Well I'm back from my little jaunt around the country, I read all the replies, and think I'll try and distill some of this down and hone some things I thought were of value.
I started this thread because I wanted to see what people think. Articles only do so much good because they are one way, and often come from the perspective of people like RobWright who have in most cases a predictable perspective. I do appreciate his participation, and think he brings up a lot of good points. I usually bring up different points of view just to investigate their validity, not because I personally hold them, so I can tweak my views here and there and try to get a better handle on things. Several people here have made reference to people speaking here just because their hidden in an online cloak and that in real life they would never be so bolt as to make certain claims. I view this as a plus. In the physical world there are many factors which often intimidate people from being honest, and the internet gives the same intellectual freedom of discussion to people which is rare in the physical world, be they a 90lb Thai female or a massive power lifter. I wanted ideas from all comers, and that's just what I got.
So the ideas have been swirling around in this pot, and even at the most bare of minimums I think it's brought some awareness to the subject to the forefront of peoples minds. We've had a lot less posts than views, but I think some interesting things have come floating to the top. So no matter which side people are on here, I think the discourse has been reasonably tame (not vulgar) and I think that the tone of the discussions indicates that people really do want a way to do things above the table, that there are many ways which might work, and many that don't.
Here are some points I thought were of note numerically, when replying it might be useful to reference the reply to the idea offered:
1. Bandwidth limits wont work, because it does not address the issue at hand which is the motivation to steal. A real solution targets the problem at its core, and does not try taking a circular path which might have a side effect which is desirable. You can cure chronic pain by simply killing people, but it might not be the best answer. Also, this idea makes many assumptions about bandwidth usage rates, how it will expand, future uses, how many people live in the home, if they have a VPN which is always racking up time, or if they link their lan across 2 homes in geographically different places. I dont mind paying for speed of access, and I do with a 30/30 FiOS connection, but bandwidth limits make no sense. There are no physical analogues to this because its digital. You can watch unlimited TV, its a digital service, its just on. It's not like the water bill.
2. Morality is relative. It is different across cultures, and even neighbors and spouses and parents disagree over issues. I don't think arguments over morals are very helpful to finding a solution to piracy because its just not human nature. We're barbaric, we lie, cheat, steal, and generally run amok. Much research has been done, and even when people morally oppose things, when asked again if they would do something if there was a 100% chance that no one would ever find out, they usually do it if theres enough personal gain. People suck, so basing ideas on "should" always break down because of person to person relativity. I would like to see some ideas that aren't based on should, and would directly address the problem at hand with a solution. Ideas that, if instituted, would compel even the most morally deficient degenerate to operate above table simply because its not worth the effort to do otherwise.
DRM is an example of DRM companies making a profit by lying to developers by telling them it would stop piracy and raise profits, and that's never happened. Instead they lose profit paying the DRM industry. All DRM has done is challenge hackers, and annoy real customers. Steam is an example of a service which adds value to legit customers, gives incentive to purchase things legally, and denies certain features to those who choose to pirate. It address the issue directly, with no flimsy morality used as the glue to hold it together, practicality and real-world applicability are key. I think that since effort is more universally constant than morality, if you push the cost/effort ratio to strike a balance, piracy will be a fringe issue of the truly destitute or the people who just want to see if they can do it (like Razor 911, ect...)
3. Piracy is not some magical PC only issue. When I bought Atari games, I traded with my friends. Thus, they never bought those. People might buy a single DVD, and loan it to 50 friends over the course of a DVDs lifespan. There is a
practical difference since digital media is infinity duplicated, but the "moral" implications are one and the same. Entertainment was viewed by someone who did not pay the creators. This is why I think we need new ideas to fit new paradigms that are popping up as a result of the spread of high-speed connections.
What if I had a personal "Library" account that I owned, and it had all my digital ownership, available to me where ever I went, or even my phone. So I go to a pals house, authenticate, and watch a movie that I paid 5 bucks to add to my library. My friend likes it, so he pays 1 dollar to add it to his, because he might wanna show it to his other friends later. He might not watch it for 20 years again, but he didn't have to front all 5 bucks, and the creators got an extra buck of profit because of person-to-person advertising. Maybe 5 pals gather at the home of the man with the big THX rig and all chip in for a 5 man group discount to add a single flick to all their libraries, watch it there and still have access to it together. People like going in on halves for things, physical ones are shared but digital ones are shared at nearly zero cost to the creator. People like collecting things, and sharing. If digital buying/selling/bartering was as simple and accessible as flea market deals, I think people would flock to it.
4. Single format development is shooting yourself in the foot, especially as tech marches forward and many platforms are more and more compatible. Even cross-platform-multiplayer should be the norm if controls are put into place for certain kinds of rooms and maps, to deal with platform specific advantages in certain titles.
5. DRM is usually seen as shoving stuff down people throats, and fosters resentment. I bet DRM companies are the ones planting and seeding many stories and coming up with funny numbers to convince developers that there are "untold riches" just beyond the horizon if only more cash was given to develop more and more DRM. DRM is a business model which makes money off piracy, they dont want it to go away.
6. The "testing argument" is of dubious claim because when your done, you don't get any benefit other than self-satisfaction from paying for games. Demos can often be misleading though, and in many cases the online play and patching ease compel many to buy games they already pirated. In this case, the single player served as a demo.
7. There is almost no consumer protection for digital items. EULAs are made by lawyers to screw people out rights granted to them by the laws of most nations, and that kind of boilerplate legal crap prevents you from doing anything useful if the software is junk. Stores wont take games back, but why? Pirates dont bother returning them to the store, they dont even go to the store in most cases, they just download them. Regular folks most likely return things that don't work, and software is not diminished by being returned (unless its scratched) as some other items are (used toothbrush anyone?)
