To anyone who thinks piracy is ok

[wulfy42]

Um, I'm pretty sure you can pirate Starcraft II even after all the efforts made to prevent it. I think the only real way to prevent piracy is to make the game only playable online and have part of the program accessed by an online server. Even then if it isn't a large part with a ton of important information someone will probably come along and make a pirated copy (but it will certainly take much longer!!).

Even MMO's were pirated I think. Vaguely remember hearing about toxic or something like that copying WoW a few years ago.

I support game companies that have produced good games I really enjoyed in the past by purchasing games they release even if they are not my favorite type of games. A good example would be me buying Starcraft II even though I'm not an RTS fan (still havn't gotten halfway through single player campaign). I love/loved Diablo II and can't wait for part 3, so purchasing SC II is worth it to me. I certainly would never even consider pirating a game from Blizzard. At the same time I WISH so bad that I had pirated HEllgate london. I wasted my money on that big time and can't even play it on my computer (although it plays SC II, Fallout NV and tons of much newer games).

I'm not exactly against piracy but I can see how it would be a slippery slope one you start pirating games so I just wait for reviews now. Hellgate london and a few other similar games have killed me of pre-ordering most games at this point or even getting them within a month of release usually. I still make a few exceptions (fallout NV was one)......but for the most part I wait before buying games now.

I wasn't as patient 20 years ago (i'm almost 40 now) and I can see why so many young gamers might just pirate instead. Hopefully they end up buying the game eventually if they like it, but another trait of many young people besides impatience is a lack of funds...so I bet most of them don't buy the game even if they like it. Probably justify it as (well I paid $50 for Hellgate London and got this game for free). That is really sad in my opinion. I think the best solution is to release demos for PC games. If a company doesn't release a demo then they should not complain about Piracy in my opinion.

 

[veloper]

No it isn't. The original owner was done with the game anyway.

The only real difference between pirates and people who buy used at gamestop, is that pirates atleast don't give away their money to random people, for something they can get for free.

Both are being cheap and contribute absolutely nothing, but atleast the pirates are smart about it.

What the game studios and publishers need to survive are the useful fools who buy the games new.

So you want me to belive that a person buys the game, goes home completes the game, outs it on pirate bay then deletes it and any disks they might have? Okay ...

None of the sort. It's already out on pirate bay.

How do people who resell giving away there money? There geting some back. If you mean the buyer it means they can't afford full price so they get a nice discount but still not enough of a self centred douche to steal it.

The people who sell their copies, receive money for something you can get for free.
The people who buy used copies, give money for something they can have for free, to people who didn't have anything to do with putting the game out there. There is no discount here.

Games can be copied infinitely and with any infinite supply, the real value is ZERO. The disc costs a cent to print. Sure it costs a lot of money to develop that game, but not to put in in circulation. Buying games is effectively charity.

So who would you rather give away money to:
1 to the people who funded the project of developing the game (and thus indirectly helping the developers keep their jobs), or
2 the likes of gamestop who rake in 100% profit from buying used games, reselling them, possibly multiple times for a copy in circulation?

Me, I'd never consider doing #2.

I see no problems with gamers trading with gamers and skipping the middleman. The stupidy is buying used games in shops.

Used game buyers are like the original owners, there taking the only copy the seller has, effectivly taking there place as the original owner.

Used game buyers are giving money for something that is almost worthless. If it's your friend and you take a game of his his hands and give him some money I could understand that, but not if it's a big business that is leeching of gamers and the industry.

If it wasn't for the "useful fools", self centred, greedy, cheap skates wouldn't have anything to play. If you are a pirate like you come across to be, you just degraded yourself aswell.

Well done!

Yes, I used to be a pirate, because back when we were kids, we didn't have any money to spend anyway, so nobody lost.
Then I joined the ranks of the useful fools, knowing my own contribution is insignicant and I could still get everything for free, if I wanted. Win for the publishers and game studios.

 

[Sightless Wisdom]

This is honestly one of the most convoluted and ridiculous issues I've ever experienced. It's really quite disappointing to me that all of the logical arguments are coming from the pro piracy side. Common you crazy over zealous pro conservative anti-pirates, stop fucking slacking off! Or wait.... do you not have any logical arguments? Is that it? Is there simply nothing you can say that makes more sense than what the intelligent pirates are saying? Well that's just a shame isn't it...

I swear I'm going to end up on probation for this one... but it's well worth it. I've had enough of both sides in some way or another. First there are of course the anti-pirates who can't come up with a decent argument beyond "but its... STEALING!" and then there are the pirate stereotypes who play along and just say thing like "fuck the industry I like free stuff". Both of you are only making it worse for your sides, just do everyone a favour and shut up.

 

[interspark]

oh THAT kind of piracy! no i think the people who pirate games and movies are scum, i mean, how would you feel if you worked months, years even, making what you thought was a top knotch game and then someone just walks in and takes one for nothing? (metaphorically of course). it's not no-better than stealing... it IS stealing. and everyone who pirates is entirely dependant on the people who actually pay for the games, if everyone pirated, the game and movie industry would just evapourate into thin air on an absence of funds

 

[Kair]

It only covers 'piracy' in a market economy. I have drawn a little illustration to help you realize the error of limiting infinite resources for profit.

That is the most uninformed graph I've ever seen.

Real world 101: Money is a good thing. It makes the world go round in our society. Sure, it's nice to say that doing things for the art of it is good, but it's not. People want to use their art to live. And buying art allows the artists to flourish and benefit. Piracy is only a detriment to this. Imagine if magnetic motors and advanced AI using robots were up to a point where they were so cheap and free that they would completely replace the work force. Millions of people would starve and die.

Your mind is also enveloped in the market economy. As a capitalist you assume that labour is a privilege and not a duty.

 

[Dastardly]

If they started pricing right I wouldn't consider piracy. 60$ for medal of honor? 50$ for front mission evo? 40$ for dead rising 2? These games are not worth the price, and I've gotten ripped off way to many times. Oh and for anyone who says "you can wait for the prices to drop" take a look at CoD MW 2. Still 60$ after about 2 years, and it's only half as good as CoD 4. Price them reasonably and sure I'd buy it. The only time I wouldn't pirate ever would be for companies just starting.

Then don't play them. Or save your money. Or get a second job. Or any number of other solutions to the problem. Sorry, but "it costs too much" isn't a good excuse. Gaming isn't a right, it's a luxury.

It is perfectly fair and reasonable to say "I think you are charging too much for this item." It is not, however, perfectly fair and reasonable to say "But I deserve it and want it, so I'll just steal it and be justified." Unless the item in question is necessary for survival, which games aren't.

I might even take issue with your claim that it's okay to steal if it's necessary for survival. I only raise this point because it is at the heart of many of the misguided "pro-piracy" arguments, though the spirit differs.

The age-old chestnut, "Is it wrong to steal bread to feed your starving family?" Has seemed to puzzle us as humans forever. I'd contend that puzzlement is only because we're conflating two separate concepts: what is "understandable," and what is "right."

There are many, many actions in the world that, if you try hard enough, you can understand. If I make the effort to see things from someone else's point of view, I can eventually come to "understand" why a serial killer ended up a serial killer. I can trace the causality chain that led to the decision, and perhaps even develop a sort of detached empathy that allows me to say, "Well, I guess in that situation, I could potentially have made the same mistake." (This is a challenging thought exercise, but I think it can be important "mental weightlifting" for anyone that thinks of himself/herself as objective.)

But whether or not the action in question is "understandable" is a wholly-separate matter from whether or not it is right (morally or legally). I understand why folks exceed the speed limit, and I choose to do it frequently, but I still fully recognize it is illegal.

It's called "allowing for cognitive dissonance." Allowing yourself to hold two seemingly contradictory beliefs at once. Most people can't do it, so they bend, twist, and justify one or both beliefs until they appear compatible. (Thus leading to the "Piracy-as-Robin-Hood" defense)

Let's backtrack to "Stealing to feed your staving kids." Is it wrong? Of course it is. It's taking what is not yours. Would I do it? Without pause. I'd do it with a smile on my face. And if you asked me, I'd fully admit that it was morally wrong. Why am I doing it, then? Because MY kids are more important to me that YOURS, and it's just that simple.

What if you stole from me to feed your starving kids? Would it be wrong? Sure. Would I vehemently disagree and try to defend my property? Absolutely. But I am also capable of completely understanding WHY you would do it.

Others, instead, will try to add conditions to the scenario that mitigate the perceived cognitive dissonance--"Well, maybe the people you're stealing from are unfairly taxing you, and that's why your kids are starving!" or somesuch. It dodges the purpose of the original thought experiment, and in doing so exactly upholds the original purpose--to prove that we are largely incapable of holding two seemingly irreconcilable beliefs ("Stealing is wrong," and "I am morally obligated to provide for my children.")

The Pay-Off (aka, "What the hell does all this have to do with what I said about piracy and survival?"):

It is alright for us to accept that, under certain circumstances, certain actions are understandable, and to even admit that we'd possibly do the same in a similar situation, without having to also concede that the actions in question are "right" or "okay."

What you find yourself doing with regard to "stealing for survival" involves exactly the same thought processes that pirates apply when trying to defend their actions--they just apply those processes waaaaaaaaay further down the "want/need" totem pole.

 

[Peteron]

They are a disgrace to Pirates! They don't even have ships! Seriously, guys!? Well anyway, I am against the pirating of games overall, and I am sure there are many who agree with me. Yet again, there are many who do not.

 

[DominicxD]

If you truly think their games aren't worth playing, don't give them any attention, not even piracy.

That is basically what I said I would do. I've kinda given up hope and am just going to limit myself to a few games in the near future and just leave gaming at that.

Why don't people just shut the fuck up about Piracy?

I'll pirate stuff if I want to. I don't give a fuck if it hurts this industry either, this industry fucking deserves it. I have yet to see a finished game released in 2010 and I have yet to be satisfied with my purchase a month down the line which has caused me to pirate other games. Pirates aren't the ones hurting this industry, the fucking idiots making the products are.

Good. I've reported your post and, with any luck, a moderator will report you to your ISP so that they can cut off your internet connection. Also, be aware that, legally, your Internet Service Provider can then report your IP to the government (and to the companies you've pirated from).

I hope that you have a few Cease & Desist letters (and possibly even a few lawsuits) headed your way, ya pirate scum

lol.

Why don't people just shut the fuck up about Piracy?

I'll pirate stuff if I want to. I don't give a fuck if it hurts this industry either, this industry fucking deserves it. I have yet to see a finished game released in 2010 and I have yet to be satisfied with my purchase a month down the line which has caused me to pirate other games. Pirates aren't the ones hurting this industry, the fucking idiots making the products are.

and why do you think the products are getting worse? devs (NOT PUBLISHERS) don't have as much money to make the games thanks to people like you with your attitude problem.

I only started pirating games recently as a result of the constant stream of unfinished shit that the devs were releasing so I don't see how I'm to blame for this. There never used to be so many unifinished games released before DLC became popular. Now the games are getting released half done, then finished with paid DLC, and that is something that I am not going to cooperate with. To be honest I'm on the verge of just giving up with video games. Save for a few, they're just a complete waste of money these days. They're not even worth the effort it takes to pirate them.

I might not have played that many games in 2010, but could you give a few examples of games that were unfinished compared to games in earlier years.

Mafia 2
Fallout: New Vegas
Civilization V
Mass Effect 2
Those are the only games I've bothered with this year and all of them show signs of being rushed out or to be finished with DLC when they could have just worked an extra month and released the full game then.

Mafia 2 has so many signs of being rushed. The way the ending cuts off at a cliffhanger and lack of a "Freeride" mode show this. There was also a part where the game introduced a "points of interest" concept on the mini map as a method of making the game world feel more alive but the thing was only used once in the entire game and was obviously meant to appear more than once.

Fallout: New Vegas was obviously rushed because the game is pretty much broken. Also the ending not letting you play on is just an excuse to continue the story with DLC.

