If you don't think they deserve to be paid for the game then simply don't buy it.YukoValis said:
No one can some up piracy better then Jack Black.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LkWKvMCzqA&feature=related
To anyone who thinks piracy is ok
- Thread starter icame
- Start date
Recommended Videos
No one can some up piracy better then Jack Black.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LkWKvMCzqA&feature=related
Just remember that video games are a privelage, not a right. If game companies wanted to charge a hundred dollars per game than they have every right to do so. I don't like this game enough therefore I must steal it, is not a good pro-piracy arguement. That's like saying that a wahing machine is too expensive for the features it has so it must be stolen. No one's forcing you to buy the games either, if you don't like it, just return it.YukoValis said:
Granted, but if he didn't buy it, I don't think it's appropriate for him and judge it even if it is a bad game, because other people did legitimately go out and spend money on it.Garak73 said:
No it isn't. The original owner was done with the game anyway.omega 616 said:
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.
Why did you not buy it because you can only install it five times. Why would you need to install it more then five times?SICK0_ZER0 said:
An examination for the "justifications" of piracy.
"I can't afford it, so I'll simply download it for free."
No. Inability to pay is no excuse for copyright infringement. If you cannot afford a product, you will do without.
"I don't know if it is any good, so I'll download it and save money."
No. If you buy a movie, album, book, etc. that you discover you don't like, too bad. It is your fault for not going to a library or renting it first. I offer no sympathy, not that those concerned want it anyway.
If you buy a game and wind up not liking it, you should have asked around, gone to Metacritic, rented it, etc. to make a judgment and if after that you buy the game and still don't like it, too bad.
"It isn't like [Insert big-name developer here] actually needs the money."
No. They don't. That developer, director, author, artist, etc. has earned more money than you will ever see in your life. That does not give anyone the excuse to download a product unless it was specifically offered for free in the first place. They created, and if you don't want to pay for the product, you are a parasite asking for an undeserved share.
"I can't afford it, so I'll simply download it for free."
No. Inability to pay is no excuse for copyright infringement. If you cannot afford a product, you will do without.
"I don't know if it is any good, so I'll download it and save money."
No. If you buy a movie, album, book, etc. that you discover you don't like, too bad. It is your fault for not going to a library or renting it first. I offer no sympathy, not that those concerned want it anyway.
If you buy a game and wind up not liking it, you should have asked around, gone to Metacritic, rented it, etc. to make a judgment and if after that you buy the game and still don't like it, too bad.
"It isn't like [Insert big-name developer here] actually needs the money."
No. They don't. That developer, director, author, artist, etc. has earned more money than you will ever see in your life. That does not give anyone the excuse to download a product unless it was specifically offered for free in the first place. They created, and if you don't want to pay for the product, you are a parasite asking for an undeserved share.
If a game sucks, then why are you playing them in the first place? Like the article says, if you're willing to play a game, then you derive at least SOME enjoyment from it. Don't kid yourself by saying that you only steal games if they suck--if you really thought that they weren't worth it, you wouldn't want to play them in the first place.YukoValis said:
Besides, do you not realize how much games cost to make? Medal of Honor costs $60 because of the millions of dollars of development costs which need to be recouped by paying customers. In fact, pirates can be blamed for driving prices up: if you paid your fair share for these games, then the overall cost per customer to make up for the development costs would be lessened and therefore prices could be lowered to make games easier to afford (so thanks for making my wallet suffer for being a legitimate customer).
Furthermore, THIS IS SOMEONE'S JOB. This is how they make money. Imagine that you took a taxi ride and refused to pay the driver upon reaching your destination. Technically, you're not stealing something physical, but you're taking up time and fuel that the driver had expected to be paid for. Now, to make the money that he or she needs to make a living, they'll need to adjust prices to account for people who expect free rides.
Finally, who the fuck are you to say whether or not someone deserves to be paid for something? Why the fuck are you the arbiter of whether or not something should be able to be taken for free? This is not your call. They made something, it's theirs, and YOU don't get to tell THEM what to do with THEIR stuff.
