Good Old Games Rebranding Tomorrow, Newer Titles to be Added
-
Category: News ArchiveHits: 1989
GS: How have publisher attitudes to your DRM-free approach differed from those of the indie community?
GR: Dev studios, small and mid-sized publishers are usually owned and managed by people who are still gamers themselves. Big AAA publishers tend to be run more and more by people who have a strong legal or financial background. This fundamental difference in the way those companies operate is reflected on their respective approaches to DRM.
Smaller studios have historically been much more aware of gamers' expectations and consumers' behaviors than big publishers have. Being gamers themselves, they do know as a fact that the best way to fight against piracy is to convince people to buy them instead of somehow trying to force them to. In this respect, selling games without DRM is a good step to achieve that. Companies such as Frozenbytes, Mojang, Remedy, Paradox or CD Projekt Red have already taken this DRM-free direction in various yet very similar ways.
Big publishers--due to a much bigger headcount and financial stakes involved in the production of AAA blockbusters--have had a historical tendency to manage their DRM policy via Microsoft Excel. As Brian Fargo said recently, "in the beginning of the industry all the nerds were in charge, but then as the industry grew it changed, and now the guys that picked on the nerds got back on top."
What I mean here is that those companies have a pyramidal structure that is way too big and which prevents them from being close to gamers and the latter's expectations. It is easier and faster for a sales or business executive to tick the "DRM" column in Microsoft Excel to secure his own position, rather than trying to convince the Management Board to change (or at least consider changing) their corporate DRM policy. The good news is--as I mentioned earlier in this interview--that more and more big publishers started thinking again about their strong DRM policies, and I am happy to see them asking questions to us about us lately.
GS: Have you noticed any impact on your business from the introduction of EA's Origin or the continued growth of Steam?
GR: We have not noticed any impact for GOG.com, simply because we are not competing against Steam and Origin as such. Historically, 99 percent of our catalogue is made of PC classics, while the aforementioned platforms focus on day-one releases and launches. To make it more clear, we sell copies of Duke Nukem 3D or Baldur's Gate, while they sell copies of Portal 2 or Mass Effect 3. There is no overlap here and we are not competitors as a matter of fact.
Of course, you're also asking if this is changing now that we're offering newer games. Once again, I think the answer is "no." In that case, because our offer deeply differs from the offer of Steam or Valve. All our games will be DRM-free, sold at fair price worldwide (no regional pricing) and with tons of added value (free digital goodies, full customer support, an optional light-speed downloader).
As a matter of fact, I think that GOG.com is more of an alternative than a competitor. There is still no way to fight against Steam for example, something we knew from the very beginning of GOG. The only way to shine is to offer an alternative model to gamers. Being different is our daily obsession to make us stand out from the rest of the field. We treat our gamers well and this generates good sales numbers, as we proved with The Witcher 2, for which GOG was the best-selling platform, right after Steam.
