penny arcade equates used games to piracy

[Samurai Goomba]

Ugh, I'm tired of arguing with idiots about this point of whether or not the most basic consumer right of owning what you paid for and being able to resell it (DVDs and books are similarly entertainment where you're paying for ideas, and nobody is whining about used book sales). Somebody else get this one, please?

I try to see things from the other side most of the time, but in this case I think people who militantly support eliminating the used games industry are shortsighted and obnoxious. You wanna know how buying used games is different from piracy? It keeps the places in business that sell your games, advertise your games and get your games out to an audience that doesn't want to buy a digital version or shop at your online store.

No game store can survive purely on new games sales, and certainly can't expand based on them, either. I don't like the way GS does things, but their used games sales do keep them in the black, which ensures they will promote and sell the developer's new game.

Joe Consumer: "I bought God of War 2 used at Gamestop a month ago, after it became impossible to find GoW 2 new anywhere. Here is a GS sign advertising God of War 3. I greatly enjoyed GoW 2, so I think I shall buy GoW 3 for the new price and support Sony."

THIS is how used gaming supports developers. Take away used games from the equation and people will buy them online or from another person directly, thus ruining conventional game stores and hurting developers even more. But I don't expect shortsighted people to notice that.

Not to mention games that cannot be purchased new. If we kill used game sales, we kill a lot of games in the process that aren't or will never become available via some sort of reprint or digital medium. Explain to me how I'm supposed to play Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath without buying used.

 

[kintaris]

If you buy a used game, either online or in store, you are going to see adverts for new games and get bombarded with pre-order offers, so chances are you will be tempted to splash out on the new one at RRP (especially since you know you can save a little off that price by trading something in). You have not committed a crime and are still very willing to part with money, and so there is still a damn good chance you will buy new games.

Compare this to the pirate. He downloads everything from the same source, so he only ever comes into contact with the illegal free version of all games, ever, and the first he hears of one is probably when he downloads it illegally. Psychologically, he has already sinned or broken the law or however you view it, so he will continue to do so ad nauseum. The pirate or pirate buyer has ZERO reason to EVER give publishers money, the used-game buyer has at least SOME, and probably plenty. How can this even compare?

Besides, used game companies have a lot of income, generated from their trade-in and used game services, to spend on securing and creating appealing offers on brand-new games. They can offer store-exclusive pre-order offers where you get extra downloadable content, which then entices used-game buyers to splash out on the pre-order or the collectors edition - because you can be damn sure those extra-DLC codes will be already used up if you buy pre-owned.

This really is a completely odd argument. I can understand perhaps the original philosophical thought of comparing the two, but claiming that there's any actual equal 'crime' towards the industry between used games and piracy is as mad as - well, its as mad as saying its as much of a bad thing to buy microwave meals at Tesco as it is to literally steal a steak from your butcher.

 

[BlindMessiah94]

And if we're going to follow that logic then I suppose thrift stores and pawn shops are theft too eh?

But where else will I buy my used underpants?

 

[Carlston]

Used gaming stores are no worse than used cd stores , used car dealerships, or used book stores. Saying that used game stores are worse than pirates is implying that gamers who buyed used video games are worse than those who illegally download games.

I have not illegally download current and previous gen games, so I refused to be called scum.

Ahh but did your folks or a friend ever give you a piece of furniture used?

Ohh how the poor makers of that furniture suffered because you didn't buy a new one.

Older Sibling? Hand me down clothing? A bike? The horror of the lost jobs and money of just giving or selling something that was not bought new?

Yeah it's a joke. But I wonder who here in the support of this would have it applied to EVERY single thing that can be sold used...

 

[Samurai Goomba]

This topic again? Here we go.

Buying used is not the same as pirating.

How they are different:
Pirating means to take one legal copy of something, violate the copyright and unlawfully copy the product to distribute.

Buying and selling used games consists of one person purchasing a legal copy of a game, selling it, then another person legally buying the same used, legal game. The only differences are the place in which it was bought, and the amount it costs.

Why buying used does not always equal a lost sale:

Lets face it, if you can get something for cheap, you're not going to buy it for full price. Many people refuse to pay full price for a brand new game. They'd rather wait to find a used copy.

This means that they weren't going to buy the game new anyway. What happens when they don't buy the game new? The developer gets no money because there was no sale.

