TorrentFreak Reveals Top Pirated Games of 2011

[harvz]

hmm, lets look at the big point here, with the multiplayer

Most Pirated PC Games (by download)
1. Crysis 2 (3,920,000)
2. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (3,650,000)
3. Battlefield 3 (3,510,000)
4. FIFA 12 (3,390,000)
5. Portal 2 (3,240,000)

1. multiplayer
2. multiplayer
3. multiplayer
4. i dont know cause its another bloody roster update for something i dont care about
5. co-op (but its valve, so many bought it)

now, number 3 should be removed because the pirated version featured no origin requirement so that's going to change the amount of people who pirated it without purchase by a ton.

so, crysis 2 and CoD, going to be pirated but the pirated versions cant be played multiplayer so it would act more like a demo. as said time and time again, just because someone pirated it doesnt mean they wont purchase it.

wait a second, how early were these leaked (i mean aside from crysis 2)? i seem to recall from the news that the russian version of CoD:MW2 was leaked weeks prior to launch, if your going to post statistics, it really should be mentioned precisely how many units were downloaded early because gamers are entitled people and will say "cause i bought it, i can DL it, LOL"...

 

[SillyBear]

I could turn that argument around and say that Copyright Laws and Intellectual Property doesn't excuse companies (*cough* EA and Ubisoft *cough*) from treating their legit customers as sh*t, which they still do. And if the companies can bypass "excuses", why can't pirates?

You could turn that argument around, but you'd be talking bullshit.

Private companies have the right to charge whatever services they want for whatever amounts of money they want. It is up to the consumer to decide whether or not these terms are fair. The overwhelming majority of consumers don't see a problem in the way a company like EA makes trade.

If you do have a problem with the way they conduct business, don't buy their products. Plain and simple. To think you have the right to use their products without financing neither them or the developers is the very epitome of self entitlement.

Stop talking about piracy as if people need an "excuse" before they do it. They don't. Pirates don't need an excuse, nor do they need your (or anyone elses) approval of what constitutes an excuse, just like the game companies doesn't need an excuse to treat their customers any way they like.

Woah, we've got a badass here.

WE DONT NEED NO EXCUSES!

Yeah, sure. Power to them then. I wonder what other crimes you could say this for?

That's also one of the reasons for rampant piracy: The companies, by their way of acting, send the signal that everything is 'fair game', because if they can be pricks, then consumers can as well (this goes both ways btw).

When was the last time a company made a counterfeit copy of something you created that took you years and used it without paying you?

I'm stretching my brain here but I can't think of the last time that happened to me.

It's pointless to discuss what excuses and what doesn't excuse, because at the end of the day, people (no matter who it is) don't need any other excuse than their own.

I wonder how far you can stretch this woeful piece of rhetoric out. I'm going to enjoy watching you try.

Your implying that moral judgement of others is bad because people are free to do whatever they want. Which is objectively wrong - the very core of our society is based on regulating "good" and "bad" behaviour.

You keep trying to shove down my throat this idea of people "not needing excuses". All you are doing is ridding them of any moral obligation whatsoever and trying to spin it so they don't have to answer to why they did it.

I can't order companies like EA and Ubisoft (who are some of the biggest piracy targets) to change the way they conduct business. I can, however, give them a good piece of advice: You reap as you sow )

If you don't like the way EA does their business, don't buy their games. That's the only legal power you have has a consumer.

There are two options:

A) You agree with the way the trade is conducted. You purchase the service.

B) You don't agree with the way the trade is conducted. You don't purchase the service.

There is no bullshit option where you come in and take the service without paying for it because of some flimsy justification like "EA ARE EVIL!" because they use DRM or they make you use Origin instead of Steam.

I'm sick to death of this ridiculous "the world owes me a living" rhetoric I'm seeing everywhere I look these days. Apparently if a private company promotes a business model you don't like, then it's perfectly okay for you to take that service without charge. Also it seems like if a private company puts a retail price on an item that you can't afford then it's perfectly okay for you to take that service without charge.

