Another PC only gaming company dies...

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.



Nobody really knows for certain what effects the death of piracy would have on PC gaming. For example, if piracy is defeated, the sales of new graphic cards might decrease too. There was a BBC News article on piracy and in the comments section many people mentioned that they will either get a game for free or not get it at all. Without piracy all those people will probably just manage without new generation games and there will be even less people upgrading the computer. Then new generation graphic cards might appear much slower and cost even more. I think it would be therefore better if the Alliance somehow ties graphic card sales more with PC games sales rather than just fight piracy.


 
Yes, that's the main difference between the two. IP law was introduced to deal with this. The excuse of "it's not stealing because I only copied it" has been redundant since 1709.

True, but the "someone else is bad, so I can do what I like too" argument is pitiful.
 


illegal versions could reduce the price, not the use value to the individual user. Regardless of whether you bought it or stole it, it has the same use value, which is the primary source of value of an item like this, making the dilution concept inappropriate in this context. whether or not the price is reduced is a decision left for the developer to make.

long story short, same value to each person, regardless of how many copies are made ... whether or not they choose to pay for that value is up to them. while this must seem like a nuanced argument, it is ultimately very important in finding a solution to this crisis.
 
I think Maximus was trying to make the point that the harder piracy is, the higher price that publishers can charge. Think of it this way;

If obtaining pirated software was extremely difficult/risky, then most pirates would go out and buy games at £20, £30, maybe even £100. If games were £10,000, though, they'd probably take the risk/put in the effort.

However, because piracy is so easy, even a £20 price tag seems "too high" to a pirate - they just download instead.

It's all about risk/effort/reward.

Or to put it another way - you don't risk a jail setence robbing a bank for £5.


This is why there is DRM on games - it is an attempt to make piracy difficult enough to make the retail price seem a better option. Of course, in general it doesn't work.

It's also why DVDs carry the threatening anti-piracy trailers - they're appealing to our consertaive nature to not take the risk. "Why risk a jail sentence for a £15 DVD?" they're saying.

The current strategy by publishers is to raise the effort / perceived risk thresholds to deter the "casual" pirate.
 
i can see where he's coming from, though it is likely that the "causal" pirate would not buy the game, if that were the only option. each person has a value that they attribute to the use of the game, over which, even if they were a law abiding citizen, they would not pay. the fact that others steal does not affect that use value.

i was just countering the opinion that dilution could be applied in this context as well as illustrating the difference between value and the actual price paid - value is not affected by theft, price is (well, at least the quantity bought at a given price). while it might seem trivial, these are important distinctions that a developer has to be aware of if they have any shot of surviving this technological/market problem they face.
 
I've read all the post's and it's amazing that the concept of stealing is vague, or some people want to justify it, but no one seems to look at the market place as the final judge of the game/producer court, ID's doing pretty good and so is Infinity Ward, Titan Quest MAY have been a good game but I wouldn't buy it, I'm into FPS just like my friends, I know one guy who plays Starcraft and no one who plays WOW, to me the rip off is 500USD or more for a video card to play the latest and greatest, I wait a year and buy the hardware and software from Ebay and save a bundle, my decision, from where I am if the product is good enough people will buy it and the developers can give their old Ferrari away( thanks John Cormac)
 
Thanks llama_man, that was the point I was trying to make.

At the moment it is so easy for people to torrent a game that there is so little incentive to actually buy the game. If obtaining an illegal copy involved significant time and effort, then most people would buy the game to save the hassle involved in pirating it.

It doesn't matter if you can argue the value of the item remains unchanged to those who bought it - one person is getting what they paid for, while the other is getting something that they didn't and should of paid for. As it stands, what are you paying for when you buy a game that you could torrent in a couple of days anyway? Beyond knowing that you have rewarded those that created it, as you right should for enjoying their IP, you don't see much practical benefit.

We certainly shouldn't have this scenario where people feel they have a 'right' to freely copy IP, play games and then decide whether or not they actually feel inclined to reward the creators as an after thought - that 'charity' like mentality is absurd. And given human nature, many will torrent even the greatest games and not feel any inclination to do that anyway.

