Dissapointed with TH's attitude about game piracy - Page 3

And so is the argument that it is like stealing someone's car.

It is nothing like that at all.

I'm not saying piracy is good and happy and there is nothing wrong with it. I support indie devs such as Introversion. I support those who release decent games without stupid DRM, like Stardock.

Thinking about it, I've actually bought EVERY game released by those two companies.


PIRACY IS NOT STEALING. (at least here in the UK). As long as I am not distributing copied software for profit, it is not a criminal offence.

Those people that seem to think piracy is equivalent to armed robbery scare me to be honest. If you had your way, I get the feeling that all infractions - from murder to dropping litter - would be considered equal and carry the death penalty, because that's the scale of parallel you are drawing when you say "stealing a car is the same as copying a game".

As for "their hard earned money going down the drain", pirates fall into two groups.

a) Downloading to "trial" a game, these will pay for the game if it is good. Revenue is only lost if the game is crap, in which case it doesn't deserve money anyway.

b) Downloading to play a game with no intention of ever paying for it. These people usually wouldn't buy the game anyway, if they couldn't pirate it they just wouldn't play it. You cannot count these as lost sales.

Xbox360 games are, if anything, even easier to copy than PC games - you even get full online functionality!!

Given that, you can't say that piracy is killing PC games, when piracy is not limited to PCs and the PC game market is still healthy.

Will update later..

NONE of those winedrinkers paid for the wine, but were told how much it was worth.

Likewise, few of my games were paid for, yet I know how much they were worth.

Wine can vary wildly in price, each brand doesn't continually become cheaper. PC games start at $50 and decline over time.

That article suggests that I would be happier with a pirated game if it were expensive, not that I would be happier if I actually paid for it.

BOOOOOOMMMMMM!!!!!!!!

i think the problem with the second article is that there are no figures that anyone can relate to, and you cant compare Console sales to PC sales, generally PC games are for the older generation and the consoles for the younger generation since theres more kids with consoles the sales are going to do better on the console.

there is no real answer to this although governments will come up with one for us im sure, there are several types of people included in these arguments.

hardcore gamer - looks at reviews and forums, probably got good hardware, and will know there stuff, and make logical desicions on what game to buy.

average joe - buys games based off advertising, doesnt have alot of money, can only afford a few games.

half pirate - someone who downloads the games before deciding where to put there money, probably will report problems they encounter in the game(relate to first article rob posted), this will warn others.

pirate - they download the game, they will never pay for it and generally play online with hacked servers, these people will never buy the game.

from these types of people can you honestly tell me that you are loosing sales from pirates? a true pirate would find away past the system it always has happend and always will. so no more sales lost there.

the half pirate(i would put myself in here), these are the hardest people to please and there the ones you want to aim at, this is where you are going to get good publicity or bad publicity and as stated in robs first article for small developers, word of mouth is your biggest ally... in this section you are more likely to loose sales if you put DRM in your games because they will cause problems like this:

these problems will be percieved as game bugs. Ultimatly this setion of people influence the sale of a particular game the most, if its good it will receive the recognition it deserves if its bad it wont sell... you should aim games with these people in mind as they are also most likley to buy the game aswell.


average joe - will go out and buy games based on advertising in the stores, this means that independant developers loose sales here, the avgerage joe isnt likley to look at online reviews and comments. small companies loose out here.

Hardcore gamer - mostly influenced by reviews and forums, which means they will see things that half pirates/pirates have wrote and made comments about. this is the section that small developers are most likley to make the most amount of sales on, but there sales will be influencened by what the pirates say about the game.

so is DRM good? no its not the right way to go about this, it damages sales more than anything.

so should games have no DRM at all? well no i would love the return of the cd key, and would like to see online distro systems offer the user the chance to have the disk and box sent to them.

is the industry viewing this in the wrong light? YES, they should use the pirate distro system to there advantage, if they limited a game to say 1hour play then after that time it required a cd Key i would happily buy the key from them, since im not being cheated by a demo. also if it were distro over newsgroups i wouldnt be limited in my nd speed like i am with Steam or have to pay like in fileplanet(then they give you 200Kb).

this pic is just for him,



thats my game draw, which doesnt include games ive bought off steam.

