Poll: Is it wrong to download very old games (that have been re-released)?

[DaMan1500]

I was talking with a friend about getting old video games off the internet for free, which we both agree isn't "piracy" since the original developers aren't making money off it anymore regardless of how we get it, when the question of if it was still okay to do that for games that have been re-released via an HD remake, something like the virtual console, etc. came up, since that makes buying them legitimately an option again. I don't really have a strong opinion either way, I just wanted to know what other people thought.

 

[Bad Jim]

If you can pay for it, pay for it. Saying "the devs aren't getting paid anymore" is not a good argument. Usually the publisher pays for development and owns the ip thereafter, so the dev team stops making money from the game before it hits the shelves. What's important is that the publisher gets paid, and thereafter has a financial incentive to fund further development.

Of course, if the ip owner cannot be bothered to sell the game at all, then I'd say the abandonware concept is reasonable. The game has been abandoned, the ip owner is not losing money to any amount of piracy.

 

[Sixcess]

Yes it is still wrong, particularly since re-released games have usually been updated to actually work with current operating systems without having to spend god knows how long screwing around with mods, patches and windows settings. If noone buys them then they've no reason to keep releasing older games for a new audience.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

I guess it all depends on the game. If you're after a copy of the original Final Fantasy III you're not going to be able to buy it. Final Fantasy III was remade and put on the DS but I don't think the original or any form of remake was put onto the PSX...that's really the only title I can think of off the top of my head though, that would be justified.

 

[ClockworkUniverse]

The thread title and poll are asking different questions. It's not technically stealing, since there's no physical product that's lost, but not being stealing doesn't make it okay.

 

[tippy2k2]

That's actually been the one problem I've had with my own anti-piracy stance (I've always thought that piracy is wrong unless you literally can't get the piece of media in question due to age anymore. What happens when said piece of media becomes available?). It's issues like this that make me just plain stay away from pirating period but I suppose if I was asked...

Yes, it is just as wrong as downloading a modern game. If a game in question is available for ANY modern generation (five years since it's dropped from mainstream so I count Wii as modern until the Wii U is five years old for those of you who want my opinion for some reason) piece of equipment (even ones you don't own), then I'm going with no. If you pirated the original game and a re-release has been kicked out, I'm stealing (or copy-right infringing ) "ohnoitsabear" opinion below [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.398774-Poll-Is-it-wrong-to-download-very-old-games-that-have-been-re-released#16325292] right below; trash your pirated copy and if you get a hankering to play the game again, buy it.

 

[DementedSheep]

Yes it's wrong. If you can purchase it legitimately you should regardless of how old it is even if its not the devs getting money for it.

 

[ohnoitsabear]

That's actually been the one problem I've had with my own anti-piracy stance (I've always thought that piracy is wrong unless you literally can't get the piece of media in question due to age anymore. What happens when said piece of media becomes available?). It's issues like this that make me just plain stay away from pirating period but I suppose if I was asked...

I feel the same way. Obviously, if the game in question has been re-released at the time you want to get it, piracy is a big no-no. But it's obviously slightly different if it wasn't available when you pirated it, but has become available. Personally, in this situation, I would say to remove the pirated copy and get the legitimate copy the next time you want to play it. But I'll admit that it's a bit of a grey area.

 

[Vegosiux]

Okay, if a game has been re-released, but you're after the original that you can't purchase anymore, then I don't see a problem with it.

But the re-release? Ummm, nope, want that, either wait until it's on sale or buy full price.

 

[miashin]

As others have already said: if there is a major difference in versions and you want the original then I can kind of see the logic. But if versions aren't an issue then please support the publishers.

 

[thiosk]

the rerelease download version of super metroid is inferior to the emulated version set up to work with a hacked wii. I bougt hthe release, and it sucks.

Go fig.

 

[Kotaro]

Unless the rerelease is somehow inferior to the original, then yes, it is wrong. However, even if the rerelease is inferior, I say you should buy the rerelease anyway (for instance: the PC version of "The Secret of Monkey Island: Special Edition" contained several game-breaker bugs, so I'm okay with people downloading the original... after buying the remake).
In general, my stance is that piracy is only okay if you can't get the game legitimately.

NOTE: While I don't encourage piracy in any circumstance, this is the only time that I'm okay with it.

 

[HardkorSB]

I guess it all depends on the game. If you're after a copy of the original Final Fantasy III you're not going to be able to buy it. Final Fantasy III was remade and put on the DS but I don't think the original or any form of remake was put onto the PSX...that's really the only title I can think of off the top of my head though, that would be justified.

Sure there was:

http://uk.ign.com/games/final-fantasy-anthology/ps-11674

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

If you can pay for it, pay for it.

But if you can't pay for it, then download it. Getting more people playing games stimulates the art. I'd say the abandonware idea has overall contributed to growth of games by providing a route for people to get into them without them having to pay. Lots of penniless kids who are now avid game consumers or developers would have been introduced to games via abandonware.

 

[Grape_Bullion]

If a developer has seen fit to re-release something to make more money on their products, I don't see why you can't pirate the original. The game was probably successful, so successful in fact they think they can make more, so why pay for the original, something the developer themselves see as outdated?

 

[Ranorak]

I guess it all depends on the game. If you're after a copy of the original Final Fantasy III you're not going to be able to buy it. Final Fantasy III was remade and put on the DS but I don't think the original or any form of remake was put onto the PSX...that's really the only title I can think of off the top of my head though, that would be justified.

If I'm not mistaken, it's also for sale on the Wii.
Unless we're talking about the real #3, not #6 that also gets called #3 but is actually #6... I'm confused now.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

I guess it all depends on the game. If you're after a copy of the original Final Fantasy III you're not going to be able to buy it. Final Fantasy III was remade and put on the DS but I don't think the original or any form of remake was put onto the PSX...that's really the only title I can think of off the top of my head though, that would be justified.

Sure there was:

http://uk.ign.com/games/final-fantasy-anthology/ps-11674

That's Final Fantasy VI which was Final Fantasy III on the Super Nintendo in the US. A common mistake but, I'm talking about Final Fantasy III:

It was remade on the Nintendo DS and as far as I know, it wasn't remade before then. The PSX got collections featuring Final Fantasy, II, IV, V and, VI. For whatever reason the anthology with IV was bundled with...Chrono Trigger...which is an awesome game but it isn't the third Final Fantasy.

 

[Kapol]

Yes. My general opinion on piracy is that, if something is available for purchase in a way that will be able to give money to the creators, it should be paid for to obtain it. And as a preemptive step I'm going to mention I include publishers and similar organizations in the 'creators' catagory. So the 'well the developer/artist doesn't get any money' doesn't really fly with me. Content that can't be purchased, at least without going second hand, become a grey area. It's still not good by any means. But I personally find it acceptable. Though I think that it's right to purchase it if it is re-released at a later time.

That's my personal opinion on the matter at least.

 

[The Lunatic]

Piracy is never stealing, it's copyright infringement.

Yes, I know it's a technicality, but, it's a very important one.

 

[Callate]

Honestly, I somewhat feel it depends on the re-release. If we think of video games as possessing some kind of cultural worth (I'll not get back into the whole "art" question here), there's value in maintaining them in some form as close to their original as possible, something the commercially-driven publishers aren't always as invested in as some of the people who maintain abandonware.

Certainly in most cases if there is a legal version available, that should be the first option (although I might argue subsequently downloading the original for a comparison might be more of a grey area.)