Piracy Megathread: Do you object to piracy, and if so, why?

[doomsdaydave11]

I fricken hate piracy. It pisses me off that people who have already spent $$$$ on a computer won't pay $30-$50 on a game. People complain that PC gaming is dying when it's their own fault. This is why a lot of game developers are moving to PS3 and X360 because it's way harder to pirate on there.

I have never pirated games or softwares.

FU pirates.

 

[Hellboy]

I'm looking to actually do some work in terms of surveying individuals on piracy with some in-depth questions, but for compiling large amounts of data, it's always good to have some pre-determined answers for any of your survey questions. My intentions for doing so are purely my own curiosity, but once I eventually put a survey together, I intend to share it with you folks (the survey itself, and the compiled results). Basically, think of this as a pre-survey survey so I can have a greater understanding of what sorts of questions I should ask, how I should format them, etc.

So, with that in mind, let me ask you guys some questions. I'll just number them, and in your responses if you number them as well that would be helpful. If you could be as detailed as possible, and try to break down your answers into a few points, that would also be helpful.

1. Do you object to piracy? If so, why? Try to determine if your objections are morally based, financially/legally, etc. This is the core question I want to really focus on, so try to think of as many reasons as possible, situational objections, etc.

2. Have you pirated games in the past? If so, how often? How long ago? Did you ever purchase the games?

3. If you said yes to 1, do you consider piracy to be better, the same, or worse than stealing a game from the vendor? Also please focus on details and break down your argument into points as much as possible.

4. If you said no to 1, would you defend piracy? If so, what is your argument in support of piracy? Do you feel that your argument would apply for only a limited number of situations, or is it all encompassing?

I'll be looking to setup an in-depth survey within the next couple of weeks, after which I'll compile all the data into a database and setup a site for displaying the results. As for participants, this will likely just be an online survey, although I'm going to try to get participants from various online communities to participate.

Thanks guys.

Now I would be a fool to say that I have never pirated anything because I have...

But I will say that anything I did like I went and purchased it...

I buy pc games, unfortunately there is not many new pc games to buy..

Console games prices compared to pcs are absurd, with some costing £10-20 pound more than the pc market...

I have always prefered playing pc games, them joypad controllers on consoles just dont cut it for me and in fps games theyre a joke..

Thanks to Bram Cohen and his bit torrent technology, complete games are released on all the torrent sites within or even before a few weeks / days / minutes ( please delete as appropriate ) of release....

EA and Steam are downloaders and im not even sure it EA works that well to be honest, i have had trouble with it...

infact i cant remember the last time I played a proper game on Windows do to the fact that this whole thing has just removed me from just having fun as the games are just tedious remakes of what went before but less playability

Where are our new Star wars games, GTA IV, etc etc..


The only people who justify piracy are lazy good for nothing thieves who can not be bothered to take responsibility for their actions..

If any games in your collection are copies that you play often then you are a thief.. A person responsible for the decline of pc games

Dont say ooh ahh bla bla bla and justifying the fact that u copy and that consoles are not privy to it too..
I know that but its not consoles that have that much of a problem, is it...

 

[radnor]

I have to hand it to you, Radnor. You've done an excellent job portraying software and PC game pirates as counter-culture revolutionaries, fighting the power so to speak, as opposed to cheap, immoral theives who are ripping off artists' works. And you know what? I'll bite. Explain to me why piracy is a productive "hobby" and good for the masses rather than just a lazy, selfish method for you to get free stuff, and I'm on board. Prove to me that everyone should pirate games, and you can be Tyler Durden and I'll be your loyal Space Monkey!

Thank you for your post. It was a sound reply. Im going to reply now but its going to be rather long reply. I dont want to be your Tyler Durden, but its nice to try to expose the big picture. I do not consider myself a underdog, i consider myself a hard consumer and a more-or-so toughtfull guy. English is far from my native language, and im posting this from work. So if there is any typos, i apologize in advance.

First and foremost: Defining Piracy. Piracy, legally is copying for self-profit. That is punishble by law, and for all of us condemn it . I myself hate it aswell.

Legally

The Piracy your suggesting in this thread, is the download from a P2P or copy from a friends media (CD/DVD/HDD). We are talking here about this second definition, witch by the way are agaisnt the EULA/TOS, not the law. And there are few reasons for it. First of all because we all (in this modern world, some countries still dont apply) already pay in every cd/dvd that we buy a Artists Rights Fee. And that fee isnt that small in most countries, its bigger that the value of the CD/DVD it self.
So, like in most countries, there is a law also, ussually in the constituicion, that says, you cant get 2 penalties for the same crime. 2 Diferent penalties. We already payed a Artists Rights Fee the moment i bought that Virgin DVD, within the context of piracy, i cant be penalized AGAIN, for the same subject. Thats one of the reasons why they are trying to hunt thepiratebay.org and others. Because they CANT hunt us. We already got our penalty the moment we bought our Virgin DVD/CD. Its a bit more complex that this, ill give you that, but in the end,it comes down to that.

Morally

They complain they arent selling and piracy is keeping its Art at bay. Alright lets discuss this part then. This seems to be the hot spot. Am i stealing from a Vendor/Retailer ? Is it the same ?

No it isnt. Far from it. First off, in gaming and some other software arent sold, they are returned and exchanged for new ones. Games (ill focus here, because, well, its the focus of this thread) have a really short life span, in terms of product. 4-6 months tops. I dont mean good games, i mean average. So here, from working with/for the Retailers/Vendor, your are not hurting it. Most games sold, its from people that already played it.

P2P/copying media is the Ultimate Word-to-mouth marketing. This i saw in my daily basis, live and in living color.