Sure there will always be people who will go to extreme lengths to avoid paying for something, but we need DRM to actually create that value proposition (make games much harder to rip so it is actually more convenient and makes more sense to actually buy them rather than just torrent them). This idea that PC gamers as a community will self regulate themselves to pick and choose to reward the developers that they feel deserve support is never going to happen in reality.
 


Crisis is a WAY overused word. That implies it's an acute condition, this is nothing new. You may be too young to remember the C-64 game rental stores that were in practically every strip mall in the early 80's. They had signs warning against copying software, but next to the register were programs to defeat copy protection. Those closed long ago, but there're still places that will rent programs, somehow calling it previewing makes it better.

I've always preferred my own copy with the manual I'd likely never look at and whatever packaging was included. It's like having a copy of a television show versus buying it. The output's the same, but there's just something missing with the DVD-R with the title scrawled on it with a sharpie instead of the packaged DVD.

I do look for a crack however if it requires that I keep the CD/DVD just to run the program, I'm just not that organized.
 
Why is it in threads like these that people love to share their ideas but don't actually read the views of others? (or if they do read them, they pay close attention not to show that they did).

If anyone is wondering why there isn't really progress in debates like these then this is a (the) reason.
 


i couldn't agree with you more about the end users not changing their view on paying, that has been mentioned ad nauseum by myself and others in this thread ... however, given the state of current technology, drm does not seem technically possible, at least at a cost point where it is even worth the time, not to mention how it cripples the game for your law abiding customers, reducing their "use value" of the game, and their subsequent willingness to pay. all in all a losing proposition.

so if you can't drm the game, and can't change the attitude of the potential audience, what to do? i agree with big mac, some potential solutions have already been tossed about in this thread.

i'm just old enough to remember the commodore 64, what a POS. if you saw the review of the ET game debacle with ATARI in the console industry of the early '80's on tom's the other day, you could see that small (or large) blips in the market or technology sector are certainly a crisis for the companies engaged. someone will always come in to replace the ones that don't deliver in the face of technological and market conditions, which is exactly what is happening now.
 
Piracy hurts the smaller developer more. They tend to have very few staff and most are the programmers, artists, etc. On the other hand corporations like EA pay the small developer, expect a product out regardless of its quality, and care little for the consumer and are bloated by management, accountants, etc.

Piracy is a major problem, but it is hard to feel guilt when you look at the companies. Perhaps if the companies would allow me to use my electronic copies as much as my physical copies I wouldn't mind as much. The RIAA is an example of cheating the customer (class action lawsuit where the companies were found overcharging for CDs) and then trying to make it so I have to buy 2 copies in different formats. DVDs were also marketed to last 20+ years, but then you find out they are degrading within 5.

Also copyright law used to be limited to 14 years and now we have it extending many decades (winnie the pooh). It is stifling creativity by having major corporations rely more on their past success rather than creativity and inventiveness.
 
I'd suggest that the lack of creativity is more driven by the public's demand for dross. Just look at how many dreadful romcom scripts get turned into movies. Someone must be going to watch that cr@p or the studios would stop making them.
 
Some people enjoy anything. The problem is when a studio hits gold they basically milk the idea for all it is worth and then keep milking it. It also doesn't help when they decide on a sequel first then a script. At a certain point people grow tired of the same thing and move to something else.

The same can be said for games. I liked the Sims, but in no way was it so much fun that I had to get an expansion pack. Nor does it help that most of the games feel similar.

Look at the heyday of the 1990s. People were upgrading quickly, the economy was good and games were innovative. Castle Wolfenstein--> Doom and Doom 2 then Duke Nukem. You didn't have dozens of FPS, same with RTS you basically had Warcraft 2 and Command and Conquer. Now look at the shelves and you will probably find the same titles and themes.

Not everyone is an FPS fan. I am not, I enjoy them, but I don't buy them. I could buy the newest RTS, but mostly I found playing warcraft 3 and its mods (battleships and battletanks) is more fun than the newer RTS. It also runs on almost everyone's computer.

My friends all loved orange box because it was a lot more than just killing. They especially loved portal for its puzzles and humor. I see several people play team fortress 2, but I only see 1 person amongst the people I know play Crysis.

Gamers have also aged. They have kids, jobs, etc. They don't have the time they used to and the social networking they once did. The economy isn't as good and they want a more relaxed pace. I know when I come home I don't want to fight with drivers, compatibility issues, etc. I just want it to work.

My major purchasing decisions aren't purely what is the fastest and affordable, but what is the most reliable, stable and economical. Your hardware can be great, but if the driver is terrible I am not getting it. I don't want to spend thousands of dollars every year to keep at the cutting edge. I also don't want anything pumping out so much heat I have to run my airconditioning to stay in the room during winter.

Admittedly this is a site for hardware enthusiasts, and the mentality is anyone who doesn't tweak for optimal performance is barely worth thinking about. The reality is the the life cycle of a computer is no longer 3 years, but more realistically 5. Also people need their computer to run basic functions (email, web surfing, storage of photos, web processing, etc) with games as a secondary luxury especially with gas prices going up and the same with food.

When it takes 5-6 hours to install your OS (that is what it took me to install xp sp2 on my system), download patches and optional software (adobe acrobat reader) and dozens of reboots people don't want to build their own. Look at the most basic computers from HP and dell. That is where the current buyers of games probably have or less. In fact look what the mid level computer was 3 years ago and you will probably see where the market needs to aim. They also need to aim for quality.

When your game has so many problems it doesn't run properly people won't touch it again. Taking 7 months to fix problems (assuming you ever do) is just not feasible. Nor is it feasible to have 200 meg patches. Not everyone has a fast internet connection so 200 meg patch might literally take 2 days on a modem. No wonder people are so frustrated with computers.
 


Let's start with what I agree on: I agree that it would help a lot if the industry would be very transparant in what you are paying exactly for what you are purchasing. In case of movies: I pay for the rights to see the movie (license to view once, or to view indefinitely or for a certain period in time), I pay for a particular format that the movie is provided on (normal DVD format with particular audio streams, blueray, next generation super duper format), and the media that the movie is distributed on (the media itself (disc), box with art). By not being very specific what it is you are buying, you can get into a legal dispute on what is intended use and misuse.

Same kind of reasoning for games.

By being very specific what it is you get for a particular amount of money, you will also allow consumers to make informed choices on what they want to get for their money.

What I disagree with: All my DVD's still work and I have been buying them since the format was launched. The discs that are degrading within 5 years are the DVD+/-R's and that is because of the way those are produced. The discs you buy are printed, not burned. Just as a tip: if you want to store data/movies for a longer period than a few years, be sure to use the DVD+/-RW format because those are more stable than +/-R (with +RW being the most stable).


 


I agree with Llama, companies are producing the same mindless dribble because there is an audience for it. Noone is forcing you or anyone else to buy (and play) any of it. The fact that you did not buy an expansion pack to the Sims doesn't say anything about the commercial validity of making and selling those expansion packs. In fact the commercial success proves that it was the right business opportunity. Apparently the average public grows tired of the same thing in a lot slower pace than yourself, and you will have to live with it. No reason to complain about it even. Just don't buy/watch/play it.
 


My point was why the industry is losing audience and money. There is always a group of people who watch, play or buy things out of habit or boredom rather than enjoyment. They aren't the target audience you are seeking.
 
Actually, they are EXACTLY the target audience you are seeking.

As a business, I want a cash cow. Low risk, high reward and little investment. i.e. Sims expansion packs.

Why waste years on a cutting edge game with a new engine that people might not like when you can spend a couple of weeks designing some minor add-on features and a load of pointless objects. Better still - include material from the game's "community" - get someone else to do the work!

To be honest, though, I'm not that fussed. I don't spend my entire life in front of the computer so a decent game will last me a few months. A handful of good games a year more than fill the few hours a week I spend gaming.

It also helps that I'm prepared to wait a couple fo weeks to read reviews before going and splashing out on a game. Perhaps if less people queued up, sheep-like, to buy the latest overhyped dross on release day then publishers would spend more on development and less on marketing. But let's face it - that ain't gonna happen.
 
The problem with using DRM to increase the difficulty of pirating is that it doesn't do so by much and also increases the difficulty of using the game legitimately.

Where the original equation would look like this.

