Piracy, Ubisoft and "the loss"

[Zeh Don]

Piracy is viewed as an issue... because it is an issue. It's a universal constant at this point: if you make it, someone will pirate it. Guaranteed.

Piracy is as easy as:
1. Go to http://www.Google.com
2. Type in "[Insert Game Name Here] + torrent"
3. Download your free game.

It's insane that people argue for it, or argue that it - in fact - is actually a good thing. By your logic OP: if I stole more food, clothes and house hold items I'd find more stuff I'd like, and then buy more - resulting in more money to people I'm stealing from?
This is the logic you're applying here?

Piracy hurts people.
Notice how only AAA games get shelf space at stores, now-a-days? Notice how "Twilight" movies and remakes are the only thing making consistant money these days? This is piracy: if people don't know the brand, they pirate it.
This is why we see remakes, rehashes, retreads and "safe" projects year after year. No original Sci-Fi movies? No original concept large scale video games? This is why.

Some of pirates then buy it, yes, but most don't. They just complain about it when their favourite pirated game, movie, music and TV shows don't receive the financial backing they feel they deserve. And they wonder why other people don't pay for it...

I don't agree with DRM. I don't agree with "Always Online" and allowing people to snoop through my personal files. I don't agree with that kind of Big Brother bullshit.
But don't think for one second that piracy is anything other than immature cheapskates with an inflated sense of entitlement looking to get the best stuff on the market for free because "hey man, corporations, man, are bullshit, ya know man?"

 

[Something Amyss]

For a comparable example, lets look at the music industry. Being substantially larger it's granted easier to keep afloat, but in said industry it is generally agreed that the sharing of Mp3's has in the end turned out to be a positive and at times lucrative arangement for artists, publishers and consumers alike.

Ummm...Despite being "generally agreed" upon....

The argument is still raging in the music industry and the RIAA are still attacking pirates, suspected pirates, and the rights of the consumer in general. While the record industry is now more progressive than the games industry, it's not quite to a point where they're willing to actually agree upon this treatise.

THEY started the "used is the same as stealing" argument, by the way, and they still have rabid fanboys who are against piracy and used sales. You want to thank someone for the current assault on used gaming? That would be the record industry.

 

[Vampire cat]

I'm NOT saying that piracy is a good thing! I'm making out that cannot be as big a problem as they try to claim, and that games are doing extremely well regardless of piracy. 95% of all games being played on PC is pirated, aparently. Absurd...

As for the music thing, well yeah... Maybe if they didn't spit out such shit bands... And based on the information I found in making this thread (and I can only base my statements off what others more educated on the subject say about it...), I wasn't wrong to say what I did. Anyway, I was trying to say that piracy shouldn't be allowed to completely kill off PC gaming based on on numbers that have no factual claim, and it's especially stupid when you factor in how many companies have their games turn in huge profits in the face of what Ubisoft and some others claim are destroying their chances for profit. This goes for the music industry too, some seem to be able to adapt and make loads of money... Others dont, and complain about it.

You cannot compare it to stealing a shirt, car or something else material. Maybe thats a shame, but you cant. I seem to remember someone doing a comic strip or something on that before, or some kind of explaining chart... Ah, here we go.

You want to thank someone for the current assault on used gaming? That would be the record industry.

Fair enough, yes they are trying. It's not working, in the same way it's not working against the games industry. Those in the music industry that learned to live with this and adapt are now making good money, while the equivalent of Ubisoft for music is stuck in their hole =p.

 

[Vrach]

Its only viewed this way because the big companies that make these products say so. Makes the people who don't know anything about piracy think that piracy is a sure-fire way to kill the industry.

Personally, I like the term "Piracy", and calling us pirates, it sounds kinda awesome.

^This, a thousand times this.

And I agree with you OP about the music industry comparison. Every single band I listen to, I started listening to thanks to pirated music (not saying I pirated it, mind you, I get CDs given to me by friends to check something out) or because someone lent me their CD (which in the game business, is apparently a "crime" and I think nothing but the worst of that). Every single band I respect and like, I buy copies of new CDs of and go to their concerts whenever I get a chance.

Now, gaming is both the smallest and the most profitable media industry. Those two facts ought to tell you - piracy is not a serious issue. I also don't remember the last time I saw a good studio closing down and blaming piracy. It's always the people with shitty titles (hi Ghost Recon!) that refuse to publicly face the fact their game sucked.