They complain they arent selling and their Art is being stolen. They cant produce Art if they cant sell it. Am i stealing from a software house ? Or a game developing company ?


First of all, let me say a few things. There is Bad Art. And ART is subject to opinions. So not everybody likes your Art. I think we can agree on this. While i love John Coltrane (and I imported several albums) most people would slash its wrists after listening for 10 mins. Its Art, i love it, but many dont. So big old John Coltrane is almost considered a cult artist. I found his music on P2P. I did download most his albuns. Then bought the cds that loved and second and most important, that i COULD FIND. I own in CD, 90% of my Mp3 Collection. The Other 10% i cant find on sale. Original CD. John Coltrane is just a good example among many.
You can say i can buy those MP3 online. But that isnt discussed here. What is being discussed is sales trough tradicional media. In Mp3 we have that chance, in games, most cases we dont. So lets continue, remember, Music and Games, if you definite it as digital Art are very similar.


So we are left with two problems here. With Art. First is, its availability in the normal ways (Vendor/Retailer), second is the quality of it. Good or Bad its a matter of opinion, quality games are defined for just one thing in the bottom line. If/How many people bought them.

Like my music that i buy, the games that i buy, i will play it before. There is too much hype and too much hyped reviews. Crysis and Bioshock arent selling what they want ? The reply is really easy. World of Warcraft is a Juggernaught not among MMORPGs but among games. Why ? First of all, because many gamers agree that is a good form of ART. Many bought that game and PAY a monthly fee. Thats strange is it ? Why are MMORPGs ( that are PAYED MONTHLY ) are growing, and the rest of the market is not growing with it ? Or even decreasing sales on some cases ?
You will argue that you need to link to a server and play. You can download (agaisnt the TOS) those servers and play. Its out there, just search it. So why do people continue to pay a monthly fee ?
Because the service is good, the monthly fee is low, and its a good Art form and they add content periodicly.

So if MMORPGs are growing, we are just focusing on tradicional products in this discussion, lets say single player ? Well, in the diversity in general right ? Are MMORPGs the exception to the rule ?


Lets go that way then. I remember when i was younger and being terrified with JAWS and other horror films. Now to be terrified, or to consider A MOVIE a good MOVIE, my standards are a bit higher. I download most my movies. The ones that are worth it, i ussually go for a cinema and watch it in the big screen. Like Ironman. I downloaded a screenie, whatched it, and now im itching to go with ma Mrs and see it in the Silver screen.
There are many more i see the first 10 minuts, and decide they were not worth my bandwith/disk space.
Same with games.

Crysis and Bioshock for example. Are they good games ? They are a Art form for Enthusiasts. For people with a SLI or a Crossfire to be fully apreciated. Do i fit that class? No, i dont have several GPUs or a top end one.So i wont buy. Its like asking me to buy a Blue Ray or HD DVD movie when i have a normal TV and a DVD player. Its just sily. I wont buy it. WIll i download it ? Yes, problably, play it for 10 minuts and delete it.
MMORPGs and World of Wacraft come to mind. I can fully experience WoW and most MMORPGs. My machine isnt a top end one, but its more than enough for what i do. And been having IT jobs for the 15 years. I dont upgrade when a new game comes out, i upgrade when i need. Gaming itself isnt a lifestyle, because honestly, few people can win money by playing games. Or none at all can make it a career. So dont call gaming a life style. Yet. I know the exceptions like Starcraft in Korea and others. But it isnt a mainstream lifestyle.
So Crysis and Bioshock and other enthusiast games sold pretty well. Considering they were focusing the enthusiast market !!!! Its a very SMALL market !!! Piracy didnt hurted them, because manly if I (the mainstream player) bought Crysis or Bioshock i would return it, because for me, i cant enjoy them !!!

MMORPGs are the exception to the rule, and if you for example try to inscribe to the BETA contest of WARHAMMER online (Loads of Hype, lets see if it delivers) the FIRST thing they ask you is your machine specs !!!! And why is that ? Because they will try to cater to everybody !

MMORPGs are the exception, not because of the quality of the Art, or the price of the Art, but because the bussiness models has evolved.

Bottom Lines:

Is piracy a way to get free stuff ? Yes it is. Stuff you wouldnt have bought anyway. Or returned.
The problem is the bussiness model.


Console Gaming

One thing if been reading alot in this, and other forums.

"bitch and moan, bitch and moan, X game doest come for PC !! Bitch and moan, bitch and moan Consoles dont have piracy, blame piracy !!"

To those i ask, have you ever made a search in p2p or in emule or other for console games ? its a worse problem than in the PC !!!! You chip you console and it will play pirated games. Are the console graphics better than pc Gfx ? not a chance. Ive seen games in PS3 (probably the best gfx console out there atm), and my crappy PC could outdone the graphics in the same GAME.
The problem is, while a game is made for THAT console, its done to those specs !! A PC Game developer must deal with a almost infinite combinations of GPUs, CPUs, Ram, and other specs. But there is yet to come a console that can beat the brute power of the PC, in Audio, GFX and flexibility. This is biased of course, its my opinion. All opinions are biased.

Conclusion

RobWright, here its my thoughts about piracy. I tried to shown here that PC gamers are looking to the problem with the wrong eyes. The problem isnt piracy, its bussiness models. Making a Game is a Art form. Art is subject to opinion. Opinion are biased and can be Hyped. If you buy a Hyped product, and you dont like that art form, you wont buy another hyped product without seeing if it rises up to the hype level.
I am not a counter-culture revolutionair, or i try to fight the power. Im just a informed consumer who likes to pay to Artists. But not all Artists, just the ones i like. I cant make you like John Coltrane and thus buy his CDs and you cant force me to Like Crysis and buy the game. Piracy ( the non legal defenition ) is a hobbie.