Civilization V seems like it wasn't even playtested when they released it. The game is full of late game performance issues, diplomacy issues and a general lack of content which could be added with DLC.

Mass Effect 2 was obviously intended to be finished with DLC though to be fair it was fairly well polished and felt like it was worth the purchase. The Liara, Zhaeed and Kasumi DLC really felt like it should have been in the original game though, particularly since there were files on the disk which indicate that the Liara and Kasumi DLCs were supposed to be released with the game.

 

[GrimHeaper]

"Games can be copied infinitely and with any infinite supply, the real value is ZERO. The disc costs a cent to print. Sure it costs a lot of money to develop that game, but not to put in in circulation. Buying games is effectively charity." The same can be said of money itself.
Personally I find the games to be worth more than money itself.

 

[randomsix]

As for Settlers 7...really? That's your only excuse for buying it, so you can play it offline? If you're on a desktop, why would it not be hooked up to the internet? If you have a laptop, guess what, most Cafes, train stations, airports, hotels and libraries offer free Wi-Fi. The only time you could be without internet is after a recent move (Which is usually back up and running in a couple days), in a car (and that is now changing as well, with newer cars actually having Wi-Fi ) or if it has been turned off (In which case, you should be spending your time finding a second job over gaming)

You falsely assume that all laptops have wi-fi capability. Mine does not, so your premise is incorrect.

In addition, what if he's not going to buy one of those new cars for a few years?

There are a myriad of reasons for wanting to have access to a game while offline.

 

[Hurray Forums]

*sighs* Morals really don't come into play. Not only are they incredibly subjective *points at thread*, they don't matter to a lot of people. If developers want to stop piracy no amount of moralizing and preaching is going to do it, make people WANT to buy your games. Do I want to pay $60 for a game with incredible replay value, constant updates, and a thriving online community from a company I trust that's treated me well in the past(Starcraft 2)? Yes. Do I want to pay $60 for a bug ridden mess so I can wait for it to be patched to something resembling playable(Fallout New Vegas)? No. Do I want to pay $60 for a game that lasts roughly four hours(Force Unleashed 2) No. Do I want to pay $85 dollars + $20 dollars in shipping to important a foreign game that the developer never bothered to translate or release abroad(Fate/Stay Night)? No. Do I want to buy a game with intrusive, obnoxious DRM? No. Do I want to buy something with an irritating "PIRACY IS TEH BAD" advert? No. Does anyone want to do those things? Probably not. In these situations which the developers oh so often shove their consumers into there's 3 options A) take a risk and pray the investment ends up being worth it B) Ignore the game possibly missing something you would really enjoy or C) Pirate it. Option A can result in you paying $60 dollars for a piece of shit, Option B isn't much fun(and downright unthinkable for fanatics), and Option C Gets you a free game. With options like that, is it really all that surprising that morals sometimes go out the window?

As easy as it is to blame pirates for being morally bankrupt or having entitlement issues I think the problem lies just as much with developers, in pretty much the same damn ways as the pirates. Releasing a game that doesn't work is morally bankrupt. Boom. End of story. You gave me a product, it was defective to the point that it didn't work as advertised, yet 9/10 I'm not going to get a refund for it. That is wrong. Really, the game industry is the only industry I can think of where that kind of shit is acceptable and gets justified(*points at New Vegas*). Can you imagine the shit storm if an extremely popular, heavily advertised movie didn't play or got stuck on a certain scene, or if a books pages were so smeared you couldn't read it? Yet somehow that's par for course in video game land. Can you imagine if the book industry started complaining about libraries or used book stores? How about making part of the book unreadable if you got it at a library? They would get smacked upside the head so fast it would make their head spin. Once again though, this sort of over-entitled behavior is par for course in video game land. Biting the hand that feeds you is never a good idea, and the game industry currently pretty much sticks the hand in a meat grinder. People aren't vending machines that spew money when you stick a game in, they're people who tend to have feelings about the products and experiences they receive.

Yes, there's some people who just pirate because HURRAY stealing is fun but fuck those guys. Ignore them. You weren't going to get their money anyway. Yes, you could punish them or make nasty DRM but it's not going to get you any money and it's a waste of effort and resources. Focus on the other people. The actual gamers. The ones you are currently treating like shit. When I buy a game it should be fun. I should be happy. I should be carefree. I shouldn't be worrying whether it's going to be playable or decent, tracking down a patch to make it work, installing some stupid DRM, wondering if I'll be done with the game before supper time, looking for a translation, or wincing when I see who is responsible for making it. Gamers are here to have fun. Not for some sense of moral superiority or to support the industry, "oh boy by buying this I made sure the publisher can afford the solid gold yacht instead of the silver one", fun. Blizzard game? Pre-order. Atlus game? Pre-order. No worries, no fuss, I know I'll get a good experience out of it so plopping down that $60 bucks is easy as pie. Tri-Ace game? Hahahahahaha, yeah right, I'll rent it, then MAYBE buy it used. Morals or economics don't come into play anywhere in that, just past experience and being a human being who generally enjoys having fun and being able to actually play his games. Really game industry, it's that fucking simple. Make buying games fun again

 

[maddawg IAJI]

As for Settlers 7...really? That's your only excuse for buying it, so you can play it offline? If you're on a desktop, why would it not be hooked up to the internet? If you have a laptop, guess what, most Cafes, train stations, airports, hotels and libraries offer free Wi-Fi. The only time you could be without internet is after a recent move (Which is usually back up and running in a couple days), in a car (and that is now changing as well, with newer cars actually having Wi-Fi ) or if it has been turned off (In which case, you should be spending your time finding a second job over gaming)

You falsely assume that all laptops have wi-fi capability. Mine does not, so your premise is incorrect.

In addition, what if he's not going to buy one of those new cars for a few years?

There are a myriad of reasons for wanting to have access to a game while offline.

Then what purpose does that Laptop serve other then to do work, that Laptop obviously isn't meant for gaming.

Wi-fi in cars seems to becoming a standard, most new models will have access to wi-fi in a few given years and even if he doesn't buy one, he doesn't need to game while driving and there are a number of things he can do while in a car. The Radio is right there, talk to the people near ya, take a nap. It's not like gaming is the only way to past the time.

Then why don't you give me some of those reasons then? Give me a reason why you would want to be left out of the loop for updates, not be able to access multiplayer or even speak with friends? You have quantitative amount of excuses that lack quality as far as I can see.

 

[wulfy42]

Saying games are worth nothing so pirating them is not really stealing is silly. Of course games are worth something or nobody would pay for them, and the games cost alot to make so if you play a game without paying for it you are stealing.

The sad truth though is that buying used games is exactly the same as pirating a game as far as the company that created the game is concerned. Pirating PC games though is likely to make more companies release games only for consoles in the future or eventually to release games that can only be played online (preventing pirating all together).

I doubt less then 5% of PC games at this point don't have persistent online access and very little sales would be lost if all PC games required the user to be online to play them. Many people might complain and say "I won't buy the games anymore" etc...but honestly I bet the next time a Fallout game or say Diablo III game was released that way it would still sell like crazy.

If piracy is so bad, prevent it. Don't tell people "Piracy is bad mmmkay" cause honestly the people who are pirating are not going to stop just because you say it's bad. There are arguments for and against pirating right now and if someone can't afford a game but still wants to play it, your going to have a pretty hard time convincing them not to pirate it!!

If I didn't have the money for Fallout NV for instance......or I was in a country that couldn't get a copy for 3 more months etc......I don't know if I could resist pirating it. I sure wouldn't do so just because someone else said it was bad. I'd have to sit down and seriously think about it (I mean I have a ton of other games to play...but I would really hate waiting to play FNV that long).

I think piracy could be used as free advertising for good games. For bad games it's a death knoll pretty much...but I just can't bring myself to feel sorry for people who release trash and try and get us to pay for it. I've probably bought over 100 games that I wish I had not paid for in the past and often returned them right away for about half my money back (At least non-pc games...sadly you can't return pc games at all...like Hellgate london).

Piracy may eventually cause game companies to stop releasing total garbage. More likely though they will just find ways to p revent piracy all together like requiring players to log in before playing etc. Websites like the Escapist and Gamefaqs at least help combat crap game releases a bit (especially with reviewers getting to try games before they are released etc) but I think pirates spreed the word super fast about how good or bad a game is. Maybe companies loose out on a bit of profit but if a game is good they seem to make plenty anyway. I think the real problem here, and the real reason so many people are complaining about games being pirated, is that so many of the games released recently have been bad. Bad games don't sell well. Piracy makes the number of bad games that are sold even less. I think that is a good thing.

If Starcraft II makes $5,000,000 dollars and loses $50,000 due to piracy I don't think it's going to make a big difference and I'm a big Blizzard Supporter.

If a game like Hellgate london (the company ended up going bankrupt anyway) sells less I doubt it will matter anyway and more people (like me) won't be jipped out of $60.

Piracy is a safeguard against companies releasing total garbage. I don't believe it's a serious loss of profit for them at this point and will only ever be a serious problem for games that suck.

 

[Snotnarok]

I pirate games that have no demo so I can actually try them before I buy them. I'm not going to just chance that it works on my PC and that it deserves its metacritic score. If I don't like it I delete it (Why would I keep a game I don't like?) if I like it I buy it.

The devs don't want to let you try the game or see just how well it runs on your PC then I make my own trial, it's only fair since they have millions of dollars and I barely have money now a days.

And before you call me out on it and tell me that I don't buy my games and that I'm just pirating all games

Spoiler

I buy my games thank you

 

[maddawg IAJI]

I pirate games that have no demo so I can actually try them before I buy them. I'm not going to just chance that it works on my PC and that it deserves its metacritic score. If I don't like it I delete it (Why would I keep a game I don't like?) if I like it I buy it.

The devs don't want to let you try the game or see just how well it runs on your PC then I make my own trial, it's only fair since they have millions of dollars and I barely have money now a days.

And before you call me out on it and tell me that I don't buy my games and that I'm just pirating all games

Spoiler

I buy my games thank you

So in short, you're saying that if they offered a trial or a demo of some sort, you wouldn't pirate and if you enjoy the game you would buy it?

My only question is, how far do you go in the games you pirate? Do you stop at the first level and make a decision or do you go farther?

 

[dboulant]

And every damn one of you would file a hefty police report and send your insurance company an almost legitimate enough list of missing items to stay below the underwriter's radar if someone broke in and stole shit from your home.

Nothing like working a concert and hearing "oh, you just buy it and I'll burn a copy"

Great, you listen to my music for free and I don't get to eat tonight.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Mafia 2
Fallout: New Vegas
Civilization V
Mass Effect 2
Those are the only games I've bothered with this year and all of them show signs of being rushed out or to be finished with DLC when they could have just worked an extra month and released the full game then.

Mafia 2 has so many signs of being rushed. The way the ending cuts off at a cliffhanger and lack of a "Freeride" mode show this. There was also a part where the game introduced a "points of interest" concept on the mini map as a method of making the game world feel more alive but the thing was only used once in the entire game and was obviously meant to appear more than once.

Fallout: New Vegas was obviously rushed because the game is pretty much broken. Also the ending not letting you play on is just an excuse to continue the story with DLC.

Civilization V seems like it wasn't even playtested when they released it. The game is full of late game performance issues, diplomacy issues and a general lack of content which could be added with DLC.

Mass Effect 2 was obviously intended to be finished with DLC though to be fair it was fairly well polished and felt like it was worth the purchase. The Liara, Zhaeed and Kasumi DLC really felt like it should have been in the original game though, particularly since there were files on the disk which indicate that the Liara and Kasumi DLCs were supposed to be released with the game.

I haven't played Mafia 2 or Civ V, but I can't say that Mass Effect 2 felt unfinisned.

I just started playing New Vegas and eventhough I've encounterd some glitches and crashes, it isn't a deal breaker (yet). I might be having a lot more isues with than I did with Fallout 3, but hey, that's what patches are made for.

For me, truly unfinished games are games like, Alan Wake were you have to buy DLC in order to know how the story ends.