Sorry about the rant, pirates just piss me off. Arrogant assholes who steal games are...
[sub]Must remain calm... Must remain calm...[/sub]
I didn't bother to read the article, so for any unintended ignorance or stupidity, I'm sorry.
I don't really pirate much myself aside from the occasional song or movie, but I don't mind pirating.
I won't pirate much in the future on account of the fact that people are actually starting to take measures against it, but I honestly can't see there being much harm.
So multibillion dollar companies aren't making a few million dollars. Unless the company is about to go under, I don't think they should complain about a fraction of their expected profits not being made.
Granted I don't know the stats, and the numbers could very well be a much higher sum, but if I'm thinking correctly, and we're talking about say a "loss" of $500,000,000 to a company worth say $5,000,000,000+ yearly, I don't think there's much room for complaining.
I don't really pirate much myself aside from the occasional song or movie, but I don't mind pirating.
I won't pirate much in the future on account of the fact that people are actually starting to take measures against it, but I honestly can't see there being much harm.
So multibillion dollar companies aren't making a few million dollars. Unless the company is about to go under, I don't think they should complain about a fraction of their expected profits not being made.
Granted I don't know the stats, and the numbers could very well be a much higher sum, but if I'm thinking correctly, and we're talking about say a "loss" of $500,000,000 to a company worth say $5,000,000,000+ yearly, I don't think there's much room for complaining.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_UnionWicky_42 said:
Sweden isn't truly Socialist.
Vietnam is prospering because it's dominated by private industry, that ain't exactly Socialist bro.
And I was talking to a socialist university student lately, one of the SMASH THE BNP SOCIALIST WORKER FTW types who said he was doing a University Degree in 'Liberal Arts', speaking to him for 5 minutes soured my opinion of Socialism in general, I admit.
There's no way i'm reading that huge article. Sorry.
But i'd like to point this out; you guys who are getting stressed about piracy don't realise that the real detriment to the video game industry right now is the "pawnbroker culture" that retailers have created. MovieBob did a full video on this topic entitled "The Revolution" (go and look it up on his blog or ScrewAttack, i can't be bothered to post the video). What this meant was that every time you trade in a game and someone buys it second hand, GameStop keep 100% of the profit. This goes for any company or business transaction that deals with the sale of second hand merchandise. Essentially, this is just as bad as piracy. The developers see no side of the profits for it. On top of that, out of those $40 you spend on a new game, the developer gets about $12 of it. Maybe slightly more.
The point is that putting aside the whole 'morally wrong' thing, on a financial level, it's no more damaging than trading and buying used games. Just food for thought.
But i'd like to point this out; you guys who are getting stressed about piracy don't realise that the real detriment to the video game industry right now is the "pawnbroker culture" that retailers have created. MovieBob did a full video on this topic entitled "The Revolution" (go and look it up on his blog or ScrewAttack, i can't be bothered to post the video). What this meant was that every time you trade in a game and someone buys it second hand, GameStop keep 100% of the profit. This goes for any company or business transaction that deals with the sale of second hand merchandise. Essentially, this is just as bad as piracy. The developers see no side of the profits for it. On top of that, out of those $40 you spend on a new game, the developer gets about $12 of it. Maybe slightly more.
The point is that putting aside the whole 'morally wrong' thing, on a financial level, it's no more damaging than trading and buying used games. Just food for thought.
I probably would need to install it 5 times or more, I've installed SoC more than 5 times due to installing various mods etc. And I just view that as extremely intrusive, I shouldn't support it in any way. Why should I have to trawl through 'Warez' sites and search for a potentially illegal Crack just to play my game? or phone a premium rate phone line and tell them my 25 digit CD Key so they can reactivate it? especially as Shadow of Chernobyl had none of that.Holy_Handgrenade said:
To be fair, I think they did use only a CD Key for Call of Pripyat.