 

[llama_man]

Maybe I'm really stupid, but I fail to see why disagreeing with their business model justifies piracy. A company's business model is THEIR choice, not yours. If you don't like the product, it's price, or the conditions attached, don't use it.
For example; I don't like the conditions/limitations imposed by i-tunes, so I buy CDs instead. I don't download albums on bit torrent for free.

There is a lot of consumer buying power in the market that currently isn't being utilised because piracy is distorting the usual free-market conditions.

 

[radnor]

Maybe I'm really stupid, but I fail to see why disagreeing with their business model justifies piracy. A company's business model is THEIR choice, not yours. If you don't like the product, it's price, or the conditions attached, don't use it.
For example; I don't like the conditions/limitations imposed by i-tunes, so I buy CDs instead. I don't download albums on bit torrent for free.

There is a lot of consumer buying power in the market that currently isn't being utilised because piracy is distorting the usual free-market conditions.

Nope, you aint stupid, but you saw it the other way around. Their bussiness model generates piracy. another thing, the market is hardly free, in a sense of free enterprise and free-competition. And much less gaming market.
Downloading albums will make them their market come to MY interest. If i never heard it, i will never defenantly gonna BUY it.We are discussing the creation of games (and music, why not, its a digital product more and more) and ussually the creators and the distribuitors ( ussually the latter who impose the conditions, and in consequence, **** the games up, Hellgate London is the perfect example, a great base but a **** game) ignore the marketing power of P2P.

You can still find NFS5 Porsche challenge in P2P networks. It was a great game. You can still find Starcraft, and thats a really old game. They were both excelent games. Some still think they still are.

Once again, MMORPGs are getting stronger by the day, and more expensive, just because of one thing. Their bussiness model is better.

You buy the CDs right ? Hope you dont rip it to MP3, because depending on the country your in, that might be ilegal. And i dont mean borderline ilegal. Do you think its valid to you to pay a fine for a product you wanna use and you paid for ?

To me sorry it doesnt make sense. If to you it makes, more power to you, less money also, and we all are free to have our opinions.

 

[clay12340]

Radnor,
I think you are inferring too much from the success of MMORPGs here. Social networking is in a huge boom at the moment. Social networking is also an enormous component of MMORPGs. If you play WoW for 6 months and then get bored you will likely not cancel your account and will still continue to log in due to the human relationships you made in the game world. I still regularly play on a MUD. It's certainly not the most compelling gameplay available, but I've been playing with the same people for 10 years now. It makes it very hard just to cut the cord.

The business model has little to do with this success in my opinion. Take a game that isn't largely about social networking and the model simply fails. No one will continue to pay to see the same content over and over again, unless they've got other people to enjoy the misery with. The reward of an MMORPG is social acceptance and the feeling of being 'part of the club'. You simply don't have that in a game like The Witcher.

I also think your point about Bioshock's hardware requirements makes no sense. You can build a computer that will easily play Bioshock at excellent settings for less than it would cost you to purchase a PS3. My machine is going on 5 years old(Minus a newer AGP video card) and it played through Bioshock at 1680x1050 quite well.

MMORPGs are protected from piracy in the same way that consoles are. Yes you can pirate the games, but the level of difficulty is much higher. You can pirate console games, but it often requires modification of the hardware. You can pirate MMORPGs, but you need to know where a pirated server is or be able to run it and you need to know how to modify your copy of the game to log into it. It isn't a matter of downloading a torrent and following 4 or 5 steps in a .txt file.

I can understand your points about not having something available from retail outlets in your area, but that doesn't account for the huge amounts of piracy in the US. You can order just about any game under the sun and have it shipped right to your door here. No shoes, no shirt, no problem.

The argument of ripping CDs to another format is completely irrelevant to this discussion. That's like saying you ripped a legally owned copy of Bioshock from a DVD to CDs, so that you could play it on a machine with no DVD drive. The pirating being discussed is obtaining an illegal copy without owning a legal copy in the first place.

 

[radnor]

Radnor,
I think you are inferring too much from the success of MMORPGs here. Social networking is in a huge boom at the moment. Social networking is also an enormous component of MMORPGs. If you play WoW for 6 months and then get bored you will likely not cancel your account and will still continue to log in due to the human relationships you made in the game world. I still regularly play on a MUD. It's certainly not the most compelling gameplay available, but I've been playing with the same people for 10 years now. It makes it very hard just to cut the cord.

The business model has little to do with this success in my opinion. Take a game that isn't largely about social networking and the model simply fails. No one will continue to pay to see the same content over and over again, unless they've got other people to enjoy the misery with. The reward of an MMORPG is social acceptance and the feeling of being 'part of the club'. You simply don't have that in a game like The Witcher.

Thank you for a articulate reply first of all. I did focused MMMORPGs becuase they offered "more" than the normal games. Counter-Strike isnt the sucess it is, because of single player. But because of multi-player. That was basicly the point i wanted to make. And most of them are succesfull because they try to cater to all specs, or all possible specs. That was the point i wanted to make with WoW although its grafics are now outdated, its still very pleaseant to the eyes played at Max settings.

Startcraft its still played in the BattleNet. and in multiplayer. The "campaign" is done to death. Thats another point i wanted to make. I have a SC license, A Bnet Account and my brothers still have them aswell. Thats 3 licenses, just because the game is multiplayer.

A good FPS is nice, but honestly i as a gamer and many of us, want MORE. GFX is always a excelent way to sell, but to keep selling the game must have something more.

I also think your point about Bioshock's hardware requirements makes no sense. You can build a computer that will easily play Bioshock at excellent settings for less than it would cost you to purchase a PS3. My machine is going on 5 years old(Minus a newer AGP video card) and it played through Bioshock at 1680x1050 quite well.

The Point i wanted to make with Bioshock was that he didnt supported nothing below Shader 2.0.
Prices there in the US are completely diferent from here in the EU. We dont upgrade hardware that fast. And Bioshock left many here to dry just for that Point. There are better examples and worse examples. I found that example because its a known one.

MMORPGs are protected from piracy in the same way that consoles are. Yes you can pirate the games, but the level of difficulty is much higher. You can pirate console games, but it often requires modification of the hardware. You can pirate MMORPGs, but you need to know where a pirated server is or be able to run it and you need to know how to modify your copy of the game to log into it. It isn't a matter of downloading a torrent and following 4 or 5 steps in a .txt file.

Its a bit more complicated, but not more than 10 steps in a txt file. Of course that defeats the purpose of a RPG, unless you like to roleplay Robinson Crusoe.

I can understand your points about not having something available from retail outlets in your area, but that doesn't account for the huge amounts of piracy in the US. You can order just about any game under the sun and have it shipped right to your door here. No shoes, no shirt, no problem.

Ill give you that here. Its hard to find a specific game/music. Maybe there (US) you have more diversity. But here it is a problem. If you want music, you need to import it, games, unless its fresh, its hard to get.

The argument of ripping CDs to another format is completely irrelevant to this discussion. That's like saying you ripped a legally owned copy of Bioshock from a DVD to CDs, so that you could play it on a machine with no DVD drive. The pirating being discussed is obtaining an illegal copy without owning a legal copy in the first place.

The MP3 argument was just to make a point.

Or

About this case i think you miss interpreted what i wrote about piracy and the Artists Fee. Or i just wrote it badly and its impossible to understand.

Or

It comes from the legal/moral definition of piracy. Because there are 2. The legal and moral are diferent. From your interpretation i think it is this reply. I consider testing it first. And tried to justify it widely by the amount of Hype, misinformation, bad marketing around. We all have made bad buys in our life, thats for sure, but in gaming, there is just too much hype and desinformation. i think you can agree with me on this point.

So i test before i pay. Here is where our opinions diverge the most. But in my posts i already justified alot fo problems. Well some you agree, some you wont. Its all good, its forum, where people discuss diferent opinions. Thank you for posting clay12340.

 

[robwright]

RobWright, here its my thoughts about piracy. I tried to shown here that PC gamers are looking to the problem with the wrong eyes. The problem isnt piracy, its bussiness models. Making a Game is a Art form. Art is subject to opinion. Opinion are biased and can be Hyped. If you buy a Hyped product, and you dont like that art form, you wont buy another hyped product without seeing if it rises up to the hype level.
I am not a counter-culture revolutionair, or i try to fight the power. Im just a informed consumer who likes to pay to Artists. But not all Artists, just the ones i like. I cant make you like John Coltrane and thus buy his CDs and you cant force me to Like Crysis and buy the game. Piracy ( the non legal defenition ) is a hobbie.

A detailed and eloquent response, Radnor. But here's where you and I differ: if I don't like John Coltrane, I don't pirate his songs. If I'm not sure I like Coltrane, I don't pirate his songs. I may listen to snippets or samples on iTunes, but I won't priate entire songs or albums. I buy a John Coltrane album and decide I don't like it, I don't believe that gives me the right to pirate other Coltrane content because I'm unsure if it will be worthy buying or not. I simply don't buy it. If I come across some Coltrane tunes that I kinda/sorta like, I don't pirate them. Either they're worth buying or not, plain and simple. I don't mean to be insulting, so please don't take this the wrong way -- you're not an informed consumer. You're an extremely picky gamer who is cautious with his money, and as a means to an end, you engage in piracy. But that's not being an informed consumer. And piracy, wether you're selling the copied goods or not, isn't a hobby. And it's a crime here in the States. And it hurts the artists. Yes, even the good artists who make great games.

In closing, you made an interesting argument, but it's not nearly enough to pursuade me that I should engage in piracy as well. I can be an informed consumer and not try to have my cake and eat it too , i.e. download a title I'm not sure of, play the entire camapign and then spend a few dasy on multiplayer before deciding that it "sucks" and isn't worth your money -- even though it was obviously worth 20 hours of your time. And if gaming is simply too expensive and too rife with mediocre titles, I suggest that you find a better, cheaper "hobby."

 

[Oh Snap]

So as consumers, would you argue that we should really be all or nothing in terms of spending? Either completely support something by purchasing it and throwing caution to the wind, or completely avoid even potentially purchasing something if you're unsure about it? It seems like in that particular situation, at least to me, if you went ahead and downloaded all the games you were sure you wouldn't otherwise buy for various reasons (not trusting the company, online reviews, etc.), and purchased at least one of them as a result of said downloading, you'd have actually benefitted that company. Maybe not as much as the guy who throws around money willy nilly, but surely that would have a more positive financial impact than being a penny pincher and never buying anything from companies that aren't Blizzard? Maybe not, I'm just having difficulty understanding objecting to that particular situation, ignoring the generalizations about piracy.

even though it was obviously worth 20 hours of your time. And if gaming is simply too expensive and too rife with mediocre titles, I suggest that you find a better, cheaper "hobby."

Sometimes things are worth time spent without additional money spent. I have some free time on the weekends, and I might just browse Tom's Hardware forums for 3 hours in the morning, but I certainly wouldn't want to pay $10 to do so. Do I think 3 hours of my time is worth more than $10? Yeah, definitely, but I wouldn't want to spend my time AND throw in an extra $10 😛 Just a thought.

even though it was obviously worth 20 hours of your time. And if gaming is simply too expensive and too rife with mediocre titles, I suggest that you find a better, cheaper "hobby."

Maybe it's just me, but I almost get a sense that some of you have such a disdain for piracy that you'd prefer to see it gone even at the cost of game companies. I mean, you can argue that a lot of pirates ought to just buy the games instead since that would definitely benefit the industry, but if every single person who's pirated games simply said "I'm done with games forever," that would not only hurt the industry as bad, but wouldn't it be worse? I mean if someone who "samples" games and occasionally purchases the ones they feel are worthwhile, as objectionable as that may be to you, simply decided to "find a better, cheaper 'hobby'," wouldn't that be worse for the industry? Doesn't seem like sound advice to me.

In essence, I'm asking if it would be better to recommend that pirates buy every game, as opposed to recommending that they stop playing games entirely. If they stop playing games, they still won't support the industry and you'll just get the satisfaction of knowing they don't enjoy free games. If you object to piracy because it results in lost potential profits for the industry, it seems like the last thing you'd want to do is recommend that they continue to not support the industry. Know what I mean?

 

[clay12340]

Sometimes things are worth time spent without additional money spent. I have some free time on the weekends, and I might just browse Tom's Hardware forums for 3 hours in the morning, but I certainly wouldn't want to pay $10 to do so. Do I think 3 hours of my time is worth more than $10? Yeah, definitely, but I wouldn't want to spend my time AND throw in an extra $10 😛 Just a thought.

The difference here is that Tom's Hardware isn't asking you to pay $10 in order to view their works. Your time is valuable to Tom's Hardware as it is a means to generate ad revenue etc. However, your time is worthless to Crytek. They could care less how much time you spend playing their game as long as they were paid for it initially.

 

[Oh Snap]

Sometimes things are worth time spent without additional money spent. I have some free time on the weekends, and I might just browse Tom's Hardware forums for 3 hours in the morning, but I certainly wouldn't want to pay $10 to do so. Do I think 3 hours of my time is worth more than $10? Yeah, definitely, but I wouldn't want to spend my time AND throw in an extra $10 😛 Just a thought.

The difference here is that Tom's Hardware isn't asking you to pay $10 in order to view their works. Your time is valuable to Tom's Hardware as it is a means to generate ad revenue etc. However, your time is worthless to Crytek. They could care less how much time you spend playing their game as long as they were paid for it initially.

Yeah, fair enough. I think Rob was really trying to emphasize the fact that someone says "this game isn't worth $50!" and yet plays it for 20 hours. Obviously that same person probably wouldn't say that they felt 20 hours of their time was worth less than $50, but they still wouldn't want to pay the EXTRA $50 on top of the 20 hours they just spent playing it. Honestly, though, who spends 20 hours playing a **** game? I couldn't even stand Age of Conan for more than 45 minutes. Assassin's Creed? About half an hour and I just hated it. Quake Wars? 10 minutes and I knew I never wanted to play it again.

 

[purplerat]

So as consumers, would you argue that we should really be all or nothing in terms of spending? Either completely support something by purchasing it and throwing caution to the wind, or completely avoid even potentially purchasing something if you're unsure about it?

Oh Snap,
Reading that you make it sound like without piracy there is no possible way for video game consumers to evaluate a purchase before hand. That we must either pirate games or stumble around blindly purchasing games like scratch off lottery tickets. However just the fact that you can download a pirated game would seem to suggest that you also have many other resources at your disposal in determining whether a game is worth purchasing or not. Demos and/or time limited trials are available for many games. Reviews from both users and critics are plentiful. Screenshots, videos, and detailed descriptions/information are also very easy to find for any game. Also I think it's fairly safe to assume that if you are able to pirate games you must be fairly computer/tech savvy, which would suggest that you should also be able to make a fairly well informed decision about what games to buy only using the legal tools I mentioned above. The truth is not that you are at some great risk by only relying on demos, reviews, forums, etc. but that you just find it much cheaper and easier to pirate. One of the lamest examples I've recently heard was on the recent Second Take video on Crysis where Ben hinted that he could understand why some people would pirate the game just to see if/how it would run on their systems. Maybe Rob can chime in on how this thinking made sense enough to make it into the video when anybody who even remotely followed the Crysis release would know that a pretty comprehensive demo with built in benchmarking was released exactly for that purpose weeks before the full game was released. So to believe these pirates were just testing their systems you would also have to believe that they both waited several weeks longer for the full version and also went through the hassle of downloading through torrents rather than just grabbing the much easier to get demo weeks earlier.

 

[Oh Snap]

So as consumers, would you argue that we should really be all or nothing in terms of spending? Either completely support something by purchasing it and throwing caution to the wind, or completely avoid even potentially purchasing something if you're unsure about it?

Oh Snap,
Reading that you make it sound like without piracy there is no possible way for video game consumers to evaluate a purchase before hand. That we must either pirate games or stumble around blindly purchasing games like scratch off lottery tickets. However just the fact that you can download a pirated game would seem to suggest that you also have many other resources at your disposal in determining whether a game is worth purchasing or not.

I'm not saying that, but the only way to truly evaluate anything is to use it. Those three examples I gave in my previous post? Assassin's Creed, Age of Conan, and Quake Wars. I only pirated one of them (AC, which is no longer on my HDD due to its crappiness). Age of Conan (beta), regardless of all the hype, was probably one of the worst MMO's I've played. Quake Wars (demo off FP) was nothing new, and even though there are a lot of great reviews for it out there, I thought it was awful.

Demos and/or time limited trials are available for many games.

