No, to eliminate regional pricing you would need global laws to forbid such practice. The currency has nothing to do with it.

Why is China a bad example? We are talking about the same good with different prices. And the same with hotels. A hotel in turkey (for example) with the same service than one in germany is much more cheaper. I do call this regional prices. And this exists for all goods...material ones and ohters.

And about Gabriel Knight...that's wrong. GOG gives you the difference back, so you pay only 15,89 € (without discount). And that are ca. 19.99 $.

Such laws would mean the end of the rich western States like the European ones or the USA...

I don't get any of those riches, so I'm all for it.

Bull.

This is just wrong. Even when you consider that store credit is a good solution (and I will admit it is better than getting nothing) you still have to pay 19.99€ (without discount). That money is GONE, no matter how you think about it. You have to be able to afford it for that price even if you get the difference back in store credit. That's not fair to anyone.

So do I...but those who make the laws does and that is the only thing that counts.

Absolutely not - it would just mean that the companies from the west that made these regional pricing rules would not be able to exploit people anymore at the same level. They would still have more then enough profit just not as high as they have now. And we are talking about digital goods not physical since they can't be compared.

Then buy the game on Steam and what did you get back in this case? Right...nothing.

The store credit isn't a perfect solution but for me that is a deal a can live with.

Since some people seem to be having trouble distinguishing between cost and credit, here is an extreme example.

Say you are looking to buy a small house. You find one that retails for $100,000, but comes with $40,000 in furniture credit (that expires in one year), which you can exchange for furnishing for the house. So technically you are paying $60,000 for the house itself. Is this the same as buying a $60,000 house? No, because:

1) You must have the initial $100,000 to spend.
2) You may not need $40,000 in furniture, or have higher priority expenses this money could go to.
3) You may not use all the credit before it expires.

In addition, you are supporting the artificial inflation of prices by accepting credit as the equivalence of cash. This in turn causes people of limited means to be shut out of market.

Now, to be clear, I think it is highly laudable of GOG to offer this credit out of pocket, even taking into account that it is with an asset that has no significant manufacturing or stocking cost beyond the initial outlay. One presumes they still have to pay the publisher's cut, even on games bought with credit, so it is real money for them.

But credit that brings a game to the equivalent cost of the one-world price is not the same as charging the one-world price. I hope this is now clear.

Without the politics of exploitation of so called developing countries the western civilizations will go down. Think about one thing for example. What will European and the USA do if they don't get their oil for a discount price (cause the citizen of these lands where it comes from would get a fair wage). But this is a subject that would blow this thread to the moon if we continue.

And the lion's share of the production costs of a physical good is man power. So it is by digital goods. So why should they not compared with each other?

Thank you! This is exactly my point of view. :)

I agree with you in everything you wrote.

As I mentioned it before. It isn't perfect but better than nothing and the first step in the right direction.

It really is a bit outside of the scope of this thread. Therefore only a single comment: Market theory tells us that any two countries can always come to an economic balance, the salaries just have to equal relative productivities. So Europe and the USA simply have to stay more productive compared to developed countries (putting more emphasis on education, more efficient organisation, ...) or they have to lower their standard of living or both. But one way or the other you will get a new balance. The world will not end and nobody will really go down.

As for regional pricing. My best angle against it is discrimination. It's just not allowed to make people different offers based on their geographical location (except shipping, ..) within a country because this would be discrimination. So it should also not be allowed to do it within countries, especially not for digital goods.
But there is a huge difference. Everyone can by the cheap hotel in turkey independent where you come from for the same price. Regional pricing in the internet is rather like, you pay 4 times more for the cheap hotel in Turkey because you come from Senegal and not from Korea. This is rather the opposite of your example.

For physical goods the price (excluding shipping) never depends on where you come from, or does it?

Oh. :(
It's for certain industries?