The fact these are mere digital copies is meaningless. The core principle is still the same. You've in favour of counterfeiting a product because you are so gravely hurt by the way EA does their business. You don't care that it is a successful business model, you automatically think you have the right to take a copy of their game for free. You don't care how much effort the developers may have put in. You think you have the right to take a copy for free.

I can't believe you and so many others can't see what's wrong with this.

 

[bit_crusherrr]

You can lower those numbers quite a bit if you include people who pirate games to try them out then buy them if they are good. How about we get some decent demo's then publishers would see piracy drop a bit.

 

[Alma Mare]

First week of 2012 and the Escapist is. already herp derping about piracy like a champ. Sweet

 

[I.Muir]

The industry got more than a mere return on their investments, beyond that I don't care too much. Piracy isn't a big deal but big money wants to be bigger money and they tear their hair out thinking of the potential money they aren't getting, fictitious or not.

 

[Treblaine]

Yeah, but consider there are over 1 BILLION computers plugged into the internet this is not so profound.

Remember, torrent tracking doesn't care about borders or regions. Boxed copies of games like Crysis 2 sell for extortionate prices in Asia and South America for a whole variety of factors from currency exchange to import duties and how many middle men they must pass through each taking a cut and increasing the final cost.

Publishers are incredibly US focused, with UK and western Europe getting incrementally less and less focus the cost inflating every time. For example Xbox live Multiplayer is STILL not available in the Middle East unless you resort to some sort of hacking!

I really just do not see MW3 selling 3.6 million extra copies on PC if by some extraordinary means all games piracy was utterly shut down, as in the regions with the most piracy the legitimate copies are just ridiculously priced.

One thing that would be more interesting than raw downloads is to look for pirate servers. 3 of those top-5 on PC have major online multiplayer components, and in fact you could say BF3 and MW3 the online is the ONLY worth-while part, so where are all these pirated copies online? How many of these are idle downloads that they cannot use online without genuine authentication in a sense then this piracy has been thwarted!

Remember, a pirated version can only be a lost sale if PLAYING that pirated copy satisfies them. If they cannot get online to a reasonably full extent of what the experience offers, then they cannot really say the legit version is worthless to them.

 

[saregos]

• 
  
  Nice broad brush you use there. It ever occur to you that "People like me" would much prefer to see the problems that drive people to piracy in the first place addressed?
  
  Instead, we see people freaking out about (and "treating"...) a symptom of a larger problem. And in the meantime driving still more people to piracy.
  
  Not that you'll listen to, or respect, a "person like me". But at least I tried.

• 
  
  And then "People like you(tm)" will just find new excuses to do so.
  
  If they lower the game prices to £20, "you'll" start whining that they should cost £15 (assuming "you" don't just continue pirating them anyway because "free" is still cheaper)
  
  Games like the Witcher and Indie Bundle have proved quite nicely that removing DRM does not stop "you" from pirating it.

• 
  
  Considering that I, personally, have never pirated a game in my life? Nice try.
  The fact remains, Piracy cannot be controlled or completely prevented. But it can be mitigated. And yet, by outlining (proven) ways in which companies can alleviate piracy, specifically by providing better value than the pirates...
  I'm somehow condoning piracy? Hardly. I'm just being more reasonable than you on how to mitigate it.

 

[saregos]

Pirating is stealing. Hence the use of the word "pirating". You keep saying that the notion is "debunked"; Try telling a court of law that; see if it stops them from sentencing internet pirates.

Ok. Since you're insistent on being stupid, I'll explain this one more time.

If it was stealing, it would be called "stealing". It is not stealing. Not legally, not morally, not factually. There is no equivalence.

Theft, by it's nature, deprives the rightful owner of whatever is taken. If I steal your car, you can no longer use it.

Intellectual property infringement (which is what "piracy", by all legal standards, is) does not. If I take a picture of a painting you own (technically, this is copyright infringement) it doesn't magically disappear off your wall.

While you're using a convenient strawman to claim that I said "pirates won't be sentenced", that's untrue. They will be sentenced. But they'll be sentenced under the laws governing copyright, not the laws governing theft.