Iron Lore closed its door because it failed to implement very basic HCI design considerations which lead to its demise, it forgot to take into account pirates and there opinions and how it would influence sales, this was there mistake they are simply trying to blame someone else. - if you cant see that im sorry.

Pictures on forums is THE FUTURE

Sophia, Wow is pirated, there are pirate servers that you can join if you have a pirate copy, so yes MMORPGs can be pirated.

I want to see piracy stopped... and I will put up with DRM to see that goal accomplished.

All these arguments about try before you buy, hassle with CD's etc are complete rubbish... read the reviews to see if a game is any good. Console owners have to change their discs etc and how much of a hardship is that really!? The same people complaining about the cost of games don't seem to find it too hard to justify a new gfx card every year strangely...

Whatever they do, they need to stop this massive piracy problem on the PC... it is surely damaging the industry and dimming the lights on pc gaming's future.

Do whatever you want with DRM developers. As long as you don't compromise the security of my machine I have no problem jumping through a hoop now and again to see others unable to play the game in question without paying for it. The choice should be - buy the game with DRM and play it, or simply don't buy and don't play it at all.

Just need to point out to those who asked why you would re-install Windows, you dont always have a choice in the matter... I need to reinstall XP at least once a year. Also its worth mentioning that poorly written software shouldnt be encouraged so as far as Im concerned pirate on so the companys that make subpar software need to rethink theyre strategy... personally though... I dont play games to begin with...

For crying out loud, who cares whether it's illegal or not! It's wrong! You can't call yourself a gamer if you steal your games, period. I don't care what the legal definition is, it's still stealing!!

You guys aren't going to change any of our minds (those of us that are against the piracy of PC games) by telling us that it's not a crime.

On another note, I'm writing a short essay on this topic and I plan on posting some of it here. I'd love to hear what you guys think...and yes that includes all of you.

If you take something which you do not own, and which was not given to you by someone who had purchased it, what is that called? From the very first idea, to the day a game gets printed, developers do not, and would not, ever agree to have someone download their game for free. Who hold the rights to video game software? The argument that piracy is not stealing is ludicrous. Like I said before, it matters not whether your plan to buy after playing, if the game if it good. It only matters that you are taking copyrighted material without permission. That my friend, is called stealing.

I've been buying and playing PC games for a long time. I own all 3 current generation consoles as well. Though, I must say I like PC games better, in their type and play style. Consoles offer me a different play style (ie FF style RPGs, etc) that aren't often found on the PC or group play with some friends when they come over to hang out.

I've long used Images of my games as a matter of convinence and speed instead of the CDs/DVDs. Though I personally consider this a legit use, I'm sure with the craze over piracy, I could still be charged with a crime. Just look at the what many music industry companies believe... ripping a CD you own to use on your computer or music player is stealing. Speaking of which, I keep a music library of most all the music CDs I own too - it's nice to use random/shuffle and hear old favorites you wouldn't have decided to listen to otherwise on top of not having to physically swap CDs or use a mutli-disc changer, etc.

I fully agree that DRM for the greater part is just junk. Pirate groups break easily and thus people downloading those copies are unaffected - the individuals downloading the games do not need any level of education or technology knowledge beyond some basic reading (if that) to play the pirated version of the game. Thus, the DRM just hurts the legit users that pay for the game. They cause long load up times while you start the game to do CD-Checks (ie StarForce - I've onced had to wait 45 seconds just for StarForce), installation problems and sometimes even conflicts that cause BSOD rendering the game unplayable. Of course in this case you cannot return the game and I turn to the crack scene for a no-CD/DVD or whatever exe. Standard DRM simply does not work as intended. If the DRM actually prevented piracy, I would care a bit less about the problems it may cause me. However, that is far from the case. I play MMO's too, so I am 100% not opposed to paying to play a good game.

I also use Steam now days and Direct2Drive - I realize these have DRM in some form. However, I don't mind as long as it is transparent once I have installed the game and it does not cause any problems. They also provide me with some of the same reasons why I have previously made Images of game's I own (faster re-installs, faster load times without disc, no disc to hassle with). I personally like these models, but do not believe they solve piracy. I've read about and seen ways to break both.

My personal view of the largest issue and one the game industry is unwilling to accept is simply: make better games. It is not that there are not good, even great games being produced; but there is also I lot of crap - a lot of it being pushed to market. Sometimes the company has a realistic projecting of what the junk will make because they understand it's place in the market (often clone games with 100 titles of the exact same game with different 'skins' or movie related games). These often fail or would be considered a failure otherwise - I doubt these are being pirated much to begin with. There are times though, a developer believes in their title with great zeal, after all they have invested sometimes years in it and it may be there dream to produce the title. If it fails, they need / want to blame something and piracy is a easy one to blame especially with what I find to often be greatly misleading or falsified statistics. One such case would be that company that sued Epic over their Unreal Engine 3 lateness for basically all the profits that Gears of War made. I think I remember the title but I don't want to say in case I am incorrect. The history of the title in question basically set the game development at between 8-12 years depending on when you consider development started but it was the "dream" of the developer to make the game so I'm sure they've attempted it many times and stopped, then restarted. It's not that the title did not have any promise in itself, but all of it's potential promise also meant many difficulties in design and concept to reality. They needed to blame somebody when they were not paid by the publisher for being late, they chose Epic because they couldn't blame piracy when they had not released. Though their charges were true to a limited extent, it wasn't worth Gears of War, nor did the fact they did not use the terms of the contact they had with Epic in licensing UE3 to resolve the issue when it came up favorable, they only had a problem when they weren't paid and saw that Epic had made money. And they wanted it.

Why do I feel this way? Back in the days I was in a marketing course and learned a lot. It never really applied to gaming at the time because there were no advertisements on TV or anything outside of the few gaming mags out there like PC Gamer. There was a really hot title being released and I just downloaded the demo. I played it and then thought, "Wow, this is the worse game demo ever." The game was bad... it shouldn't have had a demo to demonstrate to people how bad it was. If not for the demo, I would have gladly paid $50 for the game before realizing it sucked. It's the same for say a movie trailer - it needs to make you want to go watch the movie, even if it is a bad movie, the trailer needs to be good. New and fresh ideas are hard to come by - I know this. But you do not need a new or fresh idea to make a good product - that comes from following thru on the FUNdamental elements first and foremost. The best graphics and effects do not ensure an enjoyable game and many in the industry have forgotten this.

I've ranted too much but I will close with this. There are about 4 main types of people as it concerns purchasing items or pirating/stealing them be it games, music, or cars and radios, even drugs and violence:
1) The legit person that will basically always buy their games, etc.
2) The person that will often buy their games but for various reasons also pirates some of their games.
3) The person that will basically never buy the games they play.
4) The person that downloads everything, regardless of intent to use or play the game. They like to do it because they can, or feel compelled to do so compulsively.

The industry officials assume only #1 and #2 really exist. They believe #3 and #4 are actually also #2, but that is not true. Until they acknowledge that #3 and #4 are out there they will never have a reasonable expectation of their market demographics.

Next is #5, the console gamer and #6 the multi-platform gamer and their sub parts. Being mainly a PC gamer but easily falling into the multi-platform gamer category as I own everything, I will state the obvious - if there is a game released to multiple platforms, I'm only buying it for one of them. If I favor the console version for some reason (in a 3D shooter, some of the reasons often pointed out are: better assurance of no cheaters, if PC and console can play together, they always give consoles auto-aim *which is a reason why I don't play these to start with*, you know it works). Also, a direct reason for PC vs Console sells differences is pricing of hardware. Consoles run between $400-800 real price of ownership and the cost continues to drop. $400-600 is like a high-end video card in the PC world and you need to keep up with the times to some degree. In the end, these cost mean less money to spend on PC games or at least a higher overall cost to play them. When the first XBox came out and some analysis said it was the beginning of the end of PC-gaming as we knew it, people laughed, but it's slowly becoming true.

I by no means intend to say I do not think piracy is a problem, however, I believe that it is greatly blown out of proportion by the industries involved for many reasons favorable to them as corporations. Instead of wasting their money on their zero-sum war against piracy that does not work they should be spending it on improving their games or straight up saving that money. It is sad to hear a game company go out of business, but blaming piracy is just their falsified reasoning. The ability to make such reasoning is often why they "fight" piracy though. Many great game developers and publishers have gone out of business well before the "mass" mainstream piracy we see today. An example is Interplay (a publisher) - but they held some of the great titles and developers that are continuing to lead the market (Fallout, Baldgar's Gate, BioWare, Shrouded Isles, etc). Why did they fail? They loss studios and started producing not so good games, and they faced strong competition from the era of larger companies like EA. Some companies/devs are failing for the same reason today but rather blame something else than themselves and their failure to adapt to the market.

When will the false battle against piracy end? When it makes them money. Why are online stores selling DRM-free music now when DRM was such a hot idea? #1, it's a great selling point to be DRM free given all of it's problem (ever lose your iTunes music and then realize you cannot download them again without charge?) #2, because it killed battery life so many media player companies pushed for it. Battery life is a strong selling point when with the exact same hardware you can suddenly claim 40-50% longer life. #3, it never really worked anyways, just like DRM with games but now that they had 2 great reasons and ways to make money from no-DRM they did it. #4, online stores became a strong enough force in the market that music labels were not suing them any longer but investing in them.

I do not pirate games. Limited DRM is annoying, but fair. However, I decided to buy Bioshock used (so as to jip 2K out of any profits) and encouraged everyone I know not to buy it. The level of DRM that Bioshock uses borders on illegal.

This is the major issue with me:

If the DRM does not uninstall when I uninstall the game, it is malware, and the company should be boycotted and probably even litigated. Not being able to take something off your PC when you install it is a privledge that should only be alloted to the OS itself. If an installed program does that, it's a virus in my opinion.

I had to replace my motherboard halfway through Bioshock. I was planning on reinstalling anyway after I completed the game (I knew I'd have to replace my MB pretty soon, but it ended up just crapping out.) Now I have a fresh install of windows that I am not willing to damage with malware like Bioshock uses.

So... despite the fact that I loved the game, I won't even get to finish it. That leaves me two options:

1) Learn to pirate it. (which under fair use laws is probably legal) or
2) Simply never finish it, sell it, and remember the pain 2K caused me next time I consider buying a game from them.

I agree with Facelifter about the "returning it to the store" thing. If everybody that bought Bioshock had lined up at their local retailers demanding their money back, it would have done a lot more good than what we did do (express our complaints on their forums, etc.)

Hmm, no, I doubt prices on professional software like Photoshop would drop much if it wasnt pirated as much. If anything the mass illegal copying of Photoshop has helped make it a standard in photo manipulation. Its not like poeple refer to photos being "airbrushed" anymore... photos are "photoshopped". Ah well, still illegal and whatnot but worth considering...

Or turning your front room into a cinema and inviting strangers in to watch movies at $5 a go...

Watching a DVD at home with a friend who isn't paying you for the screening would not be classed as "in public".

Screening it in a village hall with everyone paying $1 to enter would.

It's common sense. No one has ever been prosecuted for watching a DVD at home with their kids.


Uploading a DVD for strangers to download is NOT the same thing. Even if you want to take a very literal view, the key difference here is that when you watch a DVD with a friend, there is no copying of the copyrighted material - when you friend leaves, you still have the original (*). When someone downloads the movie from you, they now have a copy of the copyrighted material that they can keep and/or distribute. You have therefore allowed and facilitated an unauthorised copying of copyrighted material - and THERE is your offence.


(*) I could make a quip about photographic memories, but I won't

Again, that's only really there to prevent people running DVD rental businesses from home and claiming that they're only lending to friends.

As long as your lending is infrequent (i.e. not to the same people, every week) and not for profit, I can't see the copyright owner seeking to prosecute. Even if they did, any sensible court would throw the case out on a "Fair Usage" excuse.

no youve misinterpreted(spelling?)

it is illegal for someone to drive your car unless there insured on your car.....Just like its illegal to lend someone a DVD unless they have bought the license to watch it already, which would mean they already have it.

and i never said anything about cars?!

You do realize you're arguing the same things that were argued 25 years ago. At that time though, there were C-64 software rental stores all over. Disk copy programs to circumvent copy protection meant the end of computer gaming, I think that was declared about 1986.

I could send you fifty purchased games I've loaded (or tried to) and ran maybe once before uninstalling/deleting in disgust. At $40-50 each to purchase, it's hard to just throw things like that away, but their value's obviously nil, and software return policies have been the same for years, no returns. With programs that I do use, some have bad media and replacements aren't available, so it's either copy someone else's or go without.

I do occasionally download, or visit a "preview" store here (modern term for software rental), particularly with new games. I generally know in about 15 minutes if it's something I'll buy. I see no reason to blindly purchase things that end up being less polished than old shareware and being stuck with adding it to the firetrap all those boxes of garbage programs have become. Demo's also work, but they're not often released for free, which I think's just as stupid as spending a lot of development money on copy protection that'll be cracked in a month by some 13 year old.

I'm not justifying it, but I see no point in ranting about such a minor issue. The MPAA had plenty of people ranting about piracy there as well, last year was a record box office year even with their $500 bounty on cell phones and other reasons to avoid theaters. Do you really think that was due to some moralist rant?

darkstar782, you've already stated in previous posts that you agree that piracy is wrong. What is there to gain here in this particular discussion as to how wrong it is and what exactly is wrong?

If this is such a big deal, then my suggestion is to start a separate topic on this particular angle.

The person that passed on a pirated game, gave somebody something that he did not own. He only owned a license to play the game, not a license to copy it or even to pass on his particular license. That last particular bit is food for thought because a basic premise in a capitalist system is that whatever you buy, you can also sell again. In the case of PC games, if you buy a license to play a game, then this particular license should be resellable when you no longer need it. As far as I know (but I'm not a legal expert) most EULA's prohibit this, and as such one might be able to challenge the contract in court.

Interesting at this may be, this is not the issue we're debating in this thread. We are debating the act of piracy and how it is hurting industry and legit customers. These two discussions should not be mixed.

I have come to the following conclusions after debating this topic ad nauseum.

1. Piracy is actually harming the PC industry to a noticable degree. I don't believe it is as large a degree as publishers would have you believe, but it probably does have a notable effect on games being published for the PC. While piracy is not foreign to consoles as well, it is not as big an issue.

2. If DRM were not a problem then I would have no issue at all with rigorous efforts to exterminate piracy related web sites and content. However given the fact that I rely on those resources to bypass DRM on my legally purchased copies, which is often needed just to make the bloody thing work, I continue support their efforts.

3. If DRM quit being used I fully expect that sales would increase, not decrease. I think a lot of the reason why piracy related sites have grown so much in popularity is because people went looking for help when their legally purchased software didn't work and that is where the help came from.

4. I consider DRM the greater of the two evils and simply do not understand the position taken by people who actually support DRM efforts. You people act like frigging martyrs taking one for the team in order to stop the evil piracy, but you are in fact taking one for the team for no good reason whatsoever. I have yet to see any form of DRM short of Steam or MMOs that has lasted more than a couple of days after release, and frequently gets cracked a few days BEFORE release.

No, xboxlive checks if you flash your DVD drive's BIOS and other stuff... modded 360s get bricked too quickly.

Or, he doesn't get the new updates until he gets a more recent hack...

Instead of saying DRM and piracy are fighting each other for the strong hold of the PC market, I'd say they were destroying it like a tag-team effort.