Dissapointed with TH's attitude about game piracy - Page 2

Last message on previous page:
I have to say...I'm somewhat regretful I made this post about THG, now I wish I made it strictly about piracy!!

I don't care whether you buy games or not, I care whether you steal them. Some of you seem to really take it personally that I feel piracy is a bad thing...I'm surprised that while some of you attack my opinion on piracy none of you have tried to claim that it isn't hurting the industry, which just adds fuel to argument that you guys don't give a #$%$ and that's the real reason why you steal...

Wrong. I can honestly tell you that when I download pirated games that it doesn't hurt the industry. If its a game that I download to try before buying then its likely a game I never would have bought without actually trying it first. Demos generally suck and don't provide a good insight into the game.

I honestly don't care if you think its stealing or if you think I'm unethical for doing it. I buy games that I feel are good and am therefore supporting, not hurting the gaming industry. There's the alternative of never downloading games but then I would also buy far less than I currently do. So in other words, guys like me HELP the industry not hurt it since my downloads are converted to purchases if the game is worthy of such.

In response to the DRM argument. I would argue that DRM hurts more than it helps the game industry. I will never download or buy Bioshock based on the fiasco they caused in order to "prevent" piracy. Hell, I won't even pirate it because I don't want to waste my time with a game who's publisher is more concerned about making a few extra bucks than providing good customer service.

im not stealing if i download a game..... check out the definition of theft...http://www.swarb.co.uk/acts/1968TheftAct.shtml

1) its a copy so im not depriving anyone of it, also i dont keep them permanently i go out and buy them if there good, or delete them if bad.
2) i do not gain anything (well apart from whether or not the game is good enough for my hard earned cash)

im doing the industry a favor by only buying games that deserve to be bought, im filtering out the crap and keeping the innovative and original publishers in the game(no pun intended), survival of the strongest.

EDIT

theres one other thing i would like to say in regards to DRM...

because of DRM i can no longer buy a PC game then get a refund when its not good.

Have you checked the reactions around your post? Apparently there's quite some people not agreeing that particular point. I think most if not all of them are just trying to justify their behavior, which is getting something for free that they know the creators are trying to sell. That is the dilemma and by just getting it without paying for it they are screwing the demand and supply system. If people think that the game is too expensive then don't buy it, but don't play it either! No demand? prices will go down, or games will become better so that people want to spend that kind of money on their games.

This is indeed the crux of the matter. On the one hand I fully agree with you here, purplerat. Business logic dictates to go for the big sale regardless of how many will pirate the game.

However, that system is instable in the long run if you do that unchecked. As we are seeing around us (and in this topic) you see two groups, people that want to pay for it, and people that don't want to pay for it or only if it is really really good (in my mind that is the same thing as not wanting to pay for it because what is good and what is not is a very subjective thing, and moreover, by knowing that it is available for free the actual customer value of it goes down significantly, it becomes like shareware and we all know how commercially succesful that is). So even people that do want to pay for it upfront start rebelling because others are just playing the same thing for free. At this moment industry is responding by keeping prices up or increasing them even and trying to get more bucks out of the people that remain willing to pay for it. How long will that go on if they do not uphold appearances to try and battle piracy? And is anyone in the industry caring about how fair that is to the people that are still willing to pay for it?

And that is my biggest concern...what is going on now in the PC gaming business is making honest people not care anymore and switch over to pirating themselves. It makes me sad (not that those here boasting on their piracy will give a damn..). Industry is in part to blame for this, for wanting to sell stuf that they cannot properly market but then again who can if people refuse to play by the rules? We either need new rules or we need enforcement of current rules. Anything in between just does not fly.

And what is your proposal on how to deal with them? Try to be practical please, (for instance) give some thought as to how you can prosecute or prohibit pirates in a cost effective way without bothering legit customers.

do what the canadian songwriter's association wants.. charge every canadian an extra 5$ a month because some ppl download, but everyone is guilty! no need for prosecution!

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleN [...] hub=Canada

of course, the songwriters will probably get squat and the money will go to the big businesses.

you dont say how so.

This thread is similar to many others cropping up all over the internet. Common themes I find odd:

a) presumption that there is a problem. We basically can determine if there is a problem by asking if the marketplace is economically healthy. Casual observation says it is. Recent interview with Valve on this website resulted in a viewpoint that business is great and that piracy is a minor irritation, not a problem.

b) presumption that the posters convincing each other of their viewpoint is an important factor.

where's the data?

c) presumption that the game companies are in this for "us" in some form of personalized, non-economic, sense. One of the posters above used words approximately like "how can we steal from a game company that poured its heart and soul into their product"...like its not a business but someone who worked for free! lol Lets see that heart and soul translate into distribution of profit to each user....oops...now its a business.


My personal position is that I don't steal. That's a personal choice based on my own view of carma and how I want to feel inside of myself.

Having said that, I also don't owe any "for profit" company with unsolicited and unpaid protection services. And the rest of you don't either.

Any company that enjoys the profits that come from using networked distribution faces the consequences as well. Any company that fails because of the consequences did not have a valid business plan in place.

Theft has been part of commerce since time began. Business thrives in spite of that. Behave as you wish others to behave, but debate it? Worry about it? Act like companies are victims?

Nope.

I don't remember now, it was just after the release of X3 so a couple of years ago now.

As it is, Egosoft, the makers of X3, have removed the Starforce protection in the latest patch anyway

To be honest, the worst offender is Microsoft.

I have a legit copy of Vista Ultimate OEM on one machine, and yes, I registered as a system builder just to satisfy their license. I have a legit copy of Vista Ultimate Retail on another, and my Laptop (a dell) has a preinstalled OEM version.

The Preinstalled OEM version is fine. I can change the RAM or whatever, and it doesn't throw a fit, as the preinstalled version of Vista doesn't need activating. I can't change the motherboard (which is a bit silly) but its a laptop anyway

The others are annoying. They both decide they want reactivating every so often because I have moved GPUs/HDDs whatever about. This ALWAYS requires a 25 minute phone call to M$, entering a 10832471 digit long key, assuring them that it IS only on one PC, then slowly typing the reponse key in. A BIOS update causes Vista to need Reactivation EVERY TIME.

The OEM version has even more hassle. I remember spending 3 hours on the phone to M$ when the activation process just failed completely. Vista showed as activated in the computer info screen, but wouldn't let me use Areo, and complained of needing activation in the system tray. This is a completely legitimate Vista install that had been working previously. I was passed from operator to operator in M$, and had to persuade each one that yes, this OEM copy of Vista was installed by a registered system builder (myself), no, I wasn't a pirate, etc etc, with each operator insisting that the reason Vista would not activate was because it knew it was not installed on a pre-built machine (wtf?!?). After the 10th operator insisting this, I gave up, reinstalled Vista, and it worked. Proving they were talking crap. This is one situation which proves that DRM negatively impacts legitimate customers. I had to spend 3 hours on the phone (thats 20p per minute from a mobile, and my hourly rate is £50), and then reinstall the ****ing OS, losing data, because of a failure of their DRM system.

Oh, "Windows Genuine Advantage" insisting I download some stupid little file and copy/paste a 6 digit number every time I want to download a hotfix to their buggy OS! How annoying is that! I really don't care about pirates, and don't see why I should have to jump through hoops to prove myself innocent. I almost wonder if Vista doesn't have intentional bugs in to encourage people to buy it - only this way can you download the hotfixes needed for stability. The worst part is this "WGA" thing is them admitting their stupid activation procedure doesn't even work in preventing piracy, or it wouldn't be used. So now we have a broken, waste of significant time, headache of an activation process, AND a daily annoyance in WGA, AND we are stupid enough to pay £300 for the privilege!! Yipee!!

not according to the adverts at the begining of legal dvds, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPcHhOBd-hI

although i dont want to take this any further here, if anyone can prove to me that by uk law downloading is actually illegal then send me a PM, so far our current description of stealing and theft does not cover downloading.

Ok, here we go again.

1. Piracy is hurting the PC gaming industry. Yes, I do believe this is true. How much it is hurting it is open to debate, but it is harming it.

2. DRM is hurting the PC gaming industry. Yes, I do believe this is true as well. At one point I purchased 3 games in 2 months and all three of them failed utterly to run until I found an illegal crack to break the DRM. Ever since that point I wait 3 days before buying a PC game and then I look for information on it's DRM. If it is using any form of DRM more intrusive than a CD check and a serial code, I will not buy it.

Back when Bioshock came out, I convinced several friends to wait with me and see how it did with DRM. Sure enough the DRM was thick enough to choke an elephant, so we did not purchase the PC version. Instead of all 5 of us going out and getting our own copies at $50 or $60 each or $250+, we got one copy of the 360 version at $60 because THAT WAS just a CD check.

Here is another little story for you. This one isn't about me though, it is about a little company called Stardock. You see, they had a surprise hit called Galactic Civilizations. It was a surprise because they were a small time developer and the game was made on a shoestring budget, but it sold really well, largely due to MOO3 being an enormous disappointment, but that is another story. After this surprise hit, they produced a higher budget sequel and distributed it both through their Stardock system and through retail boxes. Now here is the real cool part. It was completely free of any sort of DRM. It just had a serial code that wasn't even required except for registration.

Now Stardock had been a small time player before this point and they were ridiculed for their lack of DRM, but they stood strong and when it came out, it was one of the best selling games that quarter. In fact, right around that time Starforce was being bandied about and used in several games. This game, free of any sort of DRM, outsold every single game with Starforce the month it came out.

Now you can't tell me that people are cool with DRM and will buy regardless, nor can you tell me that DRM is even a mild deterrent to people stealing a game. There is quite simply no evidence to support it.

Now back when I was in college, I will admit that I did download quite a few games that I enjoyed without paying for them. That is largely for the same reason as my macaroni and cheese and ramen noodles diet. Hell some days I would just eat a plate full of rice. The higher my income, the more games I purchase, and I no longer pirate games. I will still download cracks for games I buy and I won't buy any game with particularly draconian DRM.

But you also have to keep in mind. Your average video game purchaser will purchase maybe, at most 2 or 3 new games a year. Most games purchased are older, cheaper, or crappier games (see barbie horse adventure).

Enthusiast gamers will almost assuredly be familiar with DRM and they are the portion of the market purchasing upwards of 15 to 30 new games a year. They represent a much higher profit margin portion of the industry.

So that 8800 GTX I just got won't be wasted!!

Bob

I think the best solution is to make it easier to buy the game legitimately.

First step is to remove the DRM software. It is pointless and a waste of money.

Second step is to pass the savings on to the customer. If they sold PC games at $40 or $45 each from day 1, they would get more sales earlier.

Third step is to give an incentive to purchase without breaking the software. Just make the serial code you provide optional during install, but required to register. Registration is required for game updates. Game updates frequently provide valuable interface tweaks and useful features so you really want them, but the game isn't crippled without them.

Last step is to have an online distribution system that allows the user to download the software but doesn't require checking in with the server every time they run it. Then give an option to also have a physical copy sent for an additional $5 or so.

Hey... that looks familiar... Oh yeah, that is excactly what Stardock is doing currently. They seem to be doing pretty well for themselves too.

oh, and ps: if you want to pay for a pointless 'service' (drm)... then be my guest. I personally would rather see that x amount of dollars that goes to drm go to another team member on ANY given game development team. Having said that. I can count on one hand how many job openings there are in the entire united states for doing that type of work. And of all the colleges across the 4 states i've lived in in the past 2 years, there was ONE that had ONE opening for an internship at a game development company, and you had to move to a different state to take advantage of it. SO this means out of the thousands of people in the tech fields in all of the colleges in my current state, ONE PERSON gets a rare opportunity to get their foot in the door for building games. It's sad really... take out the drm add the to the development... it's a simple industry shift with a complicated problem.

Since I have already given my 5 cents on privacy, let me move onto DRM.

I bought Bioshock without knowing the DRM restriction. It runs beautifully in my PC. I don't reinstall my OS often and I very seldom will replay games that I purchase. Hence, even if I was to know about DRM on Bioshock, I would still buy Bioshock to experience the action.

I would look at DRM technology as the entire package of a game. If you are not agreeable to that part of the technology, just don't buy and play the game. Period.

Use it as an excuse to illegally download games? Nah. Like I said, go alternative. Play boardgame instead.

A couple of points:

I have to agree with Rob - most people that DL games won't pay for them - ever. The posters here that do, assuming that they are telling the truth, are the micro-minority.

If I can't afford a license to play a game (which is what you are actually buying), then I just can't afford it. I can't afford a 1969 DeTomaso Mangusta, but that does not give me any right to steal one. And I really, really love vintage mid-mount italian styling. It sucks - I know. $50 is too much, but that's the price the man has set. That price-point definitely keeps me from buying all the titles that I might otherwise.

Even if the ditributors lowered the price to $25, I'm not sure that DLers would steal less. People DL movies like mad and Netflix is dirt cheap. Take the last radiohead album - you could DL it for free from the official site and people still pirated it. Still I would be happy as hell if they cut the price - maybe it would do major damage to piracy. I just suspect that the lowest common denominator would rather steal if they think they won't get caught.

I kind of don't understand why you would need to DL a game to figure out if it is worth buying. For any title there are demos, in-game clips, and fifty in-depth reviews. The one sensible justification for this (made by a poster above) is the relative DL speed of usenet - I can definitely see how it would be much faster to DL a full game over usenet vs. a demo over many of the crummy public servers. Of course, usenet is the serious pirate's portal for just this reason.

Finally, in reference to the "theft" definition above. First, if the crime is theft, then you need to look to the statutory language to determine if you are breaking the law. A dictionary definition will not even be considered by the court. Here, though the crime is copyright violation, and possibly violation of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. Under the laws of copyright, you are liable even if you only DL copyrighted material to your RAM.

Congratulations! You have realised what Flakes could not.

Congratulations. You just screwed a company that doesn't put DRM on it's games, thus ensuring that the DRM craporama will continue.

Irrelevant.

Its not stealing, as that implies you are taking something from someone. Piracy does not meet legal definitions of stealing.

If you **copied** that 1969 DeTomaso Mangusta, 100% your own creation, without stealing it at all, that would be a more accurate comparison.

If you then sold it for profit, it would be morally wrong, but copying the car it for your own use? Not really imho.

i am a cheapskate no denying that.

however if you wanted to try that wine you would go to a wine tasting session, that wine that you taste is out of the same kind of bottle and made in exactly the same way, so you know exactly what you are getting.

game demos are different to the actual game a great example being F.E.A.R, or there are certain things that run better/worse in a demo than the actual game itself... by downloading the full game you bypass this problem, and therefore get a much better idea of the actual game.

it just comes down to this for me.

if you d/l a game and like it you should buy it therefore funding the developers to make better games.

if your rich and can afford to buy all the games you fancy does that mean you should just waste money on games that you potentially wont like? therefore funding the development of bad games, a game will naturally do well if its good enough.

you should not however pirate games and never pay for them that is just wrong and doesnt help anybody but yourself.

no its not theft as ive already stated, the our uk law says that theft is removing something permantly and preventing the original creator/person from using it, by making a copy you do neither of those things.

Fixed. I don't you can call copyright theft "honest".

Irrelevant eh?

Pirates need to stop relying on irrelevant legal definitions to justify their actions. It is ironic that Flakes cites UK law to defend his position. You know where Copyright law came from? England! Oh, and it has been around since about 1700. What happened around that time again? Oh yeah, the advent of the use of the printing press in England.

Let's go back in time...

The year is 1709. Scruffy Twist, a scruffy hooligan, is bragging to a shopkeeper about his newest scam.

ST: "'Ello Guv'na. No, don't worry 'bout hidin' your wares from me. I don' need ta steal them no-more. No, I have a new plan. Me and me fellow hooligans have procured ourselves a printing press and we're gonna be makin copies of the great works of some of the great writers of the day, for a little profit."

Shopkeep: "But is that not illegal, my young ragamuffin? Is that not theft? It seems that the great writers to whom you refer will be destined for the poorhouse. And that place is disgusting."

ST: "No. And that's the best bit. Our law says that it is not theft! Great Innit? This printin' press is the grea'est invention ever."

Shopkeep: "Not theft eh? What about the second part - what about the writers?"

ST: "What was that Guv, couldn't make it out. Anyhow, tell ya what. 'cause I've been lifting yer goods for so long, you get all the copies fer yer reading pleasure at no cost! Heck, no skin off my teeth - I can make copies all day!"

Shopkeep: "Free eh? Well sign me up. I suppose it is not theft, after all! I mean, you're not even making any money off of my copies!"

Hiding in the shadows was Queen Anne, disguised as a commoner and totally disgusted by the base rationalization that she just overhead. She understood the point that the shopkeep was making - every copy of the works of these authors that was distributed without their authorization (sold or taken freely) was depriving the authors of the fruits of their labor. But that hooligan was right - the common-law definition of theft did not seem to apply. Thank goodness, she was Queen and could make new laws to deal with this new printing press technology. So, she marched off and got the ball rolling on the Statute of Anne (1709), the first real copyright law.

Back to the present:

So, if you attempt to invoke a statute of theft in defense of pirating software, you are about 300 years off in your legal analysis.

Irrelevant indeed....

I disagree. I am completely against DRM but I wouldn't buy a game just because the company has the same views as I do.

To be honest, I am for downloading games just to try them out and then buy the game if you like them (sure, there are demos but think about them as what the publisher wants you to see and play. Polish a turd and it looks nice... maybe... but it's still a turd.) but downloading games without intention of buying and continuing to play... that's BS. Why should one invest in a bad game and encourage the developer to create similar games when that cash can be put to good use? View is as testing the market without any influence from the producers because demos never reflect the real game.

If a game developer makes a game that is really good I will always support them buy buying the game. It's just not fair for the customer to buy something that turns out to be utter crap. Comparing games with wine or cars or etcetera is just wrong. When you go to a tasting you drink that wine, on a test drive you drive the actual car, you don't play a DEMO. Would you buy a car from me if I showed you only the motor?

good thing the queen signed everything over to our parliment eh, now we wait 4 years for a law to pass. Our law imo needs completly rewrote theres still silly things in there like its not illegal to shoot a welsh man with a bow and arrow as long as your on england soil and there in wales(or is it england/scotland, ill have to look it up but I cant be arsed..)

queen = useless bag of bones spends all our tax money on going to events and keeping up appearances, we should remove our royle family imo, but thats another topic.

oh and go re-read what i said.