Gamers are Killing the Games Industry

[Alarien]

You can use bad sophistry to justify it all you want but a fact is a fact.

If you download and play a pirated game, you are a thief. (With the sole exception of some people I know who buy the game legitimately, then shelf it and play the non-DRM, non-disc version made by some pirate... I actually don't worry about that).

 

[Weaver]

You can use bad sophistry to justify it all you want but a fact is a fact.

If you download and play a pirated game, you are a thief. (With the sole exception of some people I know who buy the game legitimately, then shelf it and play the non-DRM, non-disc version made by some pirate... I actually don't worry about that).

And the companies that stop you from playing a game because you re-installed it too many times? They are on a perfectly fine moral high road? Just stopping someone from using their product, this is fine and commendable? They are thieves too in my eyes, they promised the player a game and sold them damaged goods.

 

[Seldon2639]

Thats the issue: the pirates make a better product.

A pirated game doesn't need a disk in the drive. A pirated game can be reinstalled on any machine any number of times. A pirated game will not boot you from the experience because the company's servers went down. A pirated game doesn't treat you like a criminal.

Meanwhile, the legit customers get treated like trash. The only modern DRM that I support in any way is Steam. Why? Because steam gives you a better experience. You don't have to have a disk or .iso to play the game, there is a vast community, games are automatically updated, you can install your games on an infinite number of machines, and it is a great portal for independent games.

What publishers need to do in order to curb piracy (and it's NEVER going to completely go away) is to offer a product that is better than what the pirates can offer. This will get you brand loyalty, this will increase sales, and this will make your games better.

Pirates don't make any product. They alter an existing product. That's a bit like saying the guy who sells you stolen jeans actually "makes a better product" because he charges you less. Until pirates are making entire games from scratch, and giving them away, and not "taking an existing game, altering it marginally, and redistributing it", they're not making any product.

This defense of piracy as being a product is part of the problem. It fails to acknowledge that we're entirely dependent on the parent company to actually create the game. Were it not for the companies, pirates would have nothing to pirate. And, not for nothing, but no company can compete with pirates.

They make the game "better" for an individual, at cost to gamers (and the industry) as a whole.

The problem with the piracy door analogy is that it's not really accurate for two reasons:

1. Burglars do not break into your house, make a copy of all your furniture and ideas and then distribute them around while giving you full credit for having owned them.

2. The average successful burglar has to do a LOT more to rob a house than your average pirate. Pirates these days crack games before they're even released to the public. That'd be like if you bought a movie at a store and the burglar made a copy of it and took it before you left the checkout line.

And blaming ourselves gets us nowhere. Big companies like EA are only too happy to gang up on gamers who are ganging up on themselves. We have to be like groups of consumers in other places and present a united front when we have legitimate complaints like oppressive and unconstitutional DRM/spyware. Yes, some people who play games pirate, but the biggest piracy industries are in 3rd-world countries. We should be going after the people making a PROFIT on it, rather than Joe Plays-Games-For-Free in his mom's basement.

First Thing's First there's no such thing as an unconstitutional action taken by a non-governmental body. There is no privacy right against a corporation with whom you've entered a contract. You've agreed to install their software, and have to accept an EULA. That makes it completely legal. Stop talking about it being "illegal" or "unconstitutional", 'cause neither of those words apply.

The analogy was to the concept of giving up DRM because it will be bypassed either way. In that regard it makes perfect sense. And, yes, we've all gotten into the whole "is it stealing to make a copy" argument, so let's avoid rehashing old ideas.

And, fine, I'll show a united front about legitimate complaints once we stop stealing from them. Once we're negotiating as honest consumers, I have no problem banding together to say "some things should stop". Until then, I'm not going to associate myself with people who do harm to the industry.

What really gets to me is the collective self-esteem issues of gamers as a whole. There are pirates for every form of electronic media, but I haven't heard of moviegoers beating themselves up over how a small percentage of them pirate movies. I'm not saying we shouldn't discuss this issue, but throwing all the blame on all gamers, everywhere isn't helping.

Read the OP. I specifically noted that the games industry is unique. Most moviegoers have neither the inclination, nor the ability, to pirate. Gamers, in general, have the ability and (often) the desire to pirate games. Also, if one pirates a movie, the cost is smaller (in absolute dollars) and more distributed (in terms of the size of the industry). Basically, if I pirate a movie, I'm stealing $5 from a guy who has a million dollars, rather than stealing $15 from a guy who has $50,000.

Protecting the rights of consumers to enjoy the product they paid for is becoming the new laber union war, it seems. And like with that, we can't accept all the big company excuses for shortchanging us. When they're offering an inferior product to what's being offered for FREE, they should be trying to find the solution rather than creating more problems by making their commercial product EVEN WORSE, with more oppressive DRM.

See above. The guy who offers to give you a stolen iPod doesn't give you a better product, just a felonious one. If I copy every word from a book on to the computer, and give you the text, I'm not offering you a better product (more permanent, cheaper), just a product I've stolen from the legitimate offer.

Stop justifying piracy, you're giving aid and succor to the very people who FORCE COMPANIES TO USE DRM

The way to win the piracy war (if it even is winnable) is to lower prices. Because then, it doesn't matter even if people pirate. Know why? Even the PIRATES will probably buy commercial copies of the game if the price is low enough. The piracy will actually provide more publicity, while the low price of your game encourages consumers to fork over a little bit extra for that feeling of owning something you paid for.

In a bad economy, you can't expect to price games at 60+ dollars and for folks to NOT pirate. Harp about how they shouldn't play it all you want, but they want to play it and it's just priced too high for them to afford. What do you think they're gonna do? Let's be real here.

Your company is being stolen from by a group of people. The solution, clearly, is to reward those people by lowering prices. Also, why in the world do you think that any significant portion of the gaming population is going to pay $40 for a game when $50 is too much, and they can still get it for free.

You want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg. That's fine. But it also means that we don't get the next Shadow of the Colossus, the next Okami, the next Trauma Center.

 

[Alarien]

For the people who are quoting me and using the straw man comment that game companies are thieves by including limited count installation DRM...

YOU have the choice NOT to buy the game. You are not being forced to buy ANYTHING. You do not have to put up with DRM. Just don't purchase the game.

If you pirate it because of the DRM, you are still a thief.

The argument about the morality of the video game companies is a separate argument and I agree that their DRM methods are unacceptable. But they are not taking YOUR money by force.

 

[thethingthatlurks]

Perhaps we are doing a big part in destroying the industry, perhaps not. Piracy certainly doesn't help, but most of the people who pirate games wouldn't have bought them anyway, so it's not really a loss for the industry. To counter the nonexistent threat of pirates by employing some draconian DRM only serves to drive people who would otherwise have bought the game to illegally downloading it. After all, why pay when you get treated like crap when you can have a completely pain-free experience for free?

There is something I agree with however: The year-to-year releases have got to stop! We (well, quite a few gamers anyway) want our annual entertainment, and we (again, not talking about the people here but gamers in general) are afraid of new things. It's not that mainstream titles are always going to be bad, after all popular things are popular for a reason, but they become stale if too much effort is being put into making them appeal to the largest possible audience. Idiot fratboys love Halo because it lets them act out their homoerotic fantasies (teabagging ftw), Halo gets popular, everything must be like Halo. Yeah, we gamers really can screw something up...

 

[Seldon2639]

Perhaps we are doing a big part in destroying the industry, perhaps not. Piracy certainly doesn't help, but most of the people who pirate games wouldn't have bought them anyway, so it's not really a loss for the industry. To counter the nonexistent threat of pirates by employing some draconian DRM only serves to drive people who would otherwise have bought the game to illegally downloading it. After all, why pay when you get treated like crap when you can have a completely pain-free experience for free?

Yeah, but who caused the DRM in the first place? Companies wouldn't be putting in terrible DRM crap if they weren't trying to stop pirates.

 

[Lysserd]

I think what we'll see is gaming companies switching to the 'Steam Method'. Where games run off of their software and are bound to an account. It's cheaper for the company and more secrure, thus lowering the cost of the game and boosting sales.

I see a lot of people compalining about game costs and DRM being so restrictive. Guess what people? BOTH of these problems would never have existed if there were no pirates. I have to agree with AngloDoom waaay up at the top there. People will always want stuff for free. What they don't realize is what happens when people start pirating things. It causes the industry to retaliate with things like DRM. But DRM also costs money to develop and implement, so guess what? That cost gets tacked onto the price of the game.

The annoying truth is that if you want prices of games to drop the pirates need to do one thing. Instead of pirating, just wait a bit for the game to go on sale or have a price drop. Or buck up and buy it maybe. This will cause less development into DRM and will make the companies more secure, lowering or stabilizing game costs.

I myself am just starting to look at game development, and I'll be struck down before I see some brat stealing my (and many other peoples) hard work, time, and talent just because they want it free.

 

[thethingthatlurks]

Perhaps we are doing a big part in destroying the industry, perhaps not. Piracy certainly doesn't help, but most of the people who pirate games wouldn't have bought them anyway, so it's not really a loss for the industry. To counter the nonexistent threat of pirates by employing some draconian DRM only serves to drive people who would otherwise have bought the game to illegally downloading it. After all, why pay when you get treated like crap when you can have a completely pain-free experience for free?

Yeah, but who caused the DRM in the first place? Companies wouldn't be putting in terrible DRM crap if they weren't trying to stop pirates.

Companies who...ooh, gotcha
Ok, joking aside, I'm old enough to remember the days of code wheels. Copy protection has only gotten worse since then. It's one thing to enter a code, it's another to activate the product online, or have it not work if I am running or have a virtual disc drive installed.
I don't think anybody would argue that publishers don't have the right to ensure that the products they finance only enter the market through legal means, but...well, if I pay for something, I expect it to work without causing me headaches. That's my point really, I gladly pay for quality software, but I refuse to be treated like a criminal who needs constant supervision for it.

 

[Alarien]

My feeling on the DRM issue is that it sucks, but at this point, we're screwing the industry over just as much or more than they are trying to screw us. I hate online activation, but it is what it is.

At this point, I buy 100% of my PC games on Steam (or Stardock I guess, if I ever get any more of those games). It sucks not being able to load 1 copy on both my computer and my wife's... we have to buy our own copies, but Steam has good deals, you can play most stuff offline after the initial load, has decent matchmaking/dedicated servers for it's own games, and I never have to worry about losing a disc, hunting for patches, or whatnot. If I reinstall an OS, I fire up Steam and there are all my games, waiting to install.

Not to sound like a Valve fanboy, but they have the best solution to the whole DRM thing as far as I am concerned. It's a win/win for everyone generally.

 

[PDizzle418]

To me it is baffling that companies can justify the production of mediocre games and then be surprised when people pirate it. Take Spore for example Spore was supposed to be an epic game about creating and manipulating life on a large scale. Instead what we got was abusive DRM and childish game play to satisfy the "casual" gamer and appease the masses. While making a game that appeals to most people is good, dumbing a game down to the point where intelligent thought isn't required to complete the game is for the realm of amateurs and flash games.

I don't find it baffling at all. I've noticed a sense of entitlement that seems to spike higher among gamers than by consumers of other entertainment media. The general feeling is that if someone is going to buy a 60+ Dollar game, then they had better enjoy it. While it's in a game publishers best interest to make an enjoyable experience, nowhere on your receipt does it state that you must like the game. When someone spends 11 dollars to watch a movie and they didn't enjoy the movie, you can't march up to the ticket booth and demand your money back. to that end games are the same, it's just that more money is exchanged.

yes DRM is annoying, it's a giant pain in the ass, but at the same time, digital distrubution has completely changed the game. like the OP stated, it's crazy easy to install a single computer game on multiple computers. sure you may be honest, but do you think everyone else is?

They would gladly pay for a good game, but one that seems like it was rushed to completion or one they would never consider buying in the first play they will pirate and play it until they are bored (which is often not very long). And if they are pleasantly surprised by a game they didn't originally think was going to be good, they will gladly spend the money to support the developers.

once again using the movie analogy, before, if a movie didn't look good, or you weren't interested, you just didn't go to see it. Alternatively, you borrowed a friends dvd (more likely a tape since we're going back in time) or rented it, and decided on that. what differs in that case than outright pirating, is that one copy is being used, you still had to give the copy back to your friend or video store. you didn't get to keep it. Pirating a game just to 'check to see if it's worth buying' is very similar this process, except for the fact that the product appears out of nowhere, with no compensation for anyone. while it sounds nice, it's not helpful to that thing we call an economy.

I find the mentality that pirating a game can somehow leads to future profit to be short sighted, and frankly selfish. The problem is, piracy is here to stay, and unfortunately, partially because of that, so is DRM. Also, bear in mind, while it's a big part, piracy is not the only is not the only issue facing publishers these days. the reselling of used games also cuts into a company's profitablity, but that's another subject for another day.

To your first rebuttal,
I don't feel like I'm entitled to a good game I'm just saying that if they want people to venture out and invest their game they need to give you a reason to do it. You would go buy a bad fish because you wanted fish, you'd buy a good fish that you would enjoy. Same principal here if it's good people will buy it. If you want to sell a product you make it good, if someone makes a poor product and then wonders why no one wants to pay the same for a bad game as for a good game then they need to rethink their production strategy. Basically what I'm saying is that if it's not good enough to buy or the DRM in Spore's case was too strict people aren't going to pay for it and their going to pirate.

to your second rebuttal,
Borrowing a friends DVD isn't likely to get you to buy the movie though is it? the difference between a movie and a game is that a movie isn't an enthralling experience. At least to me I can see a movie once, maybe twice and I don't usually ever have to see it again with few exceptions. so if I were to borrow a friends VHS or DVD or whatever I wouldn't be inclined to go buy it because I can always get it from them. Not so with games, because if you pirate a game you only get the single player experience and if you want multi your going to have to dish out (for the most part). while what I'm saying is that I know for a fact that people have pirated a game, and then turned around and said I like this game so much that I want to buy it, or I want to play the multi cause the single player is so good. Things along that line, and if they hadn't pirated the game in the first place they would have never been driven to buy it because they didn't think it was going to be good. As bad of a rationale as it is, if someone pirates a game chances are they were never going to get that person's money anyways and in some cases like the one I have described have benefited because of it. Is this in the minority? most definitely, but it happens. Also on most pirate sites they encourage people to buy the game after trying it.

 

[Seldon2639]

Perhaps we are doing a big part in destroying the industry, perhaps not. Piracy certainly doesn't help, but most of the people who pirate games wouldn't have bought them anyway, so it's not really a loss for the industry. To counter the nonexistent threat of pirates by employing some draconian DRM only serves to drive people who would otherwise have bought the game to illegally downloading it. After all, why pay when you get treated like crap when you can have a completely pain-free experience for free?

Yeah, but who caused the DRM in the first place? Companies wouldn't be putting in terrible DRM crap if they weren't trying to stop pirates.

Companies who...ooh, gotcha
Ok, joking aside, I'm old enough to remember the days of code wheels. Copy protection has only gotten worse since then. It's one thing to enter a code, it's another to activate the product online, or have it not work if I am running or have a virtual disc drive installed.
I don't think anybody would argue that publishers don't have the right to ensure that the products they finance only enter the market through legal means, but...well, if I pay for something, I expect it to work without causing me headaches. That's my point really, I gladly pay for quality software, but I refuse to be treated like a criminal who needs constant supervision for it.

That's the price you pay for looking like people who are criminals. It's profiling, but that's what happens. Think of how many times (in politics) we've said that the more moderate elements of a group need to distance themselves from the radical fringe? Mainstream gamers, honest, non-felonious, gamers, need to distance ourselves from the pirates. In the same way mainstream Christians denounce the KKK, we need to denounce and ostracize anyone who pirates.

 

[thethingthatlurks]

Perhaps we are doing a big part in destroying the industry, perhaps not. Piracy certainly doesn't help, but most of the people who pirate games wouldn't have bought them anyway, so it's not really a loss for the industry. To counter the nonexistent threat of pirates by employing some draconian DRM only serves to drive people who would otherwise have bought the game to illegally downloading it. After all, why pay when you get treated like crap when you can have a completely pain-free experience for free?

Yeah, but who caused the DRM in the first place? Companies wouldn't be putting in terrible DRM crap if they weren't trying to stop pirates.

Companies who...ooh, gotcha
Ok, joking aside, I'm old enough to remember the days of code wheels. Copy protection has only gotten worse since then. It's one thing to enter a code, it's another to activate the product online, or have it not work if I am running or have a virtual disc drive installed.
I don't think anybody would argue that publishers don't have the right to ensure that the products they finance only enter the market through legal means, but...well, if I pay for something, I expect it to work without causing me headaches. That's my point really, I gladly pay for quality software, but I refuse to be treated like a criminal who needs constant supervision for it.

That's the price you pay for looking like people who are criminals. It's profiling, but that's what happens. Think of how many times (in politics) we've said that the more moderate elements of a group need to distance themselves from the radical fringe? Mainstream gamers, honest, non-felonious, gamers, need to distance ourselves from the pirates. In the same way mainstream Christians denounce the KKK, we need to denounce and ostracize anyone who pirates.

But what if it is actually justified to pirate a game? What about install limits, or the new DLCs on release day to curb buying used malarkey EA came up with? Or what about really old games that are no longer available in retail anywhere?
Yes, Piracy is illegal, and rightfully so, but I would say it is justified under certain conditions. Hell, I use no-cd cracks for games I bought legitimately, because my netbook doesn't have a DVD drive. Does that mean I contribute to the demise of the gaming industry?

 

[Alarien]

Err, no, it is not "justified to pirate a game." Ever. You don't even give good reasons for pirating it.

I don't see any situation in which you BUY a game, and then put a cracked or pirated version on your drive. That's just a work-around to the annoying disc situation. I have no problem with that, but if you are downloading a game you don't own in some form, there is no good excuse. And no, DRM is not an excuse.

 

[Seldon2639]

But what if it is actually justified to pirate a game? What about install limits, or the new DLCs on release day to curb buying used malarkey EA came up with? Or what about really old games that are no longer available in retail anywhere?
Yes, Piracy is illegal, and rightfully so, but I would say it is justified under certain conditions. Hell, I use no-cd cracks for games I bought legitimately, because my netbook doesn't have a DVD drive. Does that mean I contribute to the demise of the gaming industry?

When it comes to any kind of DRM, no, it's not justified. You're only making the problem much much worse. Lack of DVD drive, sure

 

[Mr. GameBrain]

The way to win the piracy war (if it even is winnable) is to lower prices. Because then, it doesn't matter even if people pirate. Know why? Even the PIRATES will probably buy commercial copies of the game if the price is low enough. The piracy will actually provide more publicity, while the low price of your game encourages consumers to fork over a little bit extra for that feeling of owning something you paid for.

In a bad economy, you can't expect to price games at 60+ dollars and for folks to NOT pirate. Harp about how they shouldn't play it all you want, but they want to play it and it's just priced too high for them to afford. What do you think they're gonna do? Let's be real here.

Plus, and this is VERY present here on the forums when the topics arise, people aren't WILLING to buy games anymore.

This here can be quite true at times. Sure there are still those individuals who wallow in pits of money and able to throw it away on frivolous trivialities. Then there are people like me, who can't justify spending a week's worth of groceries on one new game.

I just bide my time and see what pops on Steam for $2 to $7 dollars.

Steam is a great example. If it ever shuts down then it won't be great, but for now it's awesome because they provide legit copies of games at special prices that often reflect either the demand or the age of the game. Sometimes it's just a great deal, period.

But if Valve were like EA, they'd have packed a bunch of spyware in there and priced all their old games at $30+, sort of like when you buy new games at a store.

I have to agree on you completely.
I'm gonna admit I was a former Pirate, but that was because I was frustrated having to pay for games via the traditional highstreet retailers such as GAME.
As a kid I would have to save up 2 months worth of pocket money, just to afford a single videogame, which was fine back when I didn't have much of a hunger for playing games, and the AAA titles were not as common as they are now, but as I got older, I wanted to play more games, great games, where my richer friends would tell me about and I really wanted to try, but obviously I was still too young to work, and my parents couldn't afford to give me more pocket money.

So I learned about piracy, first through emulation, as there were so many sweet games I missed out on. Eventually I played all the good stuff, so I had to move on to newer stuff.

To be honest if it wasn't for my part-time job, the awesomeness of online retailers like Play.com, Shopto, and Gameplay, and the wonder that is Steam, (probably the most workable and realistic form of digital distribution), I would still pirate games, I'd have to, as not being able to play the latest game would make me depressed, (especially since my rich bastard of a friend buys every single game he wants as soon as its released (due to his family saving up a very large £4000+ trust fund for him that he can use now that he's at uni!)).

If anything, Gaming Companies are killing themselves, as they are making better products, more frequently, that even the most devoted of gamers are struggling to keep up with, because the cost of gaming is still very high!

(I will admit gaming has always been costly, but remember, gaming was a novelty luxury not too long ago, but now it has become highly intergrated into our culture, like TV, movies and music!)

 

[thethingthatlurks]

But what if it is actually justified to pirate a game? What about install limits, or the new DLCs on release day to curb buying used malarkey EA came up with? Or what about really old games that are no longer available in retail anywhere?
Yes, Piracy is illegal, and rightfully so, but I would say it is justified under certain conditions. Hell, I use no-cd cracks for games I bought legitimately, because my netbook doesn't have a DVD drive. Does that mean I contribute to the demise of the gaming industry?

When it comes to any kind of DRM, no, it's not justified. You're only making the problem much much worse. Lack of DVD drive, sure

You are aware that is circular logic, right? DRM gets worse, more people pirate, DRM gets worse still to combat increasing piracy.
Perhaps it is making the problem worse, but I won't be forced to remain online while playing a singleplayer game, I won't be told how often I can install something I paid for, and I won't be told what software I may or may not use on my computer in addition to the game I have just bought. Don't get me wrong, I won't pirate any game that does this (at that point a game isn't worth the effort to download it), but I can understand why people would, and I may even defend them.

 

[cuzant]

I've been a long time reader of the forum, suppose i have to start posting sometime. So DRM then...

Does anyone else not think it's pretty awful business sense from these big game companies? Surely the point of DRM is to stop people who have pirated from playing and to leave those who have paid to play in peace? It seems to do exactly the opposite in most cases (Steam being the only system i can think of that actually achieves this). Paying customers at best get minorly inconvenienced and at worst can't play the game they have just spent their hard earned, whereas people who didn't pay have no real problems.

I think if the game companies want to cut piracy numbers they should switch to steam-esque systems, or something else non-invasive for paying customers. At the very least it would mean the people who still pirated can't claim DRM drove them to it, and would have to admit they just don't want to pay for the product.

Oh yeah, and more demos while they are at it, it's quite nice to actually know what i'm buying rather than having to read a bunch of reviews.

 

[Alarien]

I've been a long time reader of the forum, suppose i have to start posting sometime. So DRM then...

Does anyone else not think it's pretty awful business sense from these big game companies? Surely the point of DRM is to stop people who have pirated from playing and to leave those who have paid to play in peace? It seems to do exactly the opposite in most cases (Steam being the only system i can think of that actually achieves this). Paying customers at best get minorly inconvenienced and at worst can't play the game they have just spent their hard earned, whereas people who didn't pay have no real problems.

I think if the game companies want to cut piracy numbers they should switch to steam-esque systems, or something else non-invasive for paying customers. At the very least it would mean the people who still pirated can't claim DRM drove them to it, and would have to admit they just don't want to pay for the product.

Oh yeah, and more demos while they are at it, it's quite nice to actually know what i'm buying rather than having to read a bunch of reviews.

While I agree with you whole-heartedly that smart companies should switch to a Steam-style model as their only form of DRM, I think the problem won't be solved by that.

Being a long term gamer and member of a fairly long term guild with many core members and many members that have come and gone, I see the same attitudes from a lot of people. DRM is just an excuse. People find it to be a convenient way to rationalize their theft. The basic problem boils down to games aren't "cheap" to most people, but they are widely available in a free, but illegal format, so they download them and then use DRM or other scapegoats to justify it.

Even if there was no DRM at all, people would find ways to argue that what they are doing is justified. Game piracy, along with music and video piracy back in the day, is just a fact of media based entertainment and it will always be there and there will always be people who abuse it and then look to pat themselves on the back for their cleverness at sticking it to the "man," despite the fact that the people they are dicking over includes you and me and themselves, since companies make up their losses through pricing.

 

[GonzoGamer]

The way to win the piracy war (if it even is winnable) is to lower prices. Because then, it doesn't matter even if people pirate. Know why? Even the PIRATES will probably buy commercial copies of the game if the price is low enough. The piracy will actually provide more publicity, while the low price of your game encourages consumers to fork over a little bit extra for that feeling of owning something you paid for.

In a bad economy, you can't expect to price games at 60+ dollars and for folks to NOT pirate. Harp about how they shouldn't play it all you want, but they want to play it and it's just priced too high for them to afford. What do you think they're gonna do? Let's be real here.

Plus, and this is VERY present here on the forums when the topics arise, people aren't WILLING to buy games anymore.

This here can be quite true at times. Sure there are still those individuals who wallow in pits of money and able to throw it away on frivolous trivialities. Then there are people like me, who can't justify spending a week's worth of groceries on one new game.

I just bide my time and see what pops on Steam for $2 to $7 dollars.

Steam is a great example. If it ever shuts down then it won't be great, but for now it's awesome because they provide legit copies of games at special prices that often reflect either the demand or the age of the game. Sometimes it's just a great deal, period.

But if Valve were like EA, they'd have packed a bunch of spyware in there and priced all their old games at $30+, sort of like when you buy new games at a store.

I have to agree on you completely.
I'm gonna admit I was a former Pirate, but that was because I was frustrated having to pay for games via the traditional highstreet retailers such as GAME.
As a kid I would have to save up 2 months worth of pocket money, just to afford a single videogame, which was fine back when I didn't have much of a hunger for playing games, and the AAA titles were not as common as they are now, but as I got older, I wanted to play more games, great games, where my richer friends would tell me about and I really wanted to try, but obviously I was still too young to work, and my parents couldn't afford to give me more pocket money.

So I learned about piracy, first through emulation, as there were so many sweet games I missed out on. Eventually I played all the good stuff, so I had to move on to newer stuff.

To be honest if it wasn't for my part-time job, the awesomeness of online retailers like Play.com, Shopto, and Gameplay, and the wonder that is Steam, (probably the most workable and realistic form of digital distribution), I would still pirate games, I'd have to, as not being able to play the latest game would make me depressed, (especially since my rich bastard of a friend buys every single game he wants as soon as its released (due to his family saving up a very large £4000+ trust fund for him that he can use now that he's at uni!)).

If anything, Gaming Companies are killing themselves, as they are making better products, more frequently, that even the most devoted of gamers are struggling to keep up with, because the cost of gaming is still very high!

(I will admit gaming has always been costly, but remember, gaming was a novelty luxury not too long ago, but now it has become highly intergrated into our culture, like TV, movies and music!)

You're absolutely right.
I have a hard time feeling bad for the game companies and I?ll tell you why. First we have to look at all the shovelware they produce. There are plenty of quickly thrown together games that they sell for regular price. We may not notice this gen as much because most of them are for the wii. I also don?t feel bad because they charge $60 per title. Considering how many people (myself included) who pay this full price, they?re doing a lot better than they let on. I also don?t feel bad because they allowed corps like gamestop to ruin the retail experience; considering the company revolves around video games the publishers should?ve been more hands on with them like the movie industry was with rental stores when they came around in the 80s. Another reason I don?t feel too bad is because more often than not the talented people who make and buff out these games for us are payed very little while the execs bloat the budget and take however much of the return as they want: but that?s like any other industry.

What can they do? Well instead of complaining and punishing everybody, they can try to make games a more appealing purchase. It?s like when the movie industry started to get hurt by pirating: they didn?t just bich&moan, they looked at the reasons people bought pirate dvds and addressed them: they lowered the price and shortened the time you have to wait between theatrical release and dvd release.

The game industry hasn?t done anything like that. The closest thing I?ve seen is that they?ve been trying to make it look like they?re offering more to early adaptors by cutting out content and making it dlc that only the early adaptors will get without paying $15. Or curbing trade-ins by promising, what ends up being, overpriced dlc.

The console makers can do their part to by adding features people want in their firmware updates so that gamers are less likely to get implants for their machine. What?s a ps3 owner to lose by chipping their ps3? Trophies?

So far, the only corporations that have given anyone any real incentive to buy new games are the big retail outlets like Best Buy & Toysrus and the game companies should be on their knees thanking them. I?m constantly getting coupons from Best Buy (their free reward program) specifically for video games. Similarly TRU has a rewards program where you occasionally get $20 - $30 gift cards for buying a new game and that?s been enough incentive for me. There have been a couple of games in the past year that I was on the fence about until I saw that.

 

[Resurrectionist]

Can't hold the Customer's responsible for a manufacturer's inept business model or corrupt corporate culture that inevitably leads to the downfall of a seemingly indestructable and historically profitable bluechip franchise / brand; resulting in thousands of lost jobs while those in charge are not held accountable. A Sharp Mind, Creativity and a sense of Social / Moral responsiblity is free.

Going to blame the consumer's for failures -

General Motors
Toyota
EA

Reward companies for innovation -

Example:

* Apple seems to have over priced products that are locked down tight with ironclad exclusive agreements and DRM all over the map - and are successful because Apple's business model and corporate culture has fostered a creative environment giving consumer's innovative products.

(* I don't own any Apple products; i.e. not a fanboy)