This is true, and when they're easily obtainable I'll play them. However, not all games have demos or time trials. Age of Conan didn't even technically have a trial, just an open beta that was fairly limited in terms of who could play it. Whether or not they feel that was a fair representation of their game, I took that over any exaggerated reviews that are likely to come out in favor of the game. This is the only truly viable option for reviewing a game, in my opinion, and when a demo/trial doesn't exist for a game, I personally don't see anything wrong with pirating it. Just my opinion.

Reviews from both users and critics are plentiful. Screenshots, videos, and detailed descriptions/information are also very easy to find for any game. Also I think it's fairly safe to assume that if you are able to pirate games you must be fairly computer/tech savvy, which would suggest that you should also be able to make a fairly well informed decision about what games to buy only using the legal tools I mentioned above. The truth is not that you are at some great risk by only relying on demos, reviews, forums, etc. but that you just find it much cheaper and easier to pirate.

The simple truth is that I don't trust anyone else's opinion, because our opinions are our own. Compilations of screenshots, gameplay videos, etc. are all great, but those are still, for the most part, press released, or emphasize the selling points of games. To say that anyone should simply trust someone else's opinion without trying it out themselves seems silly. I may read reviews about a car online for a while before considering it, but in the end I'm still going to want to drive it myself. Maybe not a fair comparison in terms of money spent, but a purchase is a purchase and I wouldn't want to feel buyer's remorse in either situation.

One of the lamest examples I've recently heard was on the recent Second Take video on Crysis where Ben hinted that he could understand why some people would pirate the game just to see if/how it would run on their systems. Maybe Rob can chime in on how this thinking made sense enough to make it into the video when anybody who even remotely followed the Crysis release would know that a pretty comprehensive demo with built in benchmarking was released exactly for that purpose weeks before the full game was released. So to believe these pirates were just testing their systems you would also have to believe that they both waited several weeks longer for the full version and also went through the hassle of downloading through torrents rather than just grabbing the much easier to get demo weeks earlier.

That may be the case, but I didn't pirate Crysis, and this is just another generalization. Plus, this doesn't really relate to my question, it's just another, "Hey look at all these people who pirated the game instead of playing the demo." Plus, I feel you didn't really fairly represent my entire question, as I posed a very specific situation within it. You're saying there are all these options available for pirates to put their trust in someone else before buying something rather than trying it themselves. I'm not concerned with what they SHOULD do, because I even stated that it would be a fair point to say "You should just buy the games instead of pirate them" if you're truly concerned about the industry. I was stating that it doesn't seem like a wise thing to recommend that every pirate stops playing games entirely, even though, as I stated, there are people who use piracy as the last "trusted" means of evaluating games before purchasing them. To say "well just read reviews instead" seems to overlook the fact that there are people who feel taken advantage of by the industry but still wish to support the authentic companies who want to continue making great games.

 

[purplerat]

Oh Snap,
The more I hear your opinion on this matter the more I get a sense that you feel entitled to being able to play all the great games with zero risk of ever buying one that isn't exactly what you wanted. You want all the reward without any of the risk. While that may sound nice it's actually a pretty destructive ideal when applied to the market as a whole. While you look at it simply from the view point that many games may fail to meet your expectations for the amount you paid you are ignoring all the games that far exceed expectations and are ultimately worth more than you paid. Based on your system wouldn't it only be fair to say that if we don't have to pay for games we don't think are worth it (even after playing them) that we have either pay more for games that exceed their value or only get games that meet they're priced value?

 

[Oh Snap]

Oh Snap,
The more I hear your opinion on this matter the more I get a sense that you feel entitled to being able to play all the great games with zero risk of ever buying one that isn't exactly what you wanted. You want all the reward without any of the risk. While that may sound nice it's actually a pretty destructive ideal when applied to the market as a whole. While you look at it simply from the view point that many games may fail to meet your expectations for the amount you paid you are ignoring all the games that far exceed expectations and are ultimately worth more than you paid. Based on your system wouldn't it only be fair to say that if we don't have to pay for games we don't think are worth it (even after playing them) that we have either pay more for games that exceed their value?

Again, you're not really addressing my question. You're getting into your assumptions of my character rather than really dealing with what I was asking.

Would it not be just as destructive for the industry, if not more so, for every person who pirates games to simply stop playing games entirely? I mention my own situation as an example of someone who may not be supporting the industry as well as someone who buys every game they see, but to some extent, even as a pirate, still supports companies that make solid games. RobWright was saying that if you're going to pirate games, just don't play them at all. I pirate games, and buy the ones I like. If I stopped playing games entirely, well, then I'd no longer be buying any games. Is this a good recommendation to make for pirates, when your main argument against piracy is that it hurts the industry?

That's all I'm saying.

 

[radnor]

@RobWright

Thank you for the reply. First of all, well, we disagree. No problem in that. We both contribute to the industry in our own way. Price vary alot between the US and the EU. That might be one of the reasons we disagree also. Availability varies alot also. Software and Hardware. Thats another great reason.
I have more expensive hobbies. My logo, and my signature will tell you that. I wasnt trying to "recruit" you, but aiming more to the self righteous posts with black and white opinions. You are against piracy, you dont defend any form of it. I consider your opinion valuable because you did articule with logic and fairly good sense.

I saw too much copy-paste propaganda replies. That pissed me off, not the diferent opinions. Thank you for the "discussion" and i hope to meet your more times on this board.

To Oh Snap. Keep on rocking !!

 

[BigMac]

Would it not be just as destructive for the industry, if not more so, for every person who pirates games to simply stop playing games entirely? I mention my own situation as an example of someone who may not be supporting the industry as well as someone who buys every game they see, but to some extent, even as a pirate, still supports companies that make solid games. RobWright was saying that if you're going to pirate games, just don't play them at all. I pirate games, and buy the ones I like. If I stopped playing games entirely, well, then I'd no longer be buying any games. Is this a good recommendation to make for pirates, when your main argument against piracy is that it hurts the industry?