Games are released that sometimes take years to patch, and there is no regulation or anything over the developers for this. Class action lawsuits over unpatched games might work, I don't know if this has been tried. I do realize making a perfect game is not going to happen with diverse software and stupid end users, but the current "public beta" that most things are when they hit shelves is not accepted in other markets, and should not be allowed here either. This goes for games, operating systems, productivity and business software.
If my Belkin surge protector fails to protect me, they pay me for damages. If Roboform spams the world with my credit card company, they should be held liable, because when I paid for it there is a contract between them and I. I give money, they protect my stuff and make buying things easier. If I fail to pay, they dont give me software. If they fail to protect, I should get damages. If Battlefield 2142 cant move a Titan without crashing the server, their not giving me the 64 player online experience that I bought it for. I'd like reasonable ideas on this, or at least to explore the issue. Maybe within 2 weeks of an issue, they need to fix it or some type of action results. Rebates to players? Discounts on next purchases? I'm not sure, but something needs to be done, and feet held to the fire.
If EA cant do it because they have gotten used to a certain release cycle and aren't willing to lower earnings to raise quality, then they need to go under, and the licenses auctioned off to others to liquidate debt. I have no interest in what a company thinks its going to make, or expects, or thinks it deserves. Companies that fail to make things at the right price/quality point go away and make room for others, that's capitalism. Maybe some group from India can do more quality for less investment, good for them. Until they pork-barrel out and get beat to the market by a new startup with a better cost/quality ratio and go out of business or buy them out. I only care about them giving me what I paid for, just like anything else. Failing that, a fair compensation or refund mechanism is needed.
8. Analogies from the physical realm seldom apply to the digital. Legally, things do. Like expecting my OS to work, and also my car. Also the OS that runs (Minix usually) my ABS system. Laws and ideas apply, making parallels that involve duplication and sharing don't usually fair well. Guarantees also apply, as they are used to sell more units of whatever. A digital guarantee is worth the same as a physical one.
9. Like someone stated before, all the muck about Crysis could have been avoided with proper market research. If I design a product that people want, ramp up production, advertise and hire all these people and promises to investors and stick products on shelves and they sell like hotcakes the first week that's great. Then if someone posts a YouTube video on how to use some cheap common object to duplicate the idea, and then purchases slow down, whose fault is that? Does the poster of that video owe me money? I patented the idea! I had expectations! Well maybe he does owe you, but who cares he's in Cuba! This is why I say morality needs to take a bow to practicality. ANYONE making a next gen game, with those hardware requirements, on a single platform release, would have to be dense to think they would rake in billions and have Bugatti Veyrons falling from the sky around them. They can sit on high-ground all day, and it wont earn them crap, and piracy wont abate one bit. That was just stupid, and doomed to fail from day one. You might as well make audiophile headphones with radio shack parts and expect people to pay 500 for the set, some might. Or they'll just look at them in the window and build their own. Market research, multi-platform development, fair pricing, online distribution and lots of extras only for legit online accounts would have been much more profitable.
10. Law is not a basis for morality, its a system of guidelines and punishments. We have the death penalty, we still have murder and rape and everything else. Making an "example" only works in small groups where people feel personally attached. It wont work globally, only economics can. Even then, some bad things happen because people are, after all, people. Thats why stores factor in losses due to theft, its just not worth the cost of protecting against it. Law has also been hi-jacked by lobbies. Look at the Iraq war and Pharmaceutical companies. The second amendment is not there for hunting, its for keeping the government in check. American rights and freedoms are being eroded because private interests are taking hold over the masses, and by the time it hits the boiling point we'll be powerless to do anything about it. Try watching TV for 5 minutes without
11. What kind of profits do they expect? Did Crysis not make more than it cost to develop? The market is turning into an oligarchy, but is it because it more profitable to sellout to EA, then found new companies over and over than it is to just make a steady stream over time? It looks good on your resume! You made a company, had a hit game, then sold with windfall profits for all! Or you reinvested profit, developed more, and became Blizzard. If you sell you can get rich quick, use all that to make new companies, and use past success and sales to companies to convince banks that you can do it all over again. Right, Richard Garriot? At Crytek they have jobs...they didint go under...they are making new games still. How much of this is people looking at piracy rates and comparing "perfect world what if's" to real profits? How many bonuses do CEOs need? How many companies have actually gone under do to piracy, and not other things like people giving themselves massive bonuses after a hit game and not saving enough to bankroll the next one? Or changing everything in mid-development? This is not just the gaming industry that does these things. The same old crap is here, but this time we have piracy to point a finger at and blame, soon after the DRM sharks will be sniffing at all places that deal in Intellectual Products and mesmerizing their boardrooms with phantom earnings, for only a small fee...
12. I've seen that "if you cant afford it then don't play it" tossed around a bit. Like I said, morally fine, if simplistic and unenforceable. People just aren't going to take that ball and run with it. Where I live here in Reality, USA I cant begrudge that Romanian for stealing games. I know how he feels. Same for all those others who are just pretty dang poor (relativity here, might be GREAT locally on $500 a month for food, housing and internet and other stuff, until you realize a new US game is $50), or have parents that ignore them and find respite in gaming in general. I think that pricing models should really adapt to bring global economics into the fold, sometimes games are entertainment. For others it might be an escape from an otherwise meager or lonely existence.
13. I've gotten refunds for movies that sucked. I have even gotten refunds for meals that sucked. Some industries realize that total profits raise with quality of service until you reach diminishing returns. I don't think games, or any digital service, should be any different. Short term gains aren't worth long term losses.
So thats it, I hope at least one of these resonates with some people, and that we get some well thought out responses
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram