else to give more money for respect! Yay!".

That's what I'm saying, he's speaking for everyone, and when I said "like the rest of us" I mean, just giving opinions, and not saying that "it'd be good for gog" or "bad for gog" just saying what we feel about it. I'd pay more than $10 for a game if it meant the difference between playing it and not playing it.

In theory for me it's ok to see more price points on GoG.
As long as the prices are fair for every specific game it's ok by me (and I kind of trust GoG on this).
Remains to be seen how this will be implemented. It's too early to comment if it's ok or not.
It all depends on how this price flexibility is implemented. If this will lead into stimulating the wildest fantasies of greedy publishers then this is not ok, but if the prices are set with common sense then I see no problem.
Edit: And another thing, if multiple price points will open the way towards adding new rare games that otherwise the publishers will not agree to release, the it's definitely ok. Eventually the wallet and desirability will decide for each user and game :)

Sure they deserve to be paid. I'm just saying that increasing too much the prices of older games could create a room for easy-money for publishers instead of pushing them taking risks in financing creative developers. There's more and more independent studios developing out there, for ethical reasons but also because some big publishers would not publish their games because there's too risky bets than sequels or casual games... don't give them old game too.
Anyway with other downloading platforms competition it'll be bad for GOG to increase it's prices, I bought Eleven Legacy (which is quite recent) on Impulse during a promo for 9.99$ two months after it was released and steam and gamersgate are making frequent prices drops...

The thing that everyone seems to be assuming is that this new higher price point is only going to be applied to single games. In the interview I read, while it did mention a higher price point to get somewhat newer (but still old) games on the site, it also mentioned something very key: game collections. Would something like the entire Ultima series for $15 or $20 be worth it? I think so (even if I am personally not interested in the games). Adding this higher price point (whatever it is) will allow GOG the flexibility to do things like that on a regular basis, instead of just occasionally during a weekend sale. That can only be a good thing, both for GOG and for us.

When I say something I assume that other people assume that it's my opinion. Because I'm saying it. People shouldn't have to go around putting "in my opinion" in front of everything they say.
Now when you say "like the rest of us", yeah, you're trying to speak for everyone.