Notch says 'If you can't afford Minecraft, just pirate it'.
- Thread starter Da Orky Man
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Thats fine for you, but do you create digital content for a living? If you do, like me, you will know that the lcoal food store does not share your attitude. They want you to pay for groceries, or you can't eat.LilithSlave said:
So your attitude is fine, and admirable, but it does not scale to people making full time projects for a living, unless they are independently wealthy.
Notch could not sell a game for the rest of his lfie, he has $10,000,000 in the bank. That's fab!
But that is not true of 99% of indie developers. Most of them NEED you to buy the game, so they can pay the rent and buy food. It's a very different story when the rent is due on friday and you haven't sold enoguh games yet.
Well I suppose someone who can't afford to buy the game, and someone who pirates contributes the same amount of cash to him..
Still its different for a Dev to be saying things like that.
Still its different for a Dev to be saying things like that.
Twilight_guy said:
Please note that he didn't even make the game free. He just said pirate it. Why not just give it away instead of advocating illegal activity?
Funnily enough, its this attitude that makes me happy to pay for a game. Notch obviously values his content over his profit, and because of that attitude, I'd definately pay for it.
I've not actually got minecraft, but if I ever did I'd happily pay for it.
I've not actually got minecraft, but if I ever did I'd happily pay for it.
It doesn't work that way because people agree it can't work that way and don't want to change it.Twilight_guy said:
That depends. It only matters because of limited resources. If you had an unlimited supply of food, would you really care if some people took some of it without giving you anything in return?Twilight_guy said:
Anything covered by copyright is inherently like that. The only reason it's disfunctional to treat it that way is because of the things which aren't like that.
(The creator of some copyrighted work needs to eat, for one. And food most certainly isn't an unlimited resource...)
This works perfectly well as long as there are no limited resources involved. But of course, there are.
So... It is how a functional world could work... Just not the one we live in.
You see, those are the kind of people who should be pirating. People out of options who still have the decency to ask. Not a horde of entitled teenagers who think they should have anything for free because 'it's not hurting anyone'.
I have to agree with this.
I honestly feel that this sets a worrying precident. Restraint is an important lesson to learn throughout life when it comes to financial matters. I for one cannot afford much in the way of games currently due to poor forward planing with regards to my mortgage (writing off my car didn't help either
). However this does not entitle me to have games, music or any other item for free. I am sure I will enjoy these things all the more when I can afford them.
Please don't think this is just a bash aimed at Notch. He has a right, as does any artist, to try and ensure as many people as possible see and appreciate his work. However, as well as art, a game is a product and I do think his comment is a little irresponsable given the current state of the industry regarding piracy.
I'm sure there is evidence to back up the arguments relating to piracy having a positive impact on game sales, similar to those generated by steam sales and the humble indie bundles no doubt. However that does not change the simple fact that if one cannot afford something (and lets face it minecraft is a game, not a necessity for life like food, shelter or clean water) one should not have it for free because one wants it. There has been a borrowing culture until recently of people taking what they cannot afford which has had a part to play in current financial diffculties.Twilight_guy said:
I honestly feel that this sets a worrying precident. Restraint is an important lesson to learn throughout life when it comes to financial matters. I for one cannot afford much in the way of games currently due to poor forward planing with regards to my mortgage (writing off my car didn't help either
). However this does not entitle me to have games, music or any other item for free. I am sure I will enjoy these things all the more when I can afford them.Please don't think this is just a bash aimed at Notch. He has a right, as does any artist, to try and ensure as many people as possible see and appreciate his work. However, as well as art, a game is a product and I do think his comment is a little irresponsable given the current state of the industry regarding piracy.
Steve Ballmer said (essentially) the same thing about the rampant piracy problem with Windows, and said that at the end of the day he would rather someone pirate Windows than use a competitor's operating system.
I don't think it's quite the same in this case (I'm sure Notch wants you to play other games!), but I think both are a reaction to the inevitability of piracy, regardless of how attractive you make the legitimate option people are still going to pirate it.
I don't think it's quite the same in this case (I'm sure Notch wants you to play other games!), but I think both are a reaction to the inevitability of piracy, regardless of how attractive you make the legitimate option people are still going to pirate it.
Notch is going "dumb *****, i am rich, so i don't care," and seeing, as the game was successful in it's early stage, i don't blame him for such attitude