For that matter, a non-commercial pirate won't be "sentenced" at all, as Copyright Infringement is, except under certain very specific circumstances, a Civil and not Criminal offense. They might be sued by the company, but that's all that's (currently) allowable under the law.

And it's a sign of the true absurdity of all of this shit that the allowable punishment for copying a CD is orders of magnitude higher than for stealing it.

 

[maninahat]

Pirating is stealing. Hence the use of the word "pirating". You keep saying that the notion is "debunked"; Try telling a court of law that; see if it stops them from sentencing internet pirates.

Seeing how Copyright Law is handled by Civil Court, and not Criminal Court, there is a 100% chance they will *not* CONVICT (not to be confused with "sentence") any software pirate of Theft.

Even if you want to be pedantic about my terminology, pirating can be handled as a federal crime as well as civil case [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NET_Act], so yes, a person can be sentenced or convicted (though not of "theft").

You will not find a court that will convict someone who downloaded a game off the internet with theft. Piracy, in this context, is referring to copyright infringement which is not theft. Your poor use of legal terminology shows you're yet another person who knows nothing about the law yet feels they can offer an opinion on it.

Also, the word you're looking for is "paid", not "payed".

Perhaps I just wasn't using strict legal terminology in my use of the word "theft", but using the word colloquially? Okay, I will concede to your superior knowledge that courts officially distinguish copyright violation from theft. That doesn't take away from my previous arguments that filesharing is obviously stealing, in the same way that "abstacting electricity" is also quite obviously theft (despite it being officially impossible to "steal" electricity in the eyes of UK law). Either way, copyright infringement is still a crime that will still result in a punishment. That was the simple point I was trying to make in the first place. I was mistaken in assuming the argument "copyright violation=/=theft" was meant informally, rather than in strict legal terms.

In the UK copyright infringement isn't a crime. It's a civil matter, not criminal. Stealing and theft are construed as being the same thing in the law so you can't say that it's stealing but not theft, it doesn't make any sense. I don't understand why many many people on this site feel it's ok to use it even in a colloquial sense. We have a term for what this particular act is (copyright infringement), so why not just use that?

I suppose it is because the act of copyright infringement resembles theft. It involves an individual taking something that doesn't belong to them from someone else. It has been pointed out that copying intangible goods can't be theft because the original owner hasn't been deprived of his property. But I think it is obvious that the taking of something that doesn't belong to you without permission, in itself, deserves (at least informally) to be called theft.

 

[stefman]

So the WII has more piracy than the Xbox is it me or is that bit odd

It's because wii games are smaller in data size, and the wii itself is extremely easy to install homebrew programs on while nintendo has a crappy countermeasure to it that barely works.

 

[Skeleon]

It wouldn't be fair to say that every pirated copy represents a lost sale, but it would be equally unfair to say that every copy didn't.

No, of course not, but I'd say that pirating games makes it much easier to get games you would otherwise not want to buy or pay full price for, i.e. games you wouldn't have bought either way. I'd say directly converting the piracy numbers into "potential revenue" would definitely be disingenious for that reason.

Compare it to the used game market, which the publishers also hate a lot, or the budget games and compilations, both of which I make extensive use of:
I for one am much more liberal with buying games thanks to the availability of cheaper options than I would be if it meant having to buy at full price each time. I would simply not own the variety of games I do, I couldn't and wouldn't want to afford to.

Now, that obviously doesn't excuse piracy, but I think that playing around with these numbers and their interpretations can be used to overdramatize the problem and present a faulty image of the real damage it does.

 

[Athinira]

You could turn that argument around, but you'd be talking bullshit.

In your opinion yes.

Woah, we've got a badass here.

WE DONT NEED NO EXCUSES!

Yeah, sure. Power to them then. I wonder what other crimes you could say this for?

Well how about the revolution that created the United States? By your logic, Americans are all criminals, and USA should by right still be an English colony.

