At the end of the day, property remains where it is. See, even that definition doesn't fit, and that's more a "layman's" definition. Sorry.hannes2 said:
Poll: What's wrong with piracy
- Thread starter Random Name 4
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That doesn't mean 4.5 million people pirated Witcher 2. Far from it. First off, torrent tracks need to be restarted frequently and every time one is started it is recorded as 1 entire download. Second, pirates are not organized people when it comes to piracy. It is done in their spare time and they frequently lose files, delete it then decide they want to try it again. It is free so they don't exactly keep tabs on them because they can just download another copy if something happens to that copy.the spud said:
That already skews the numbers by multiple downloads and by being generous, I will say that takes the number from 4.5 million people down to 3.5 million people. (Yes, that is a generous in-your-favor estimate.) Now as for it being "losses". There was buzz about it being banned in Australia so if you wanted to check the game out, you had to pirate it. I wouldn't doubt that being banned in other countries was on the table as well like Muslim countries. This means the game wasn't being sold there anyways. These are not lost sales, these are sales that were never going to happen.
Did some people download the game to get a free game? Most likely, yes. Did 4.5 million people do it just for a free game? Hell no. As Balky would say, "Don't be ridiculous." Of those 4.5 million downloads, probably around a million wanted a free game and might have bought. (That is also assuming none of the people downloading owned a copy.) The world has a lot of people in it and 4.5 million isn't a lot in and of itself. However, when 4.5 million people is a gross exaggeration of the actual amount of people involved and just how many sales that actually represents, this isn't some disaster.
Seriously, this is fear-mongering in part of publishers. It's like the recent swine flu "epidemic" in the states. It is making a disaster out of something small because people buy into it and there is something to gain for the people doing the fear-mongering. There were people duct taping their windows in to battle anthrax all in the name of television ratings. Seriously, this is the same thing. It will NOT kill the industry, the video game industry is an invincible industry at this point and that should be common sense. If every triple A studio went out of business tomorrow, there would be a handful of new ones by friday. There is a market demand for video games right now and any independent developer willing to make games would capitalize on that.
OT: Morality is not black and white in regards to piracy as it has to do with motivations on a personal level. I personally am against it from my circumstances. There are exceptions to the rule, even there, however mostly it is bad and I don't support it. However, to say if it is bad or wrong overall is pretty much impossible.
And how VHS was killing TV and theaters!NightHawk21 said:
Anyway...I prefer to let a certain song, and the soothing sounds of MC Hart do the talking for me...
Did I hear you right? Did I hear you saying that you're going to make a copy of a game without paying?
Now I know you love the game and that's alright to do
Because the posse who make them, they love them too
But if you start stealing, there's no more they can do
(Corey: But I just wanted to make one copy!)
You say 'I'll just make a copy, for me and a friend'
Then he'll make one and she'll make one and where will it end?
One leads to another then ten, then more,
And no one buys anything from the store
So no one gets paid and they can't make more
The posse breaks up and they close the door
Don't copy! Don't copy that floppy!
Not because we want it but because you're just takin' it
Dis-res-pec-tin' all the folks who are ma-kin' it
You see, on these disks we have frozen in time
The creativity of someone's mind
Do you think, that because, with a flick of a key
You can copy that game, that the work is free
This creativity, we protect it by law
We value so highly, what the mind's eye saw
Don't copy! Don't copy that floppy!
Because the posse who make them, they love them too
But if you start stealing, there's no more they can do
(Corey: But I just wanted to make one copy!)
You say 'I'll just make a copy, for me and a friend'
Then he'll make one and she'll make one and where will it end?
One leads to another then ten, then more,
And no one buys anything from the store
So no one gets paid and they can't make more
The posse breaks up and they close the door
Don't copy! Don't copy that floppy!
Not because we want it but because you're just takin' it
Dis-res-pec-tin' all the folks who are ma-kin' it
You see, on these disks we have frozen in time
The creativity of someone's mind
Do you think, that because, with a flick of a key
You can copy that game, that the work is free
This creativity, we protect it by law
We value so highly, what the mind's eye saw
Don't copy! Don't copy that floppy!
Because piracy caused DRM.
Pirates refuse to respond to stimulus from companies to do the right thing (Witcher 2 was cheaper and DRM free, still pirated to death).
Also, most pirates I have met have mostly been completely insufferable CUNTS about it.
I still lament that it's illegal to spread computer-frying viruses under the guise of popular games.
Pirates refuse to respond to stimulus from companies to do the right thing (Witcher 2 was cheaper and DRM free, still pirated to death).
Also, most pirates I have met have mostly been completely insufferable CUNTS about it.
I still lament that it's illegal to spread computer-frying viruses under the guise of popular games.
This its not stealing is bull copying is the same as stealing because it has the same outcome as loss of money for the person who owns the company the only differnce is a normal theif has the balls to go and take a risk and not sit behind a chair and think that copying a game is a rightRandom Name 4 said:
But you're still ascribing damages you can't prove. The industry says "download=lost sale," and that's nonsense, but even if you scale that back, you cannot demonstrate damage. And since pirates tend to buy MORE media, the question is not one of damages, but ethics.Fishyash said:
Nope. No it doesn't.Pyro Paul said:
Although I guess I should justify that. Firstly, let's mention that there exists, and always will, a conscientious objectors, such as yourself. People who will not pirate a game because they feel it hurts the industry etc.
Secondly, look at how many people still buy PC games. Yes it's a smaller market than console, but people still buy them. How many PC gamers do you reckon don't know how to pirate a game? Then there's consoles, where many people probably don't know how to pirate, and even if they did many wouldn't because it's riskier than PC piracy.
Also, how do you propose that the game industry will suddenly just die? Ignoring indie devs, who would keep going out and making games, I assume you mean the big AA devs. Would it work like the music industry that died when piracy started, or film industry which isn't churning out multi-million dollar blockbusters anymore?
They wouldn't just stop making games. Piracy will never reach a point where developers suddenly have to stop. Not only that, but do you think that the same business model will carry on for the next 100 years? It's due for a change, and to be honest, a complete crash might actually be a good thing.
Corporations caused DRM. They don't even want LEGAL uses interfering with their products, so it's rather naive to assume piracy is the problem here.lacktheknack said:
Based on asspull numbers that were used to demonstrate CD Projeckt's commitment to not using DRM.
Worth noting both halves of that: They pulled the numbers out of their asses AND they still aren't planning on resorting to DRM.
Eh... piracy is morally iffy at best, but I doubt it has any tangible negative effect on the industry, so I pretty much don't care.
What I do care about is the bullshit that companies claim they have to pull because of piracy, but that's entirely the fault of the companies, not the pirates.
Also, it's not stealing, and it's not theft. It's just not. It's a completely different crime with completely different effects. Stealing takes something away from someone else, copying something without permission (AKA "pirating") takes nothing away from anyone else, but gives the pirate a copy too. Different. Stop making yourselves look stupid by saying otherwise.
What I do care about is the bullshit that companies claim they have to pull because of piracy, but that's entirely the fault of the companies, not the pirates.
Also, it's not stealing, and it's not theft. It's just not. It's a completely different crime with completely different effects. Stealing takes something away from someone else, copying something without permission (AKA "pirating") takes nothing away from anyone else, but gives the pirate a copy too. Different. Stop making yourselves look stupid by saying otherwise.
Because paying for games gives the industry much needed incentive to keep creating and if you're to poor to buy games then how did you afford that console or computer in the first place? besides the internet is filled with free games so why pirate the ones that do cost money and if you bloody have to pirate how can you do it and still try to claim the moral high-ground? DRM was created to fight piracy. Its a response to what you're doing and so its your fault just like airport security digging through my colon for bombs is terrorists fault.
Why cant you just fucking pay for the stuff you use like the rest of us?
Why cant you just fucking pay for the stuff you use like the rest of us?
That is some irritating disc DRM on his floppy. He should buy Memorex blank discs. I like how at the end she uses the manual as incentive to buy, when they don't make those anymore.Valiance said:
I love seeing how many people were brainwashed by our glorious corporations into believing what they say as to how piracy kills the industry ...
Let's look at the music industry, cause that's the only other media where we have seen large complaints about piracy.
Who complains about piracy in the music industry?
Small labels or even independent artists.
Why do they complain?
Because they simply can't survive without the income.
Do they get around it somehow?
Hardly, but at the end of the day, a large complaint on some news site, or a high torrent 'score' means more interest for the music and makes for an incentive for them to keep on producing - even though they generate a loss. But they're growing to a much more high-profile organization and in turn grow to a size at which they are 'fine' nonetheless.
Now let's ask the same questions to the game industry:
Who complains about piracy in the game industry?
Big publishers, who make a tiny loss compared to the revenue the game generates nonetheless.
Why do they complain?
Officially, because this makes them unlikely to invest in upcoming games.
Actually, because they want to squeeze every tad bit of money out of that one game/franchise.
Do they get around it somehow?
They believe so, by deploying bothersome anti-piracy measures like DRM and online passes, or even deploying their own system-crawling program and force the customers to use it.
But what does that really cause? Let's look at EA on this.
What are EA's main measures against piracy?
Against both piracy and second-hand purchases EA has the 10$ thingy, online passes and Origin.
The 10$ thingy and online passes are bothersome, as they mainly require you to enter codes and whatnot just to get what you paid for in the first place, just so those who didn't pay them directly has to invest some extra money directly to EA to get the same.
Origin then is an entire platform, something that has access to your computer to an unknown extent, and forces yet another such platform upon us just to play those games. I'm still boycotting BF3 over Origin, same will likely go for ME3 as well, if they pull the Origin bullshit there.
Oh, and let's not forget how the prices for PC games skyrocketed over the last decade.
In all honesty? The way the big publishers chose to respond to piracy is a deterrent when it comes to actually buying the game.
Now, the next question:
What does this deterrent cause?
People don't want to pay for the game because either they dislike the publisher's reaction to piracy in the first place, or they don't want to support the publisher anymore, or they simply want to avoid the publisher overall.
Nonetheless they would love to play the game.
That means, those people will either boycott the game, or pirate it. Now, if they pirate it, it's more or less a sign against the publisher.
So, at this point, we have the usual pirates who did it before, and will keep on doing it. Then we got the anti-publisher pirates, who just started pirating. Now we're having the cycle start:
Piracy -> Anti-Piracy Measures -> Disagreement -> Piracy -> ...
This is what leads us to the point we have today.
Yes, piracy is a bad thing in the first place. But it turned into a means of critique more, than simply a way to get a game for free.
Yes, there are people who pirate just to get the game for free. Same goes for all other media industries. But only the game industry responded with a major deterrent causing even more piracy. And that's the difference.
Let's look at the music industry, cause that's the only other media where we have seen large complaints about piracy.
Who complains about piracy in the music industry?
Small labels or even independent artists.
Why do they complain?
Because they simply can't survive without the income.
Do they get around it somehow?
Hardly, but at the end of the day, a large complaint on some news site, or a high torrent 'score' means more interest for the music and makes for an incentive for them to keep on producing - even though they generate a loss. But they're growing to a much more high-profile organization and in turn grow to a size at which they are 'fine' nonetheless.
Now let's ask the same questions to the game industry:
Who complains about piracy in the game industry?
Big publishers, who make a tiny loss compared to the revenue the game generates nonetheless.
Why do they complain?
Officially, because this makes them unlikely to invest in upcoming games.
Actually, because they want to squeeze every tad bit of money out of that one game/franchise.
Do they get around it somehow?
They believe so, by deploying bothersome anti-piracy measures like DRM and online passes, or even deploying their own system-crawling program and force the customers to use it.
But what does that really cause? Let's look at EA on this.
What are EA's main measures against piracy?