 

[Farther than stars]

What I meant was, you cant effectively combat piracy in the same way you cant terrorism because it's impossible to cover all angles. There will always be SOMEONE that slips trough. In my country Norway there was a terror attack by a single person earlier this year, and after his horrible actions everyone was crying "why wasn't he stopped before?!" Well, how do you spot a person like that? Should we detain everyone with a shaky childhood just because they MAY become terrorists? One cannot get EVERY person that pirates games, and one can't easily secure a game from every angle of attack. If they stopped concentrating on protecting the game and put the money into making a great game that people would WANT to pay for, everyone would be winners.

Call me a cynic, but it sounds like you're trying to catch more flies with honey than vinegar and in this situation I can't help making up a balance of what that means.
What you're saying is that if you spend less resources protecting your software and more on improving it, this will then diminish piracy. But isn't at the same time a game with less protection and a better quality also a more lucrative possession and therefore a greater incentive to pirate it?
You see, you say that you can't combat all angles, but that's not the way I see combat, since combating to me means covering all angles possible, so that the ones you can't cover cause minimum damage.
Anyway, I'd also like to go back to the War on Terror thing, as I agree it's a bit of a tangent, but it's the same basic principle. Do you really believe that extremists are going to stop killing people if we keep our mouths shut about it?
How many eyes were on Norwegian terrorism when this happened? Because I'll wager there weren't a lot, but it still happened. Shouldn't we then at least put this knowledge that we've gained of the situation to good use so as to help ensure that this doesn't happen again?

 

[Farther than stars]

Now, gaming is both the smallest and the most profitable media industry.

Now this intrigues me, because last time I checked the video game industry was the largest entertainment industry in the world, both in terms of capital and staff. So what exactly do you mean when you say that it's the "smallest media industry"?

 

[Kopikatsu]

Because a song takes like...a week to record/touch up. And only costs what you pay the musicians/technicians.

A video game takes years (usually) and tens of millions of dollars to create.

Basically, the music industry can afford piracy because it costs relatively little to produce music. The video game industry takes it much harder.

It's also kind of shitty when you know that people like your game (otherwise they wouldn't be pirating it in the first place), but they don't feel like paying for something you sunk a ridiculous amount of time, energy, and money into.

 

[Irridium]

You know, Bethesda's got it... And Mojang too. Release great games at fair prices with wide mod support for the PC, and your name will last forever...

Couldn't have said it better myself, unless I included VALVe in the mix. Seriously, they're rolling in dough.

Don't forget GoG, who's entire business strategy revolves around selling games DRM free.

Yeah, they're older games, but older games are even MORE susceptible to piracy. Since there's very, very few ways to buy them legitimately.

They also proved a modern game can sell well with no DRM, with The Witcher 2. An old-school RPG PC exclusive broke 1 million units sold fairly quickly. And the GoG version had no DRM, and sold pretty well. In fact, it did so well publishers are now wanting to get their newer games on GoG, since GoG proved that selling a game with no DRM, packing in a bunch of free extras, and not treating their customers like shit is a valid business strategy.

Yeah, at this point I think the problem lies solely with Ubisoft. Because apparently their DRM was a success [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111951-Ubisoft-Says-Always-On-DRM-A-Success]. Which if it was, that means piracy is NOT the reason their games aren't selling. And if it wasn't, then Ubisoft straight up lied to everyone.

 

[Marcus Kehoe]

I think piracy should be a hint to the industry to make it worth our while, pirates can give us a better product for free while we have to pay for yours and it does less and is actually a bigger pain to use.

 

[Kopikatsu]

You know, Bethesda's got it... And Mojang too. Release great games at fair prices with wide mod support for the PC, and your name will last forever...

Couldn't have said it better myself, unless I included VALVe in the mix. Seriously, they're rolling in dough.

Don't forget GoG, who's entire business strategy revolves around selling games DRM free.

Yeah, they're older games, but older games are even MORE susceptible to piracy. Since there's very, very few ways to buy them legitimately.

They also proved a modern game can sell well with no DRM, with The Witcher 2. An old-school RPG PC exclusive broke 1 million units sold fairly quickly. And the GoG version had no DRM, and sold pretty well. In fact, it did so well publishers are now wanting to get their newer games on GoG, since GoG proved that selling a game with no DRM, packing in a bunch of free extras, and not treating their customers like shit is a valid business strategy.

Yeah, at this point I think the problem lies solely with Ubisoft. Because apparently their DRM was a success [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111951-Ubisoft-Says-Always-On-DRM-A-Success]. Which if it was, that means piracy is NOT the reason their games aren't selling. And if it wasn't, then Ubisoft straight up lied to everyone.

Not necessarily. It could just be that their DRM was a success...until it got cracked.

Actually, that could be the reason that Ubisoft is so pissy about piracy now. They sunk a lot of money into developing a DRM whatever that couldn't be cracked easily...and then it was. I'd be pissed off, too.

 

[Something Amyss]

As for the music thing, well yeah... Maybe if they didn't spit out such shit bands...

That sounds like an attempt to justify piracy. For someone who's not saying it's a good thing, you're certainly putting forth an argument that it's okay.

And based on the information I found in making this thread (and I can only base my statements off what others more educated on the subject say about it...), I wasn't wrong to say what I did.

"Based on sources you have no access to, I was right."

Well, take it from someone more educated than you on the subject, you're not right. It's not generally accepted.

Anyway, I was trying to say that piracy shouldn't be allowed to completely kill off PC gaming based on on numbers that have no factual claim, and it's especially stupid when you factor in how many companies have their games turn in huge profits in the face of what Ubisoft and some others claim are destroying their chances for profit.

And this is true. Even Ubisoft is turning profits, despite all the piracy and used sales and all the EVULS OF DA CONSUMAH!

This goes for the music industry too, some seem to be able to adapt and make loads of money... Others dont, and complain about it.

Most of the people making loads of money are the ones complaining about it. I'm sorry, but you're wrong again. Tying this back to your Ubisoft example, their 2011 year had higher revenue than their 2010 year. And both were obscenely good.

Man, those people who aren't adapting are FAILING AL THE WAY TO THE BANK, eh?

Fair enough, yes they are trying. It's not working, in the same way it's not working against the games industry. Those in the music industry that learned to live with this and adapt are now making good money, while the equivalent of Ubisoft for music is stuck in their hole =p.

As above, false. But since this was specifically addressed to me, I figured I'd restate.

Notice how only AAA games get shelf space at stores, now-a-days? Notice how "Twilight" movies and remakes are the only thing making consistant money these days? This is piracy: if people don't know the brand, they pirate it.

If people know the brand, they pirate it. Arguing that this is because of piracy is kinda silly. Especially since large franchises are the biggest targets of piracy. It's also inane to pretend that only Twilight consistently makes money just because it's a phenomenon. Or remakes.

This is why we see remakes, rehashes, retreads and "safe" projects year after year. No original Sci-Fi movies? No original concept large scale video games? This is why.

Remakes are nothing new (no pun intended). None of this is particularly new. None of it's really related to piracy. Corporations rely on improved business statements each year. If you waved your magic wand tomorrow, and all piracy disappeared, they'd still tend towards "safe" projects because it means more money and satisfies their shareholders.

Take that as an indictment of capitalism if you want, but it is what it is, regardless.

 

[Irridium]

You know, Bethesda's got it... And Mojang too. Release great games at fair prices with wide mod support for the PC, and your name will last forever...

Couldn't have said it better myself, unless I included VALVe in the mix. Seriously, they're rolling in dough.

Don't forget GoG, who's entire business strategy revolves around selling games DRM free.

Yeah, they're older games, but older games are even MORE susceptible to piracy. Since there's very, very few ways to buy them legitimately.

They also proved a modern game can sell well with no DRM, with The Witcher 2. An old-school RPG PC exclusive broke 1 million units sold fairly quickly. And the GoG version had no DRM, and sold pretty well. In fact, it did so well publishers are now wanting to get their newer games on GoG, since GoG proved that selling a game with no DRM, packing in a bunch of free extras, and not treating their customers like shit is a valid business strategy.

Yeah, at this point I think the problem lies solely with Ubisoft. Because apparently their DRM was a success [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111951-Ubisoft-Says-Always-On-DRM-A-Success]. Which if it was, that means piracy is NOT the reason their games aren't selling. And if it wasn't, then Ubisoft straight up lied to everyone.

Not necessarily. It could just be that their DRM was a success...until it got cracked.

Actually, that could be the reason that Ubisoft is so pissy about piracy now. They sunk a lot of money into developing a DRM whatever that couldn't be cracked easily...and then it was. I'd be pissed off, too.

It was cracked before that announcement.

 

[veloper]

You know, Bethesda's got it... And Mojang too. Release great games at fair prices with wide mod support for the PC, and your name will last forever...

Couldn't have said it better myself, unless I included VALVe in the mix. Seriously, they're rolling in dough.

Don't forget GoG, who's entire business strategy revolves around selling games DRM free.

Yeah, they're older games, but older games are even MORE susceptible to piracy. Since there's very, very few ways to buy them legitimately.

They also proved a modern game can sell well with no DRM, with The Witcher 2. An old-school RPG PC exclusive broke 1 million units sold fairly quickly. And the GoG version had no DRM, and sold pretty well. In fact, it did so well publishers are now wanting to get their newer games on GoG, since GoG proved that selling a game with no DRM, packing in a bunch of free extras, and not treating their customers like shit is a valid business strategy.

Yeah, at this point I think the problem lies solely with Ubisoft. Because apparently their DRM was a success [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111951-Ubisoft-Says-Always-On-DRM-A-Success]. Which if it was, that means piracy is NOT the reason their games aren't selling. And if it wasn't, then Ubisoft straight up lied to everyone.

Not necessarily. It could just be that their DRM was a success...until it got cracked.

Actually, that could be the reason that Ubisoft is so pissy about piracy now. They sunk a lot of money into developing a DRM whatever that couldn't be cracked easily...and then it was. I'd be pissed off, too.

More like they have a PR problem and need PR training and coordination.

Their DRM was a failure as an anti-piracy measure, because it didh't take long for the AC2 games to be cracked. Still it helps keeping used sales dead, as will any old DRM scheme. There's no good way to spin that.

What's not earning Ubisoft sales in the PC market is their inconsistent behaviour. Ubisoft both want to pull out and continue selling on the PC.

If they pulled out completely, Ubisoft employees could throw any insult at PC gamers with impunity, but instead they pull out only a couple games, while they continue making PC ports all the while losing more and more the few fans they still have in PC land with their hostile statements.

Pulling out a few less promising PC ports and saying nothing at all, would be infinitely smarter than the last 2 statements.

 

[dennett316]

Piracy is a form of theft. You are getting a product for free that cost millions to develop, and the only way to play it is to buy the thing.
"Would the pirate have even bought the title anyway?" Well they obviously wanted to play it as they were willing to wait for hours and jump through hoops at times to get the damn things running, if they didn't want to play the game, why pirate it? If they DO want to play the game...then buy or rent the damn thing. There's no excuse and no justification...too expensive? Prices drop very quickly on new releases nowadays, Deus Ex HR can be had for £9.95 brand new just under four months after release.
DRM? Bull crap! GoG versions of games are DRM free, and very cheap, yet are still copied. The Humble Bundles have all been pirated too despite being for charity, and you could pay anything you wanted.

"But somebody bought an original copy to make the pirated copy!" Wrong...many rips are made from pre-release leaked copies, and hundreds of people may well get a copy from that. The developers get zero return for their investment.
"But they just want profit". No sh** Sherlock, they are providing a product for people to purchase that cost them a lot of money, time and effort to create. Where does this idea of not wanting to pay for stuff come from? Even before money, goods and services were bartered and traded, it's how the world works kiddies. Don't like the idea of DLC? Then don't play the damn game, vote with your wallet and don't support the devs who are milking the udders dry. That DOES NOT give you the right to steal the game, there's no nobility in doing that, there's only selfish desire and a pathetic need to say you 'stuck it to the man'.

Pirates have the cause and effect thing backwards. They claim to be fighting the evil corporations and their greedy and grasping ways, DRM, DLC and the rest. But frankly, it's their kind that caused the need for ever more outlandish and restrictive DRM in the first place which does, ultimately, hurt honest gamers. There will always be those who think they're entitled to something for nothing, it's an unfortunate trait that seems to be getting more and more ingrained in recent generations.

 

[Vampire cat]

Anyway, I'd also like to go back to the War on Terror thing, as I agree it's a bit of a tangent, but it's the same basic principle. Do you really believe that extremists are going to stop killing people if we keep our mouths shut about it?
How many eyes were on Norwegian terrorism when this happened? Because I'll wager there weren't a lot, but it still happened. Shouldn't we then at least put this knowledge that we've gained of the situation to good use so as to help ensure that this doesn't happen again?

What is the goal of terrorism? Example; Country A has troops in country B to keep the peace. Someone from country B are not happy about Country A keeping soldiers in the country. These people from Country B desides to send someone over to country A to somehow kill some people there, in order to scare country A to pull out their soldiers. If country A does not appear to become scared (ie, does not noticably react to the attack beyond one would if someone close died), why would these people from country B keep attacking? Country A is obviously not put off by their actions, so it doesn't help.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism

If an act of terrorism does not intimidate it's target, it won't coerce the target. If it fails at this, it has failed it's point and would be pointless. YES it is naive to believe that the whole world could be made to just not care, and so terrorism would go away. That just wont happen, it makes too juicy news, and said news are far too available for the average concerned westerner... Typically, dwelling on something makes it more significant than it initially was.

-slice-

You see, what I did was google a few things to get some information on this before making the thread. I seemed to remember someone talking about how file sharing wasn't such a bad thing, and so I searched up a couple of articles, which is what I based my post on. Fair enough, maybe my comparisons were quite halfassed today. It quite annoys me that said halfassed mistakes have COMPLETELY taken over the thread, ignoring what I really wanted to discuss.

That said, you didn't give any sources for your claims youself, so looking at it that way you are no more right or wrong than I am =p. Maybe you are right, I will admit to being wrong if this is the case. Fact is, you haven't really PROVED me wrong yet. But please, do. And then let us get on with the ACTUAL TOPIC, instead of dwelling on poor comparisons, comparisons I should obviously NOT have made seeing as their basic meaning is being ignored along with the topic of this thread... An example of my google searches:

http://www.google.no/search?q=mp3+sharing+beneficial+to+music+industry%3F&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:nb-NOfficial&client=firefox-a

Bethesda has got it, eh?

25,000 people are pirating Skyrim right now, that's just today, that's just from [u/]one site[/u]... that's 1.5 million in sales not being paid after a product is used.

What?

I hate pirates.

I fucking hate pirates.

Nobody likes pirates. It's still not right to hurt their honest users because of the bad apples. 95%... HAH! Would most of these peple that torrented Skyrim have bought Skyrim if there was no torrent available? How many of these people would. Thank you for talking about the thread toic =3.

 

[Jack Rascal]

You cannot compare it to stealing a shirt, car or something else material. Maybe thats a shame, but you cant. I seem to remember someone doing a comic strip or something on that before, or some kind of explaining chart... Ah, here we go.

*snip*

Pirating is stealing, no matter how many cute pictures are made to claim otherwise.

If I lived next door to you and you have wireless internet, am I allowed to use it without your permission? You paid for it, but you don't exactly lose anything if I use it. You wouldn't consider that stealing?

And pirating can be considered a lost sale for a very simple reason. People who will never play the game, have no interest in it and therefore will never buy it are not people who will pirate the game. If you wish to play the game, have interest in it and pirate it, you are a lost sale. It is a lost sale the minute you wanted to play but not pay.

The claim that "they would not have bought it anyway" is broken. Why pirate if you didn't want to play? Oh, they wanted to play you say? I see, they just didn't want to pay for it. If they are not willing to pay for a product they have no right to use it.

I know it is pretty pointless to even try to discus this here, there is no way that people who pirate or think it is ok will ever change their mind. Too many cute pictures and nonsense posts to confirm their believes. But I'll throw this post among the others anyway.

 

[DracoSuave]

Ah the lovely damage that happens when a single teaser quote from an interview gets revealed to the public, then repeated on another game journalism site with editorial accompanying it without the actual context of the original interview.

Which no one has, because said interview is not released yet.

As a result of sensationalist journalism, the individual in question had to come out and clarify the context of said quote, which has people saying he's backpedaling--which they can't say shit about because they have no fucking clue what the original interview covered.

This is called 'sensationalist journalism' and we need to take a step back, wait for the whole story to come out, and then form -informed- opinions.

 

[Vampire cat]

Pirating is stealing, no matter how many cute pictures are made to claim otherwise.

If I lived next door to you and you have wireless internet, am I allowed to use it without your permission? You paid for it, but you don't exactly lose anything if I use it. You wouldn't consider that stealing?

Compared to you walking into my house under shroud of darkness and TAKING my box and wires so that I no longer had access to it myself? No. Would you?

Would I be happy that you leeched of my internet? No. Would I try to prevent it? Yes. Would I punch my room mate that actually pays to use my internet in the face because YOU are leeching off my internet? ... Would you?

I haven't been defending piracy. Maybe it seemed a bit like it, but what I WAS trying to do was point out that it's not as big a problem as some make it out to be, and that their actions in defending against piracy is hurting the paying customers more than it is hurting the pirates. And to all you that felt the terrorism part was the most interesting, this is where that comes in. Defending against terrorism eventually ends up hurting the general public more than it does the terrorists. You can defend against it to a certain degree, but when it starts seriously eating at peoples freedoms and standard of living it's gone too far, in an atempt to protect against something which is so hard to protect against as to be almost impossible.