To start with, I do not believe your claim that you would not buy any games if you could not get your hands (for whatever reason) on pirated copies.

But even when I would believe your claim, then I will argue that it will be the best thing to do regardless, also for the industry but even more so for legit customers. Let's assume we are talking big numbers here and that it's not just you that behaves as you have described but that it holds for the majority of illegal copyholders out there. The fact that (all of) you would leave the marketplace would make the regular market principles do its work again (demand and supply). It would take out a chunk of money on the short term, so there would be (even) fewer PC game titles for sale but the quality of the games that will hit the shelves will definitely improve and the money will return, in the form of new people growing up with the normal way of being an informed consumer. The best thing would be: people that have a healthy instinct with regard to playing by the rules (average Joe Gamer), are no longer tempted to become pirates themselves when they know of people that got the same stuf for free that they paid serious money for.

 

[Oh Snap]

To start with, I do not believe your claim that you would not buy any games if you could not get your hands (for whatever reason) on pirated copies.

That's irrelevant, as RobWright was suggesting that pirates simply don't play games, rather than pirate them.

quality of the games that will hit the shelves will definitely improve and the money will return

Why would quality improve?

 

[purplerat]

Again, you're not really addressing my question. You're getting into your assumptions of my character rather than really dealing with what I was asking.

I'm not really sure what question you want me to answer. You've posed quite a few in this thread and I've tried to give my input. But I have another (actually two more) questions for you in regards to how you feel you should always be able to determine whether or not to buy the games you pirate.

1. What type of metric(s) do you use it evaluating a game for purchase?

2. Why do you think it's up to you to determine the value of a game?

Shouldn't it be either you buy it and play it or you don't. If you willingly chose to you experience any part of the game then shouldn't the people responsible for that experience be compensated. Your not paying for a game because you like it, you're paying because you took advantage of the work that these people put out there. It's not a perfect system (capitalism) and many bad games will be sold. But it's a lot better than the system you advocate. You may be able to personally justify your own actions but do you really believe a system where all games are free and the consumer needs only to support those they like after playing them would work?

 

[radnor]

1. What type of metric(s) do you use it evaluating a game for purchase?

A silly reply will follow, for a variable that mesurable in FUN&WIN/hour. You will probably find its significance in copy pasta.

- I ussually install it about an hour before dinner time. if i in 10 minutes or 20 get up and go cook (thing that i do it very well) the game sucks.
- If not, it may not suck. If my Ms checks and see im playing, she will go cook. When its ready she will call me.
- If i stay playing its a good candidate to be bought. If i get up and go eat, well...its not a good game.

That is how i measure the quality of a game. If 1 hour after the instalation im getting up to eat, its a sucky game.
But you wanna know whats funny, i cook most days. The Ms fear a bit when i get a good game. But that happens rarely. This is very true, believe it or not.

2. Why do you think it's up to you to determine the value of a game?

Because I WILL PAY FOR IT. And you need to take economy 101. If your a American, you know why there is a sub prime crysis ? Because people STOPPED paying for OVERPRICED houses. The ones that payed got f*cked. Demand will determine price and availability. I will stop for here, because this is a techie forum.

 

[purplerat]

Because I WILL PAY FOR IT. And you need to take economy 101. If your a American, you know why there is a sub prime crysis ? Because people STOPPED paying for OVERPRICED houses. The ones that payed got f*cked. Demand will determine price and availability. I will stop for here, because this is a techie forum.

The housing crisis in the US is a perfect example of how this type of "try then buy" system is doomed to fail. People "bought" houses with no real intent on paying for them. They had no intent of actually investing money into their homes. Either they were going to flip it for a quick profit or would us the home while they had an ultra low payment and plan to sell once they couldn't afford it any longer. When this system failed not only did the people trying to take advantage of it suffer everybody else also did. You think you can play a game for an hour then decide it's not worth you money. But that doesn't work just like living in a house for a year then deciding you don't want it doesn't work. Sure you may be able to personally get away with it, but for the market as a whole it is doomed for failure.

 

[purplerat]

And you need to take economy 101

Nice catch line, but do you really even know what ECO101 is? I'm not an economist but have taken basic economics courses. The focal point of any basic course in economics would be Supply and Demand. The game makers supply the games and the game players buy them. Things like the number of games produced, price, quality, availability etc are detemined by the market. What people like you and Oh Snap advocate is to work outside the market for your own personal gain. Just wanting to try a game is a demand. What you are doing is to create a false demand that does not meet the supply (playing games but not actually buying them). This breaks the market which like I said before is what's supposed to determine things like the volume of games, price and quality. Game producers see a demand but at the same time are skeptical as to whether even a good game will actually sell. They're not going to abandon the market as if there was no demand because there is still money to be made. So what do you get? A lot of low quality games at a much higher price.

 

[radnor]

Like many other topics, they are subject to interpretation.

As far as i see, there are several other ones.

Depending on the genre, there is a demand. For example, plataform games have vanish from the PC plataform because the demand stopped. They were basicly substituted by FPS. PC gaming at the time saw that the plataform formula was ending.

Funny thing is, besides everybody else and their mother, gaming industries are taking its time to come with new concepts.
I mean, they are taking a long time giving new game concepts. Music ( still in stereo ffs ) has taked a even harder toll because they are only adapting now. Video/Cinemas is reiventing themselfs the more they can, with many flunked experiences in they so they can stay atop. Many TVs are already streaming freely over the web and have video-on-demand products so they wont lose MORE costumers. In all this entertainment markets, they were forced to reivent themselfs so they can cope with DEMAND. FYI a crysis in a market only exists when the sellers (supply) start to disapear. EA, Activision, Blizzard and many others dont seem much to me to be poor, struggling companies. So, no crysis what so ever here.

