let's debate piracy and the hypocrisy behind it

Recommended Videos

lwm3398

New member
Apr 15, 2009
2,896
0
0
numaiomul said:
they chose to take drugs. they don't have the willpower to quit drugs because they have an addictive nature. pirate chose to take games. that's their nature. and besides: you can die from games last time i checked.
Yes, they chose to take the drugs, and they got addicted. Because drugs are addictive, not because they have addictive personalities. Actually, probably a bit of both.

How do you die from games? Playing a game won't kill you after playing it for one long time. Drinking, smoking, and shooting up too much at one time can. People would stop playing games before they starved, and if they didn't, they probably didn't really want to live. A human being would never go against instinct like that.

You say you want to build a bridge between pirates and developers. You say pirates like the only kind is you. You see, you want games but can't afford them, so you pirate. Other pirates can afford them just fine but say "Fuck that, I don't wanna pay for anything.". You also make it seem like you need games. You, as I've said before, do not need them to survive. So stop trying to make yourself seem like a crusader for all of the people who can't afford games, there doesn't need to be a crusader for that. Pirating is wrong, no matter what the circumstances, unless you're just buying the game to test it and then buy it honestly.

You are not justified. It would be okay if you were pirating, say, food, but games aren't necessary like food. There is no way to justify stealing that which is not a necessity.
 

Assassin Xaero

New member
Jul 23, 2008
5,392
0
0
secretsantaone said:
poiumty said:
Ugh... this is like trying to talk to people that believe in god... You are not making a copy of it for fuck's sake. That is the stupidest and most illogical thing I have ever heard. Well, not really. I need to stop saying it is the most illogical thing ever because ever type I say that people never fail to prove me wrong when they open their mouths again.

To make a copy of anything, first you must have it in your possession. You may be downloading a copy of it, but you are not making the copy yourself, unless you burn it onto a disc or something. When I download a CD or a game, I am not making a copy of it. I am getting the files from another source and getting them onto my hard drive. When I backup my hard drive or burn the data to a disc, then I am making a copy of it.

Bottom line, you are not making a copy, you are taking a copy.
 

Babitz

New member
Jan 18, 2010
418
0
0
Danglybits said:
Babitz said:
Assassin Xaero said:
numaiomul said:
Assassin Xaero said:
numaiomul said:
why are people so hateful on people like jack? :-/
Because he seems to think that it is perfectly ok to steal stuff because he doesn't have the money to buy it, maybe? Has he tried to get a job? Probably not. Well, I can't afford to live on my own, drive a nice car, or have the insurance for a nice car. Using Jack's logic that means it is perfectly ok for me to go steal a nice car and have a nice house without paying for any of it...
already discussed the job part
numaiomul said:
fourthly: the economic state in jack's country is in a full turmoil, adults are so desperate for a job that they are willing to work extra hours for no money at freaking mcdonalds as a toilet washer or stuff like that so jack has no way of getting a job [not including the extreme work-load a school from jack's country necessitates.]
You never said if he ever tried to get a job. Plus, school is no excuse. If he has time to play pirated games and go around to all these sites on the internet all the time, then he has time for a job...
Yeah, there's loads of jobs out there in under developed countries for high school graders.
If Jack and his country are so destitute, then he really doesn't have the time or the money to spend on games does he? Games are a luxury item and it sucks that there are haves and have-nots but at what point did not having enough money for something mean that you got it for free?
No one said it's the right thing to do. Jack buys original games from time to time when he can afford them. On the other hand, I can bet my ass that all of you would pirate the hell out of the world if you lived in the same conditions.

I don't even have to ask you if you have an mp3 folder on your computer. Or if you watch copyrighted videos on youtube. That's also piracy, as far as I know.

In the underdeveloped countries, piracy does more good than DRM ever will. Jacks play pirated games and buy them once they can afford them. If it weren't for piracy, Jacks would never play or buy any games at all. Not to mention, there would be no Jacks on this forum and the whole gaming community would be a lot smaller.

Piracy isn't right. None of us say it is. It's just that we have no other choice, except not playing games at all. I know, you'll tell Jack to stop playing games, and I know you wouldn't stop either.

AND FOR THE Nth DARN TIME TO EVERYONE OUT THERE: IN THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES FOOD, COMPUTERS AND INTERNET ARE CHEAPER AND THE WAGES ARE LOWER THAN IN THE US, BUT THE PRICES OF GAMES REMAIN THE SAME SO STOP ASKING HOW CAN JACK AFFORD A COMPUTER AND FOOD AND CANNOT AFFORD GAMES.

But anyway, this whole argument is retarded since we all just go in circles.
 

numaiomul

New member
Oct 18, 2009
73
0
0
I want a more open public toward piracy. there are bad people in ANY social group. that is a given. but some want to change. if steam made a program to use your interned connection as a part-time transfer server for points, or click for points i'd be all over it but currently there is no such thing except ptc/ptr sides which most are bogus [personal experience]. and i never said that pirates are only my kind. and personally i don't care about idiots like the ones that can afford but pirate for the sake of it;because frankly you can't get an idiot to change his mind.
i never said i need games. i love games and i like to play. and i'm not trying to be a crusader. i'm one of the guiltiest people i know stuff like the ones we're discussing being the least of my worriers but i think developers inhibit their profit by encasing themselves in a box of [all pirates are bad].
and besides let's get down to a SPECIFIC example [that's really common where i live]:jack's example. he has no money for games. when he raises a bit he buys an original game because he likes it. he pirates most games. in his SPECIFIC case do you think the companies lose anything? he isn't a loss because he didn't have the requirements for the target population [funds and stuff] so technically the company loses nothing maybe gain one or tho customers because jack tells how good the game is and jack gains some fun time. there are at least 10k jacks in my city alone so that means roughly 15k extra sales for a good game. i see it as a win-win situation. again i am referring to this SPECIFIC situation which is quite common where i live.
don't you think he shouldn't be regarded as any of the idiots who spam their way through life and developers try to make a win-win situation with him?
oh and btw: pirating in our country is something as common as walking. i even saw a guy selling dvd-s o some police-men.multiple times.
 

Dick Seamen

New member
Mar 3, 2010
31
0
0
lacktheknack said:
numaiomul said:
so i have sensed a broken logic here. potential sales DO NOT EXIST.
those numbers are made up. if a game is pirated 40 milion times it doesn't mean that 40 milion units will be sold if piracy didn't exist. if u think otherwise prove it.
So let's imagine that piracy didn't happen. And that the game pirated 40 million times wasn't pirated at all.

Let's imagine that, with no alternative, 5% (a rather low number) of the people who WOULD have pirated the game buy it instead.

Also the game costs $50 (also low).

40000000 x 0.05 = 2000000 more customers.

2000000 x $50 = Ten million dollars more.

If piracy didn't exist, then a lot of potential sales would turn into REAL sales (even if just a small percentage).

So, I just proved that piracy does in fact lose the company money.
Well.. Im just going to use your own argument here..

Let's imagine that, with no alternative, 5% (a rather low number) of the people who have pirated the game buy it after they downloaded it illegaly and liked it.

That doesnt sound to unreasonable, does it? I became a huge fan of the Football Manager games after i played a pirated copy of it a couple of years ago and have bought every realease of it since that.

For the record, i do not download myself since i dont like playing games on PC. Except for FM, it does awful on console. But i dont think its morally wrong.
 

Nuke_em_05

Senior Member
Mar 30, 2009
828
0
21
Entertainment is a luxury, you don't have any "right" to it. If you can't afford it, too bad.

Not that that will change the minds of the entitled masses.
 

RathWolf

New member
Apr 14, 2009
326
0
0
Dick Seamen said:
Well.. Im just going to use your own argument here..

Let's imagine that, with no alternative, 5% (a rather low number) of the people who have pirated the game buy it after they downloaded it illegaly and liked it.

That doesnt sound to unreasonable, does it? I became a huge fan of the Football Manager games after i played a pirated copy of it a couple of years ago and have bought every realease of it since that.
The thing is though, what do you think is a higher percentage of pirates: those who just want it for free and would otherwise buy it, or those who download a game and then decide to buy it?
 

chronobreak

New member
Sep 6, 2008
1,865
0
0
Just as an aside, I think this thread also speaks to the notion of analogies as parts of arguments. Analogies are only useful when trying to make a point simpler for someone to understand, if they become the basis of an argument, they will fail almost all of the time, because comparing one thing to another usually contains some sort of logical fallacy. We are getting too bogged down with the drug talk and stealing cars and whatever else.

You shouldn't defend your position with an analogy, it should just be used as an explanation. That is my opinion, anyways.
 

Danglybits

New member
Oct 31, 2008
517
0
0
Babitz said:
Danglybits said:
Babitz said:
Assassin Xaero said:
numaiomul said:
Assassin Xaero said:
numaiomul said:
why are people so hateful on people like jack? :-/
Because he seems to think that it is perfectly ok to steal stuff because he doesn't have the money to buy it, maybe? Has he tried to get a job? Probably not. Well, I can't afford to live on my own, drive a nice car, or have the insurance for a nice car. Using Jack's logic that means it is perfectly ok for me to go steal a nice car and have a nice house without paying for any of it...
already discussed the job part
numaiomul said:
fourthly: the economic state in jack's country is in a full turmoil, adults are so desperate for a job that they are willing to work extra hours for no money at freaking mcdonalds as a toilet washer or stuff like that so jack has no way of getting a job [not including the extreme work-load a school from jack's country necessitates.]
You never said if he ever tried to get a job. Plus, school is no excuse. If he has time to play pirated games and go around to all these sites on the internet all the time, then he has time for a job...
Yeah, there's loads of jobs out there in under developed countries for high school graders.
If Jack and his country are so destitute, then he really doesn't have the time or the money to spend on games does he? Games are a luxury item and it sucks that there are haves and have-nots but at what point did not having enough money for something mean that you got it for free?
No one said it's the right thing to do. Jack buys original games from time to time when he can afford them. On the other hand, I can bet my ass that all of you would pirate the hell out of the world if you lived in the same conditions.

I don't even have to ask you if you have an mp3 folder on your computer. Or if you watch copyrighted videos on youtube. That's also piracy, as far as I know.

In the underdeveloped countries, piracy does more good than DRM ever will. Jacks play pirated games and buy them once they can afford them. If it weren't for piracy, Jacks would never play or buy any games at all. Not to mention, there would be no Jacks on this forum and the whole gaming community would be a lot smaller.

Piracy isn't right. None of us say it is. It's just that we have no other choice, except not playing games at all. I know, you'll tell Jack to stop playing games, and I know you wouldn't stop either.

AND FOR THE Nth DARN TIME TO EVERYONE OUT THERE: IN THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES FOOD, COMPUTERS AND INTERNET ARE CHEAPER AND THE WAGES ARE LOWER THAN IN THE US, BUT THE PRICES OF GAMES REMAIN THE SAME SO STOP ASKING HOW CAN JACK AFFORD A COMPUTER AND FOOD AND CANNOT AFFORD GAMES.

But anyway, this whole argument is retarded since we all just go in circles.
I am well aware of the discrepancy between affordability of necessities and broadband and computers in many parts of the world thank you. It does not change the fact that this hypothetical person would be wiser to save what money he would spend on games and such for things he actually needs. Just because its cheap doesn't mean it's not a waste of money if you need other things.

You also have no clue what I would do in his situation. I have stopped buying games and canceled subscriptions when I couldn't afford them. "No other choice"? Please, Jacks aren't noble, do what ever it takes freedom fighters. They're people who don't have the scratch for something that they want so they steal it.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Dick Seamen said:
lacktheknack said:
numaiomul said:
so i have sensed a broken logic here. potential sales DO NOT EXIST.
those numbers are made up. if a game is pirated 40 milion times it doesn't mean that 40 milion units will be sold if piracy didn't exist. if u think otherwise prove it.
So let's imagine that piracy didn't happen. And that the game pirated 40 million times wasn't pirated at all.

Let's imagine that, with no alternative, 5% (a rather low number) of the people who WOULD have pirated the game buy it instead.

Also the game costs $50 (also low).

40000000 x 0.05 = 2000000 more customers.

2000000 x $50 = Ten million dollars more.

If piracy didn't exist, then a lot of potential sales would turn into REAL sales (even if just a small percentage).

So, I just proved that piracy does in fact lose the company money.
Well.. Im just going to use your own argument here..

Let's imagine that, with no alternative, 5% (a rather low number) of the people who have pirated the game buy it after they downloaded it illegaly and liked it.

That doesnt sound to unreasonable, does it? I became a huge fan of the Football Manager games after i played a pirated copy of it a couple of years ago and have bought every realease of it since that.

For the record, i do not download myself since i dont like playing games on PC. Except for FM, it does awful on console. But i dont think its morally wrong.
Unfortunately, that number you mentioned is something closer to 1%. Especially to people like "Jack", which this whole thread is about.
 

lwm3398

New member
Apr 15, 2009
2,896
0
0
numaiomul said:
and besides let's get down to a SPECIFIC example [that's really common where i live]:jack's example. he has no money for games. when he raises a bit he buys an original game because he likes it. he pirates most games. in his SPECIFIC case do you think the companies lose anything? he isn't a loss because he didn't have the requirements for the target population [funds and stuff] so technically the company loses nothing maybe gain one or tho customers because jack tells how good the game is and jack gains some fun time. there are at least 10k jacks in my city alone so that means roughly 15k extra sales for a good game. i see it as a win-win situation. again i am referring to this SPECIFIC situation which is quite common where i live.
But Jack is STILL A SALE LOST! The game he got for free that should have been paid for is $60 lost from the company, and if what you say is true, 10,000 people not paying $60 is $600,000 that should have been paid! And if he tells a person to buy the game (The Game which I just lost, everyone feel free to say "Damn you!" or something), how do we know the person he told doesn't pirate it? He's just spreading the word and creating more pirates! And if your country is so bad financially, how can those 15,000 people can pay for the game in your country and come 10,000 can't? You're contradicting yourself.
 

direkiller

New member
Dec 4, 2008
1,655
0
0
numaiomul said:
i never said i deserve a game, and i never said i'm doing something good and i'm not trying to make excuses for myself. in a country like this a conscious brings only trouble and most go insane by the time they reach 14. i'm trying to make a bridge between developers and pirates so that developers find out what pirates what [i am speaking of the ones that genuinely don't have the means to buy i game but still want it] and sell their game and make some profit and the pirates get a legit game with full feature thus everybody is happy. if we keep a chasm between pirates and developers stuff like DRM will seem child's play compared to the future security measures.
I think it was about 6 months ago someone(here) did do an article on pirated games in lower income places i cant find it but it may help your cause
 

Dick Seamen

New member
Mar 3, 2010
31
0
0
RathWolf said:
Dick Seamen said:
Well.. Im just going to use your own argument here..

Let's imagine that, with no alternative, 5% (a rather low number) of the people who have pirated the game buy it after they downloaded it illegaly and liked it.

That doesnt sound to unreasonable, does it? I became a huge fan of the Football Manager games after i played a pirated copy of it a couple of years ago and have bought every realease of it since that.
The thing is though, what do you think is a higher percentage of pirates: those who just want it for free and would otherwise buy it, or those who download a game and then decide to buy it?
I would say their about the same.. The biggest piece of the cake is probably the people who just downloads every thing they have the slightest interest in, because they can.
Hopefully this pushes the industry to make an alternative solution that makes piracy not worth it.
For example, in Sweden we have Spotify. Basicly its all the music in the world for 100 swedish kronor (about 12$) a month (or free with ads). A service thats better than piracy in so many ways that its just not worth the effort to download illegaly anymore
 

JonnWood

Senior Member
Jul 16, 2008
528
0
21
numaiomul said:
i'm not talking about the bad type of pirates. the one that HAVE money but don't pay. i'm taking about the ones that don't have money and would pay. they both are called the same way and treated the same way despite intentions.
That's the problem; you think there's a difference. Whether I rob a store to buy crack or to paythe rent, I've still committed a crime. Intent is irrelevant. Heck, the rent-paying robber at least has a necessity-based excuse. For any type of pirate, their primary reason is "I want".

You can die from aspirin as i recall.
It takes dozens, if not hundreds of doses. It is not possible to have a fully functioning mind and take that much aspirin.

the fact that you can die from something and not from another isn't a very good argument. and besides drug-addicts usually manifest self-neglect and loss of emotional control [or having it before they started taking the drugs.
You made the claim that games can kill people, not me. Drugs actively alter the user's brain chemistry to make them addicted, regardless of their original mental condition. While it is true that people can be addicted to nearly anything, look at the percentage of people who die from drug use vs the percentage of people who have let themselves die from playing a game.

No one said you should pay for a game. You have the financial possibilities to make the choice of buying games [probably even regularly] and you made it. most of us in my country don't have that choice available. i'm not saying we're good or bad i'm saying we're a bit more limited.
And? I can't get most US movies on DVD cheaply, yet I don't pirate. How long before you get "luxury, not right" though your skull?
 

secretsantaone

New member
Mar 9, 2009
439
0
0
Assassin Xaero said:
secretsantaone said:
poiumty said:
Ugh... this is like trying to talk to people that believe in god... You are not making a copy of it for fuck's sake. That is the stupidest and most illogical thing I have ever heard. Well, not really. I need to stop saying it is the most illogical thing ever because ever type I say that people never fail to prove me wrong when they open their mouths again.

To make a copy of anything, first you must have it in your possession. You may be downloading a copy of it, but you are not making the copy yourself, unless you burn it onto a disc or something. When I download a CD or a game, I am not making a copy of it. I am getting the files from another source and getting them onto my hard drive. When I backup my hard drive or burn the data to a disc, then I am making a copy of it.

Bottom line, you are not making a copy, you are taking a copy.
You're arguing your own personal semantics here.
 

secretsantaone

New member
Mar 9, 2009
439
0
0
WanderFreak said:
Argument #1: The corporations don't need the money
You know how Activision started? A small group of people programming for the Atari. In its day it was THE FIRST INDEPENDENT DEVELOPER IN THE WORLD. That's right, the big bad Activision was the 2D Boy of the 70s and 80s. So this big bad corporation that doesn't need your money, it started out as the golden child. So all you people cheering for the Infinity Ward staffers leaving to start their own company, think about that for a second. Oh wait, World of Goo (which was sold for whatever price you wanted for a time) was pirated to an insane degree. Good work.

Argument #2: I'm sticking it to them
I hate McDonalds, stupid restaurant! Which is why I eat there to stick it to them. Congratulations, you're a idiot. Boycotters, take note: boycotting a game is fine. Boycotting a game, then pirating it, just shows how much of a loud mouthed, attention seeking jackass you really are. It says you want the game, you want to play it, but you want to play it on YOUR terms and damn anyone, the game's developer included (even if they're an indy studio, damn them for wanting money to survive, greedy corporation!), who says otherwise.

Argument #3: I can't afford the game/Games are too expensive
Too fucking bad you entitled little shits. I can guarantee 90% of people with this attitude are kids who have never had to get by on $10 a week for months on end because there's no work in their field. And you think the fact you can't afford something justifies stealing it? Try that on a car and see how far you make it. With any luck you'll nearly hit a cop and they'll just shoot you and be done with it. Just think of it as stealing their bullets because you're boycotting being shot by police. See, your argument is perfect!

The video game culture right now is in a bad state. Gamers are an immature, loud mouthed, entitled group of people. We want everything, we want it now, we want it our way, and damn anyone who dares try to make a profit off it it, or do anything however slight that we don't like. It's like someone shifted our culture from creativity and game play to some mess based on the ideals of that jackass college student who hates everything but doesn't really explain why. Corporations are bad! My mass produced button I bought at HMV says so! Look at Left 4 Dead 2, the perfect individual example. Valve makes games too slow! What, a new game? BOO! It should be a free expansion pack! Wait, I know, I'll pirate the game! That will show them that I agree with them entirely but am too arrogant to actually purchase it.

Ultimately, there is no argument. Piracy is stealing, simple as that. We don't have threads arguing whether or not murder is justifiable, or whether breaking and enter is justifiable. It is legally illegal so stop trying to convince everyone you're doing something noble and rebellious. Piracy is the new smoking in class. The only one who doesn't think you're an idiot is you.

But then hey, we're the culture that demands we be treated seriously, while at the same time sending death threats to people we don't like, and making every single instance of nudity in video games a news post (seriously Escapist, you're not doing something good with that). How do you think the outside sees us? A bunch of thieving, lying, obnoxious, foul mouthed, immature, violent, dangerous individuals. No wonder the media always attacks us, we give them all the ammo they ever need.

As a post-note, I'm an artist. An INDEPENDENT artist. If you pirate my stuff, you know who it hurts? Me and only me. Go on, be a big man, ruin my day because you're a cheap fucker.
What an unbiased and objective argument.
 

numaiomul

New member
Oct 18, 2009
73
0
0
Your not taking into consideration the obvious feature most [all] pirate games lack. on-line. multiplayer usually is big in today's marker and a game can hype up a pirate that can buy a game into buying it for the fun of playing with other people.
Still why do you care about people that didn't and couldn't make a difference in a companies sales? i repeat Jack can not buy games at a regular basis, [mostly once a year] so what he does, does not affect game companies. with what does he affect you that have the financial ability to buy games and support developers and etc? jack in your life has NO EFFECT whatever he does, if he pirates or not. but you still hate him for obtaining something illegally that doesn't affect anyone. why?

lwm3398 said:
numaiomul said:
and besides let's get down to a SPECIFIC example [that's really common where i live]:jack's example. he has no money for games. when he raises a bit he buys an original game because he likes it. he pirates most games. in his SPECIFIC case do you think the companies lose anything? he isn't a loss because he didn't have the requirements for the target population [funds and stuff] so technically the company loses nothing maybe gain one or tho customers because jack tells how good the game is and jack gains some fun time. there are at least 10k jacks in my city alone so that means roughly 15k extra sales for a good game. i see it as a win-win situation. again i am referring to this SPECIFIC situation which is quite common where i live.
But Jack is STILL A SALE LOST! The game he got for free that should have been paid for is $60 lost from the company, and if what you say is true, 10,000 people not paying $60 is $600,000 that should have been paid! And if he tells a person to buy the game (The Game which I just lost, everyone feel free to say "Damn you!" or something), how do we know the person he told doesn't pirate it? He's just spreading the word and creating more pirates! And if your country is so bad financially, how can those 15,000 people can pay for the game in your country and come 10,000 can't? You're contradicting yourself.
jack is NOT a lost sale because he was never a sale. and just because some are filthy rich by stealing from others doesn't mean we're all filthy rich.
 

lwm3398

New member
Apr 15, 2009
2,896
0
0
numaiomul said:
Yes, but he could (And damn well should be) a sale. He got a game he should pay for for free, that is a loss for the company! One person buys it and the hundreds who pirate the one copy get it for free. That's 1 sale for 9,999 illegitimate owners. They lose those 9,999 sales by not getting them. Do you understand!?