Against both piracy and second-hand purchases EA has the 10$ thingy, online passes and Origin.
The 10$ thingy and online passes are bothersome, as they mainly require you to enter codes and whatnot just to get what you paid for in the first place, just so those who didn't pay them directly has to invest some extra money directly to EA to get the same.
Origin then is an entire platform, something that has access to your computer to an unknown extent, and forces yet another such platform upon us just to play those games. I'm still boycotting BF3 over Origin, same will likely go for ME3 as well, if they pull the Origin bullshit there.
Oh, and let's not forget how the prices for PC games skyrocketed over the last decade.
In all honesty? The way the big publishers chose to respond to piracy is a deterrent when it comes to actually buying the game.
Now, the next question:
What does this deterrent cause?
People don't want to pay for the game because either they dislike the publisher's reaction to piracy in the first place, or they don't want to support the publisher anymore, or they simply want to avoid the publisher overall.
Nonetheless they would love to play the game.
That means, those people will either boycott the game, or pirate it. Now, if they pirate it, it's more or less a sign against the publisher.
So, at this point, we have the usual pirates who did it before, and will keep on doing it. Then we got the anti-publisher pirates, who just started pirating. Now we're having the cycle start:
Piracy -> Anti-Piracy Measures -> Disagreement -> Piracy -> ...
This is what leads us to the point we have today.
Yes, piracy is a bad thing in the first place. But it turned into a means of critique more, than simply a way to get a game for free.
Yes, there are people who pirate just to get the game for free. Same goes for all other media industries. But only the game industry responded with a major deterrent causing even more piracy. And that's the difference.
Which is why they're shutting down devs that actually made positive sales, right?Dejawesp said:
That'd be enough to keep me from ever pirating anything.Savagezion said:
Lame 80s/early 90s PSA raps are the BEST DRM.
I'm not supporting piracy, but there is absolutely no evidence to support this hyperbole. While piracy = lost sales, ultimately most games are still profitable or else they wouldn't get made. The ones that aren't profitable are usually due to poor reviews and gameplay rather than rampant piracy.Pyro Paul said:
The most pirated games are major triple-A releases, all of which sell millions and millions in their launch month.
Doesn't anyone find this thread rather absurd? Here we have game consumers complaining about piracy - that it will destroy the industry. Yet all of them buy games. Why? If piracy is so harmful and corrupting, why don't we turn to it as well?
I think this highlights the real issue in the debate - mistrust of gamers. Companies like Ubisoft assume that if there is illegal means of obtaining a game, gamers will turn to it. So they sabotage their own games.
I think this highlights the real issue in the debate - mistrust of gamers. Companies like Ubisoft assume that if there is illegal means of obtaining a game, gamers will turn to it. So they sabotage their own games.
kman123 said:
Risingblade said:
While you three are absolutely right and I totally agree, we'll never convince our opponents otherwise.Ickorus said:
Our opponents have a very flimsy excuse stuck deep into their brains that piracy isn't stealing because, most though wrong definitions of stealing say that something of value must be physically lost or it isn't stealing. Because, technically nothing is lost, product wise because with digital distribution, there is an infinite supply and nothing can be lost.
But of course we of course know that is stupid, and the real definition of stealing is just plain taking something that doesn't belong to you.
Though the industry digitally has tried to make it so there is a limited to supply, to combat the infinite supply means on stealing idea, by putting out limited registration keys, but of course then the little rat people that now have to find a way around that to get their free copy cry out, "Draconian DRM!", "Oh no, they are unfairly trying to control who gets to play the game!"
I don't care who it is, people have no right playing these games for free unless the companies themselves give them out for free. People don't even have the right to demo a game, I don't care if the company didn't put out a demo, downloading a pirated copy to "demo" the game is still illegal and wrong. People don't have any right to play the game unless there is a legal demo or they pay for a copy. If there is a problem with your copy, wait for it to be fixed, if it doesn't get fixed, then that was just a bad buy, that is life, shit happens.