So, where was i again ? O yeah. Demand.

What before, was a rich, diverse market ( in the type of diferent products ), now it is a franchised, categorized market. Well, ive played many games that i felt it was more of the same. Crysis seems more of them same if you skip the Graphics part. And that part i wont enjoy fully. So far nobody does.

I liked the FIFA series before, im a european, i like football ( soccer for ya ). Nowadays, i dont even want to touch it. I bought PES 2008 though. So why arent more football games ? With diferent aproaches ? Why not ?

I still play Speedball 2 on DOSbox (its abandoneware now, so no piracy, you purist), and i would love to see a remake of it !!

Why is there only MORE of the SAME ? Because small companies cant compete with the big boys ? Lets wait, for example, for Darkfall online (Adventurine). And there are others there im quite sure of it.
Do they wanna sell ANOTHER FPS ? Sure !! you just need to compete with a **** of them around. Dont blame piracy !! Blame yourself (in this case the companies) for another product with diferent ducktape around it !!!
The Wii console isnt sucessfull because of the unholy graphics. Its sucessfull because of the diferent approach.

Demand wont buy another FPS while its have loads of (Fun+WIN)/Hour on ANOTHER FPS online that is already payed.
Demand wont buy another RTS while its have loads of (Fun+WIN)/Hour on ANOTHER RTS online that is already payed.

Oh wait.....are there more genres...yes they are...but supply isnt offering. Of course not. It is cheap and fast to launch new titles with the same game engines OVER and OVER again. So you say, if we dont buy they wont have money to create better games ? I gave a straight reply a bit above in this post about companies profit. Just google it. So the production cycle is :

Hype, sell, complain piracy because the game wasnt better.
Hype, sell, complain piracy because the game wasnt better.
Hype, sell, complain piracy because the game wasnt better.
Hype, sell, complain piracy because the game wasnt better.
Hype, sell, complain piracy because the game wasnt better.
Hype, sell, complain piracy because the game wasnt better.
Hype, sell, complain piracy because the game wasnt better.
Hype, sell, complain piracy because the game wasnt better.


And you know why ? Because supply is milking you with the same game that has diferent ducktape. Wow for example entered that cycle. But Wow is a NEW product with a completely diferent bussiness/gaming model to what the normal gamers is used to. Wow to a gamer now is like Macdonalds Fast food to a 6 years old. Your brain just cant defend yourself from so much (Fun+WIN)/Hour. They play for some years (1 or 2) and then quit. Because they realize the production cycle.
Or are just burnout of some much fast food. Meantime, they payed a monthly subscription fee for 2 years.

You on the other hand your just a good soldier. Or consumer. You get Hyped, you buy because of the hype, and afterwards you have the nerve to say to me that i make your product bad ?

No mate, You just bought the same game for several times now. You get burned out.
What i meant by Economy 101 wasnt supply and demand mate. Was a bit more. But hey, everybody has its limits/capabilities. No prob.

To finish with a nice catch frase.

An economist is a man who states the obvious in terms of the incomprehensible.

 

[Oh Snap]

Again, you're not really addressing my question. You're getting into your assumptions of my character rather than really dealing with what I was asking.

I'm not really sure what question you want me to answer. You've posed quite a few in this thread and I've tried to give my input. But I have another (actually two more) questions for you in regards to how you feel you should always be able to determine whether or not to buy the games you pirate.

1. What type of metric(s) do you use it evaluating a game for purchase?

2. Why do you think it's up to you to determine the value of a game?

Shouldn't it be either you buy it and play it or you don't. If you willingly chose to you experience any part of the game then shouldn't the people responsible for that experience be compensated. Your not paying for a game because you like it, you're paying because you took advantage of the work that these people put out there. It's not a perfect system (capitalism) and many bad games will be sold. But it's a lot better than the system you advocate. You may be able to personally justify your own actions but do you really believe a system where all games are free and the consumer needs only to support those they like after playing them would work?

1. Is this something I actually want to continue playing? Most games have some form of a learning curve, so not too long after that, when the game actually "starts," if I'm having fun and I enjoy it.

2. Because it's my money. I don't determine the value of a game, aside from whether or not I'm going to purchase it. In fact, all consumers "determine the value" of products in this same way: they either buy it or they don't. I'm just like any other consumer in the market, the only difference is I get an "insider" look at the product before I make my final decision. At that point, the company's marketing, paid for online reviews, box art, etc. are all irrelevant and I base my decision entirely on the final product. For some companies, like EA for instance, this can be a really bad thing when you're cranking out low quality games and pumping a ton of money into marketing instead of actually making a great game. RobWright's suggestion was that for people that do this, they simply stop playing games. That just doesn't sound like good advice coming from someone who wants the industry to succeed. That is to say, having disdain for someone who only selectively supports an industry you want to thrive and telling them to stop supporting the industry entirely seems counter-productive. Saying "buy more games!" would be better advice than spitefully saying "Just get a new hobby!" Is that pretty clear? I've tried explaining it a few different ways but somehow it feels like that point is lost in the next reply 🙁

 

[purplerat]

In fact, all consumers "determine the value" of products in this same way: they either buy it or they don't. I'm just like any other consumer in the market, the only difference is I get an "insider" look at the product before I make my final decision.

Well that pretty much sums it up. You call me self rightous because I [gasp] play by the rules, yet you're so arrogant that you believe that:

"In fact, all consumers "determine the value" of products in this same way: they either buy it or they don't."
but at the same time you have some right to an "insider look" before you "buy it or don't".