Risk + Difficulty vs Reward

It has now become this

Risk + Difficulty vs Reward + Annoyance

The more annoying the DRM is to deal with for a legitimate purchaser, the more likely they will pirate it. So far there has not been a good method of creating stout DRM that increases the difficulty notably without increasing the annoyance of dealing with it's presence more. As a result DRM is driving people to pirate instead of reducing piracy. This phenomenon can be clearly seen with PC gaming trends.

If we plan to stop piracy, then first we need to stop these idiotic and short sighted DRM initiatives and then develop a new strategy to encourage sales. DRM doesn't work. I'd say that point has been proven.
 
I consider myself a gamer and have never heard of the company Titan Quest, or any of the games they made except warhammer, but I never played it. I play COD4, COD2, AA, Splinter Cell, CnC games, GTA (can't wait for GTA4 on PC), Etc.

I mainly play FPS hence why I never heard of them, they do not make any games that interest me.

To say that because someone has not heard of a company they are not a gamer is complete ignorance.

Obviously the current DRM and anti copying measure have failed miserably. Games are still being cracked and showing up on the torrent sites. Even Microsoft's vaunted security measures were cracked within a week. The only way to make it more difficult to prevent the pirating is to remove the torrents. The swedes have tried to remove the pirate bay and have yet to succeed.
 


It is going to get worse before things will become better again. If somebody figures out how to solve the dilemma technically (forcing people to pay up before they can enjoy the product, which would restore regular demand and supply dynamics) that would help significantly. Not only in increasing revenues for the industry but also the voice of the customer will be heard again as people will refuse to shelf out a lot of money for things they consider fair use of something they already paid for.

As an example: I will never buy digital content that is limited to a few uses (and then disappears) for a price similar to content that is persistent. I will never buy digital music or video that is limited to a particular device that I own.
 


dude, thats just the opinion of a few noob journalists here at toms games. PC gaming is the fastest growing gaming segment, and brings in the most money. A few publishers are struggling, mostly EA. Yes, they will turn a lot of dev time over to consoles for a few years, but thats because consoles are decent right now. In 2 years they will suck again, and they can't update them that often so people will have to make do. Meanwhile, pc gaming will continue to advance and rock.

Personally, I love how the crap publishers are moving on to consoles, leaving more original developers on the PC. I mean, how many games do you want built on the unreal engine lol? After a while, they all feel the same.
 
also Titan Quest sold well enough. If they are going out of business its the management that !@#! it. Not piracy.

The game is a total hack from diablo, zero originality. But hey, it was pretty fun I have it and it lasted a good 2-3 weeks in my dvd drive. So while I'm happy to laugh at the demise of EA pc games, I will miss iron lore.

A pirate does not equal a sale. Simple simple thing to figure out guys.

Further, the more people playing your game, the more people will buy your game. Also interesting eh?

Proof: Sins of the Solar Empire.

Thank you.
 


Odg, I should have known you had already made it over to this thread. And I'm glad to see you're here, too. 😉

PC gaming is the fastest growing gaming segment? Really? Show me what numbers you're talking about.

PC gaming brings in the most money? How, exactly? Please explain.

Crap publishers are moving to the consoles? What, like Epic, Valve, BioWare, Activision? Come on, Odg.

Please don't misunderstand what I'm trying to do here. I'm not trying to do a Chicken Little and say the PC gaming sky is falling. I thinking the market is slumping, but not dying. However, part of the reason it's slumping is because a significant number of PC gamers are not paying for the majority of the games they acquire. And they never will.So that shrinks the potential audience for a lot of PC games. In an industry where games are becoming more and more expensive to make, there's less and less of an economic incentive for making games on the PC because of piracy. I espouse this view because many developer, publishers and others in the game industry I've spoken with believe it. We can argue that they're just trying to blame piracy for crappy games, but come on -- is Call of Duty 4 a crappy game? Then why are there so many torrents for that game? Why is Infinity Ward so concerned about the number of crack PC versions currently playing online multiplayer? Now turn it around and take a console title. Do a search for Mass Effect torrents and one of the first things that comes up is a torrent on Pirate Bay -- FOR THE DAMN SOUNDTRACK.

And thanks, Odg, for calling me a noob journalist. It's nice to know the hard work is appreciated.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom