Lionhead: "Piracy these days on PC is probably less problematic than second-hand sales on the Xbox"

[viranimus]

Yes it is really rather simple... Its actually pretty obvious that the profits lost from piracy pale in comparison from the profits "lost" from second hand. Second had is legal and legitimate and as such more people have less qualms about doing it.

But the bullshit thing is, that even though developers do not like resell and rental markets theres not a damned thing they can do that can refute their legality. THATS why they are a bigger threat. All developers across the board need to get this stupid notion out of their heads. They are absolutely wrong for thinking they are entitled to profit from resells. They are wrong for trying to cripple the rental markets. And quite frankly, even if they were successful in destroying the resell and rental markets entirely the ONLY thing it would do is serve to make piracy even larger.

Lets get to the real root of the matter.. Lionhead isnt afraid of piracy with fable 3 because they know damned well that word of mouth has spread on fable 3 to the point no one would even really want to pirate it.

 

[Som_kun]

I know people on both sides of this argument, so I'm gonna try and give a logical center ground to the debate

A lot of the pirates I know are the "Icelandic"(pardon if i get my European country wrong) downloaders (where it is legal to have the game for ~24 hours before it's piracy) they play the first 2-3 hours, and if they're still playing, turn around and buy the game new, thereby making the devs money. Used buyers will never hand a penny to the devs EVER (+1 for pirates). There are pirates who wont do this (+1 for used cuz piracy is illegal in most places), and i will only excuse them if 1: you can't get the game where you are, 2: you are replacing a game that you own and has been ruined in some way (scratched disk, missing key etc) both of which are not technically piracy anyway. there are also hipster pirates who don't want to give money to the man (game stop, EB, etc frankly i don't blame them, and if it was up to me I'd burn every one of the things down) and to them I say Email me with your home town, i will find you a nice indie store that will offer you the game, and all the money goes to getting more games (Like the store where I live, where even the manager makes minimum wage because he spends every penny the company makes on either expansion and upkeep of the store or on the arcade he's building in the back of the store, which is AWESOME btw)

TL/DNR:
if you are a pirate who treats it as an "extended demo", then that's fine because you are no longer part of the debate.
if you pirate the game, finish and delete, there cannot be a way to get it in your country, otherwise SHAME
if you buy from download stores (steam gog etc) GOOD JOB
if you buy used from gamestop SHAME
if you buy used from indie GOOD JOB

 

[danintexas]

I would feel sorry for devs and publishers if they stopped treating their customers like criminals (Call home crap, DRM, ect ect) and they didn't sell products that are not even close to being finished. (See multiplayer lag fun in Brink as an example)

Stop treating me like a criminal and release a game when it is ready and then I will grab the flag and fight for your lost monies. Till then - fuck off

 

[TheXRatedDodo]

This whole used sales thing that publishers are going on about so much lately implies that we all have some sort of obligation towards developers, and while yes, they should be paid well for their work, used markets simply don't work that way. Only in the video game world is the original creator trying desperately to claw in a share of the money from a transaction of a pre-owned item. This is why if I'm selling a game, I do not trade them in for credit in a store, instead I sell them to a friend, cash in hand. After the copy was originally bought, whether the devs get any money or not is simply not my problem the same as the original carpenter who crafted my table's income is no longer my problem if I choose to sell that table.
To want this to change is simply greed, nothing more.

 

[Jimmy T. Malice]

I don't see what the problem with selling on games you've finished is. The developers have already made money from the first-hand copy, so why would they expect to get any money from second-hand ones? It's the same with EVERYTHING YOU CAN BUY.

 

[Adam28]

There is nothing wrong with buying games second hand but it doesn't mean that they aren't a problem for publishers/developers.

I'll use an example of a game I recently bought. I bought a game second hand called Folklore for the PS3, so far I am loving it, and I wouldn't of minded paying the full price but at the time of its release, it just seemed like too much of a risk. Now, that I have bought it second hand, although I have acquired the game legally, it hasn't helped the developers who made this amazing game any better off financially. Unfortunately, I don't think the game did very well sales wise so I doubt there will ever be a sequel.

Now unfortunately, although this is a problem for the company, I haven't done anything wrong.

I wouldn't actually be surprised if second hand games are hurting the industry more than pirates are, especially in the console market.

Thinking about it.... about half my games were purchased second hand.

 

[boag]

No, because the former isn't illegal.

They are both Illegal.

I refer you to the Timothy Vernor Case
http://www.geekosystem.com/tag/timothy-vernor/

 

[Rewdalf]

I think I sort of get what he means.
While developers don't get money from either, pirating and reselling, the fact that a store is profiting from reselling while the pirates are just getting the game is the problem.
Pirating is illegal, but it's free for everyone, and nobody gets paid for the game, while when stores buy and resell a game, they're making money off of the transaction while the company isn't.
Both are still wrong though. One of them is just legal.

 

[boag]

I think I sort of get what he means.
While developers don't get money from either, pirating and reselling, the fact that a store is profiting from reselling while the pirates are just getting the game is the problem.
Pirating is illegal, but it's free for everyone, and nobody gets paid for the game, while when stores buy and resell a game, they're making money off of the transaction while the company isn't.
Both are still wrong though. One of them is just legal.

Again, look up the Timothy Vernor case, since September 2010 its been Illegal to resell Copyrighted content.

Just because it hasn't been enforced heavily yet doesn't make it any less Illegal.

 

[LiudvikasT]

It's very simple pirated copy is not a lost sale, pirate either has no money or simply sees no reason to buy and often there's no way to make him buy your game.
On the other hand the people who buy from second hands are not pirates, they would have probably bought the game even if they found no cheaper second hand alternatives.

 

[philcelery]

Again, look up the Timothy Vernor case, since September 2010 its been Illegal to resell Copyrighted content.

No, it hasn't. That's an inaccurate description of what the article says and the article's interpretation of the ruling in relation to used games is equally inaccurate.

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/09/10/09-35969.pdf

Autodesk distributes Release 14 pursuant to a limited
license agreement in which it reserves title to the software
copies and imposes significant use and transfer restrictions on
its customers.

 

[Sonicron]

And just like that I know with unwavering certainty I'm never buying anything developed by Lionhead. Yay for decisions that potentially make my life simpler!

 

[geier]

I think the main problem is this:
If i pirate a game and find it's developers worthy of my hard earn money, i buy it and support them. The devs get some money, not as much as when i buy it on release day, but at least something.

But when i buy a used game, the developer gets absolutly nothing, exept i donate them money.

 

[Continuity]

Simple, don't do either.

Yes piracy is illegal and second hand purchasing isn't but thats not the point, the point in question here is which has a larger negative impact on the developer, and thus which is worse for the gaming industry and by extension worse for all gamers.

I don't know which is worse without seeing reliable stats (which probably don't exist) but I suspect the second hand impact on the console platform is of a similar magnitude to the piracy impact on the PC.

 

[FalloutJack]

You know what? I'll buy used if I want to, as long as they sell, because I like saving money sometimes. It's a choice. MY choice. You wanna stop me, then come on down to Gamestop and try it.

 

[Twilight_guy]

I like the people trying to argue that developers need to make games good enough that people don't sell them. Does anyone honestly believe there has ever been a game so good that nobody is willing to part with it? That's hilarious.

The movie industry has to dell with similar problem from rental companies getting one copy and letting everyone see it so I don't know what makes the games industry smaller. Both can take millions of dollars to make and have to move fairly good to be worth it. Maybe there is something I'm missing.

 

[Gill Kaiser]

No, because the former isn't illegal.

Irrelevant. Legality has no bearing on this discussion, unless you're naive enough to think that legality directly correlates with moral acceptability.

 

[TrevHead]

Selling a game on ebay and using the cash to buy a new game - Good
Gamestop or another 3rd party middleman who takes most of the cash - Bad

Also post number 111 by Dexter111 is spot on.

in my mind gamers who use Gamestop really arnt much better then pirates, at the least (most) pirates dont kid themselves that theyre not damaging the industry

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Doesn't matter if 2nd hand sales are more problematic or not, if publishers perceive it to be you can expect more things like Project $10, Online Passports and other, more intrusive DRM to become a feature of console games.