Why people that oppose used game sales are hypocrites:

There is no chance at all that everything you own is brand new. Your car, your appliances, your clothes. Some of it was bought used. Did you contribute to Ford when you bought that 2002 Taurus from the guy with the creepy eye that lives around the corner? No.

Your house wasn't built by you. It was built, sold, and resold for possibly a hundred years. You're living in that house and the person that built it isn't getting any money for it.

You have borrowed things from your friends. Don't lie. You have. Music, movies, games, their car, their clothes. If you're opposed to used games, you're opposed to borrowing and lending. When you borrow a game from a friend, you're playing it without contributing money to the developer.

Pirating is not theft. Pirating is copyright infringement.

Buying used games is not theft. Buying used games in not copyright infringement. Buying used games is a perfectly legal way to acquire legal games.

I'm quoting this because it perfectly and succinctly says everything that needs to be said about this issue.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

No they only saw the money ONCE for TWO sales of the game, cutting the profit they WOULD have made in half. Thats like one person buying and one person pirating. Half possible profit.

I still stand by the fact that pircay is ok if its a game you would never ever ever buy ever. I pirated a rom of pokemon mystery dungion. I wouldnt buy that game even at gunpoint. I would pay a penny for it ever. No potential sale is lost, i was never a customer. If the option of piracy wasnt there i wouldnt buy the game to make up for it.
That way you dont take away a potential sale.

You cared enough to look for, download, and play a video game that you apparently had absolutely no interest in.

"I want no chocolate cake!"
"But your eating chocolate cake..."
"yeah! But i don't want it, and never ever did!"
"But.. Your EATING chocolate cake. RIGHT NOW."
"But I DON'T WANT IT!"

Out of curiosity, because i would never ever buy a Fresca should I be able to just take bottles of the junk for free? After all if they never gave me it for free i would never have purchased it to make up for it?

Right your very very wrong but i wont be patronising. Especually your last comment. You know thats wrong and if you dont you need an emergency education on the internet. First of all a friend emailed it to me. He ahd it, my cousin likes pokemon and wants to know if he should get it. He did. I assisted a sale with piracy. How ironic. Anyway he likes my stuff and always brake sit if he comes over. He came over and had pokemon to play with instead. Win win.

Your final comment. "pirating a game is like taking a real life object"

Wow. Just wow. the ones and zeros that comprise that game? Know how much it cose to produce each individual copy online? NOTHING. The fresca costs an amount per bottle. The copies do not. Its very very different and its a very simple concept. Priacy is COPYING not TAKING SOMETHING TO DEPRIVE SOMEONE ELSE OF SOMETHING.

If i pirate a game i would never buy, i have one copy, so does everyone else. No one is done one copy. Everyone has the same amount of copies as they did before except now i have ONE. If you take fresca you have ONE MORE fresca and they have ONE LESS. if i pirate i dont take anything but a POTENTIAL SALE. When you steal you take a POTENTIAL SALE AND A PHYSICL OBJECT they owned. You have taken two things, one has real monetery value. Mine has none.

Dont post arguements so obviously transparent please, its very obvious fresca and a copy of mystery dungion on my computer are very different in the economic world. The game is virtual, it can be copied. The fresca is real it can only be TAKEN. Its quite simple. This arguement enrages me but ive tried to be civil. Im honestly 100% sorry if any offence was taken.

 

[Carlston]

The issue is that just like piracy, used game sales don't benefit the creators. Is that statement accurate and if it isn't why not?

The better question is, why should we care?

Yes, the existence of the secondary market probably means that game developers make less money. So what? The developers and publishers are hurt a little, the consumer benefits a lot. That's called "efficiency," and it's a good thing. Morality has nothing to do with it.

Developers are under no obligation to make games for us at their own expense, just like consumers are under no obligation to choose the most expensive of multiple legal options of purchase. If developers aren't making enough money to compensate for their time and effort, they're free to stop any time they like. Until then, they're making games for themselves, and we're buying games for ourselves.

Why should one care? Hmm here is a nice example.
Fable 5 is about to come out. The only Fable 3 you can find and the one fable you have not played your friend offers to sell you.

You pop it in your 360 or Xbox next gen, and Microsoft with it's nice database and crazy licensing agreement 50 pages long notes your name is not the person who owned it first.

Xbox police lock your console and flushes 8 months of Xbox live your prepaid down the toilet in a licensing violation.
They they lock out your friend. And since it's Microsoft, hey why not just shut down your copy of windows and every microsoft product you own? It's their company they can do what they want right? They just have to add it to the agreement... As well as record your hardwares serial # so you can't just get a new windows copy. You'd be amazed at what THEY want the world to be like.

That's why I would care. And god help you if they get their way. What's next? Shutting you down for cheat codes in a single player game?

Ohh another good example. Buying a car and then going a bit to fast, get a speeding ticket. Now Ford send a letter saying you must surrender your car, buy a new one for policy violations...

When I buy something, it's mine. Period.
Stated it before, once I buy it, long as I don't pirate or cheat online. The customer/supplier bonds is fracking OVER.

 

[manaman]

This argument seems to always be summed up pretty easilly:

Selling games after you are done with them: Acceptable.

Buying used games: Acceptable (unless you are in the industry, then you a thankless thief only looking out for yourself)

Making copies of a game (or other media) and then selling it (or selling the copies): Illegal and piracy.

Downloading a copy of the game: Illegal and piracy.

Buying a used game: Does not equal piracy.

What Gamestop does: Fairly deplorable profiteering that has ruined the used game market for everyone else, but not illegal.

Make what you will out of it but this seems to be general outlook on these points. Which says to me that used games are not piracy, but if the company doesn't want to support multiplayer and other features that require calling home for a used game sale so be it. Just don't sit there and call me a thief for buying something used the same way I might with a TV, a couch, or a movie.

 

[floppylobster]

check it out here http://www.penny-arcade.com/2010/8/25/

The basic argument is if you pirate the publisher doesn't see a dime, if you buy used the publisher doesn't see a dime.

I would go one step further and say used games are WORSE than piracy. Because with used games you are extracting money from the games market. A used game buyer has money in their pocket, and has shown a willingness to spend it on a game. A pirate doesn't necessarily have money or if they do is not willing to spend it.

In my opinion used game shops (and to a lesser extent rental places) are parasites leeching off of the creativity and risktaking of developers and publishers. You could claim that because someone knows they can resell a game they are more willing to pay the new price but I would argue that the amount is negligible compared to the amount a publisher doesn't get when someone purchases used instead of new.

Of course digital downloads and online purchases are going to murder games retailers just like they did record and book stores so I think the gamestop problem will go away in a few years.

But you cannot buy a used game day one. Or even in the first week of release. If you can it's because someone hated the game, and rather be stuck with a $60 thing they hate (I'm looking at my copy of Command & Conquer 4 right now) they sell it and salvage some of their loss.

I don't know many people who sell games they really enjoyed. And really the selling of used games has been going on since Pong. Has it really killed the industry? Has there been a massive increase in the amount of second hand stores around? Haven't you seen all the rental places going out of business? Probably around 50-80% of sales occur in week one depending on the title. Used game sales do not affect this. Anyone waiting for a used copy will just as easily wait for the 'platinum' copy if the game is any good and the publisher was a bit faster at moving their price point to a realistic position. Also, it's good for the environment.

 

[Kagim]

Sorry, just had to add this. What if someone buys a game used THEN pirates it? Would the universe explode or something?

If you live in Canada that is technically legal. As long as both the original and back up copy now in your possession are always both your possession at all times.

If you upload a single bit of that file however that is breaking the law. The backup is for you and you alone.

In other words if you lend or sell your original copy of the media the backup copy must be deleted or destroyed, as well the back up copy may never ever leave your possession.

So if your original copy is destroyed or lost you can no longer legally sell or trade the backup, as that would be a crime.

Canadians are legally entitled to a back up copy of any movie, music or software program.

In short...
So if you legalaly buy said product you can legally have one back up. You may never have more then one back up per original copy. Each original copy is technically tied to the back up. So if the original is willfully surrendered the backup must be destroyed. Your not even allowed to give the new owner the back up. It must be destroyed and it is up to the new owner to generate the back up.

Downloading said files seem to be the only way to get a hold of many back up copies these days as DRM stops me from making backups of my property.

That's why i hate DRM. Because dishonest pricks want to take whats not thers i lose my right to back up my own media for my own personal use.

 

[Escapefromwhatever]

What is nice about used games, however, is being able to find old titles that nobody else carries. You probably won't find them at Gamestop, mind, but not all used games suck. That said, the comic is indeed amusing. Most indeededly, indeed.

Sorry, just had to add this. What if someone buys a game used THEN pirates it? Would the universe explode or something?

SNIP

If I am correct, that's legal in the U.S. as well. Basically, when you purchase a game, you are not buying the actual physical copy of it, but rather the license to it, which allows you to own and play it. So when you download the game, because you own the license to it, it's legal, as you are allowed to own the data.

 

[Feylynn]

Piracy is worse, as I'm sure Tycho agrees. But I'm on his side in saying, I don't intend to by Used games out of anything but necessity.
I stopped trading in games for this reason.

If I want a sequel or a spin off or a new IP from those developers in my life time. It's up to the customer to purchase from them to both show interest and support the notion with money.

If used games were more like 50% or even 20% off then I could see the temptation even if not agreeing with the practice. But typically they are like 5-10% off at best. Hardly worth it to take money out of developer pockets.

The argument for a lot of Piracy happens to be "It's no different then Sharing." Same holds true for the used market, just the middle man has decided to sell the same thing to more then one person, a glorified rental for a significantly higher fee, rather then no money changing hands at all.

All that said I'm not going to be hostile over someone valuing the extra change in their pocket, that's totally reasonable, but I also think it's the developer's right to tell you "Hey, we'd like your business and have thrown in something extra that the retailers can't, just for people buying from us."

 

[MasterV]

Pffft. How much did they pay these guys to start spouting that nonsense? Second hand gaming has been going on for ages. Only now, with dev costs soaring sky high and games not as good, many people don't feel like paying full price. They are willing to pay, but not 70 euros for a game they know won't keep their attention for as long as older, better games, and have every right to.

Instead of making expensive crap then, how about you make good fun games without the need for cinematics and voice acting and pixel/vertex shader 47,2456? Eh developers? So instead of giving the customer the finger, why don't you take your hand out your ass and give the customer something he IS willing to pay your asking price?

 

[willsham45]

OK...In the real world (using probally terrable examples)...I make and sell trollies for £5 each, once cash is handed over I move onto the next customer and think nothing off it. If the buyer sells the trolly after a few months for £2 where it is sold again for £4 I can do nothing nore do I care, I got my cash I got first. Yes someone made money off my creation but I don't care He/she did not make as much of a profit than I did and It is probally better than having the trolly scraped.

In the gaming world it would seam to work ideally like this.
I make and sell a trolly, once sold I follow the buyer to ensure the trolly is only used for the one specific task I wanted it to be used in the first place and nothing more, disallowing the user to part with it once it is old and starting to not work as well as it was.

Spot the difference and tell me if you think this sounds about right. With some games requiring annoying anti priacy software that stops us playing when the internet is off or resistering games. And now thinking against resale.

But then it is just them saying in the perfect world you will give us loads of dosh for minimal return. Enjoy your game just help us get more profits.

 

[Psydney]

Also, the penny arcade guys are just pandering to the corporations. They are cowards who are too afraid to stand up and say screw you.

I'm far from a Penny Arcade fangirl, but in the years I've been reading them I've never seen much indication that they're panderers. It's more likely that they see a genuine issue here.

That said, their argument doesn't convince me. Book publishers manage to survive even though used book stores exist. And although brick-and-mortar movie rental places are rapidly becoming a thing of the past, they sell used surplus stock when popular movies drop off the radar (at least they did years ago when I still went to them). Not sure why this is any different.

 

[superbatranger]

And if we're going to follow that logic then I suppose thrift stores and pawn shops are theft too eh?

Well with this logic, would flea markets be considered piracy?

 

[Talon_Skywarp]

Sorry but I don't own the vast amounts of money needed to buy every game I want brand new. I have to spend it on fuel, alcohol and generally having a life as well.

I buy books from charity shops, I buy cd's from rogues in markets (usually in a long overcoat and saying 'what you buying?') and I buy second hand games.

Sue me I'm poor. And like bargins.

Guess that 1 pound copy of Animal Farm I got is an insult to Orwell...

EDIT- Note to penny arcade- Lars from Metallica called. He agrees. Tossers

 

[Kagim]

Right your very very wrong but i wont be patronizing. Especially your last comment. You know that's wrong and if you don't you need an emergency education on the internet.

Both cases involve taking what does not belong to you for free under the logic that because you don't want it you deserve to have it.

First of all a friend emailed it to me. He had it, my cousin likes pokemon and wants to know if he should get it. He did. I assisted a sale with piracy.

Now if ONLY you could guarantee EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE of that happening resulted the same, till then.

How ironic. Anyway he likes my stuff and always brake sit if he comes over. He came over and had Pokemon to play with instead. Win win.

Your personal problems are not my or anyone's concerns, nor justification of these actions.

Your final comment. "pirating a game is like taking a real life object"

Wow. Just wow. the ones and zeros that comprise that game? Know how much it cost to produce each individual copy online? NOTHING. The fresca costs an amount per bottle. The copies do not. Its very very different and its a very simple concept. Priacy is COPYING not TAKING SOMETHING TO DEPRIVE SOMEONE ELSE OF SOMETHING.

Ohh, i love this part. There is a reason why i use pop as an example.

First, you know how much a bottle of pop costs manufactures to create? Less then a fifth of a cent. You know how much a regular unit of plastic costs? About 2-4 cents to the production company.

Now, when it comes to distributors. My dad runs a small convenience store. For a 24 pack of Pop straight from the distributor my dad pays $18.89 plus tax(After all discounts both at point of sale and end of the year are said and done). My dad turns around and sells those bottles for 1.75 plus tax. Which means bottles 12-24 are already paid for and the entire cost goes to my dad, excluding taxes of course.

Meaning as long as the first 11 bottles of pop are sold my dad does not lose a penny. You have technically stolen NOTHING from him but, that's right, a potential sale. He hasn't lost a cent of his investment. So as long as he sells the first 11 bottles his investment is safe. In fact he still makes a couple cents off the 11th bottle.

There is a reason why stores and restaurants push pop so damn hard. Because it is literally liquid profit.

As long as my dad doesn't allow 55% of his product to be stolen he pulls a profit and doesn't lose a dime.

So does that mean its alright to take the pop for free once my dad has sold the first 11 bottles?

Is it fair for people who wouldn't normally buy the Fresca to start taking it for free as soon as it no longer costs my dad anything?

If i pirate a game i would never buy, i have one copy, so does everyone else. No one is done one copy. Everyone has the same amount of copies as they did before except now i have ONE.

If you take fresca you have ONE MORE fresca and they have ONE LESS.

However, as i explained as long as 11 out of 24 bottles are taken not a single cent is lost from the investment. My dad can literally dump HALF of his pop inventory into a river and STILL turn a profit as long as no one steals those 11. So how exactly is it any different? No one is losing anything but a 'potential sale'. Neither group has directly lost a dime.

if i pirate i dont take anything but a POTENTIAL SALE.

Pop. 11. Sold. Rest. Pure. Profit. Get the drill yeah?

When you steal you take a POTENTIAL SALE AND A PHYSICL OBJECT they owned. You have taken two things, one has real monetery value. Mine has none.

Every bottle after the 11th doesn't have a monetary value though. It quite LITERALLY is worth $0.00 to my dad. The entire $1.75 goes to my dad in pure profit. Every single instance of pop sold past 11 is money directly in my dads pocket. Every bottle stolen past the 11th don't cost my dad a cent. You are literally stealing more from him by taking a penny he dropped on the counter then it would be then to steal that bottle of pop.

Dont post arguements so obviously transparent please,

I don't, i actually have a bit of a grasp on economics from working with my dad for three four years.

its very obvious fresca and a copy of mystery dungion on my computer are very different in the economic world.

When you get down to it no. In both cases stealing One bottle of fresca and downloading one copy of a game results in no direct loss, only the lose of a 'potential sale'.

It's only when a very large number of people began taking what isn't there's do either group actually begin to see a direct lost in profit.

The game is virtual, it can be copied. The fresca is real it can only be TAKEN.

Actually you are still taking something. Taking is the act of gaining position of something. A video game is a thing, regardless how you try and define what a thing might be. The code is a thing as it exists.

As well as i have already mentioned in both cases no one is directly losing a dime.

Its quite simple. This argument enrages me but ive tried to be civil. Im honestly 100% sorry if any offense was taken.

Oh I'm not offended as I actually have a grasp of what I am talking about.

 

[Spectre39]

Has everyone forgotten that we are still in a recession? Until I have a job by which I can afford to buy new games, I would. But until then, I have no choice to but to buy only one or two used games in the span of a few months. I understand that the developers would like to see a cut of the profits to support the industry, but I cannot comply at this time. I simply cannot do it. If the economy ever improves to the point where I once again have income, then I will buy new. Until then tough luck. Money is not entitled to everyone.