"The idea that laws decide what is right or wrong is mistaken in general. Laws are, at their best, an attempt to achieve justice; to say that laws define justice or ethical conduct is turning things upside down."
- Richard Stallman

I also said this once in an entirely unrelated discussion with some countrymen of mine: I support society, but if i find that my government at any point turns into what can be considered a "bad" government, then I'll be the first man to join a resistance movement to state a coup. I don't care if that makes me a criminal, i fight for what i consider right, not what the laws consider right.

Now this might get me thrown into jail. Hell, in another time period it might have gotten me executed (or killed in action). Like i said: You reap as you sow. That's a risk i need to be willing to take.

I wonder how far you can stretch this woeful piece of rhetoric out. I'm going to enjoy watching you try.

Your implying that moral judgement of others is bad because people are free to do whatever they want. Which is objectively wrong - the very core of our society is based on regulating what the government thinks is "good" and "bad" behaviour.

Fixed.

First of all, I'll repeat once again: Law does not define justice or what's right or wrong. In Europe, for example, we believe death penalty is wrong, and it's therefore forbidden according to our laws. In some American states, it's fair game. That doesn't mean one is more correct than the other. I personally don't believe in death penalty, but that's just me.

Second of all: Using the word "regulating", you do hopefully realize that to regulate human behavior, you need either a carrot or a stick, and any government who consequently decides to use the stick, foregoing the carrot entirely, isn't a healthy government.

There is no bullshit option where you come in and take the service without paying for it because of some flimsy justification like "EA ARE EVIL!" because they use DRM or they make you use Origin instead of Steam.

But i don't take EA's service. I take a different service based off EA's product.

If i somehow found a way to "cheat" Origin into believing I'd purchased a game legally, meaning i could take advantage of everything EA offered a paying customer, then your analogy would be useful. As of now, it isn't.

The fact these are mere digital copies is meaningless. The core principle is still the same.

No it's not.

I honestly don't know where you got this idea that your opinion is somehow what is written in the "holy book of right and wrong", but i can tell you it isn't.

I can't believe you and so many others can't see what's wrong with this.

Because, unlike you, we:
1) Understand and respect that people might not have the same opinion as us
2) We don't define right and wrong based on the law

So returning to an earlier quote you wrote...

If you do have a problem with the way they conduct business, don't buy their products. Plain and simple. To think you have the right to use their products without financing neither them or the developers is the very epitome of self entitlement.

...The epitome of self-entitlement is actually anyone who believes that their opinion should be in the holy book, and that they can dictate what's right and wrong and what others should do.

You can't do that and neither can any government. Sure, you might be able to ENFORCE it upon people, and if that works, then great for you. Basically it comes down to what i said: Everything is fair game. That doesn't mean that actions don't have consequence, and if you can't live with the consequences, then you shouldn't do something.

Obviously a lot of people is willing to take the risk and pirate. I'm not saying I'd take the same risk (it's been a while since i pirated something, so at least not anymore), but instead of whining about how these people are jerks for not taking YOUR moral stand, try to consider if the system isn't broken instead. It's worth remembering that Copyright is a custom monopoly granted by law, and any monopoly is going to create competition (legal or illegal). If people want a product, but can't get it how they want, they are always going to seek out alternatives.

 

[DiMono]

Reducing piracy is deceptively easy, but nobody will do it: lower the price of your game. I think it's a fair assumption that many people who pirate games do so because they think they're too expensive. Lower the price, and there's less incentive to pirate. The same thing happened with CDs: people started pirating them, so they raised the price to make up the lost profit, and then lots of people started pirating them.

Lower the price, and make sure people know you're doing it, and fewer people will pirate.

 

[Neonit]

notice how most of those games are (imho) crap. with exception of portal 2 i dont really see any good game....

 

[Pilkingtube]

I had no idea that there were this many piracy/IP theft apologists with such a fervour to defend what they do. 0_o

Anyway Mike Kayatta, for all the crap you've been given, I agree with you.

 

[ZombieGenesis]

"Meh I really do not care, and in no way is a download a lost sale. Just look at studies done on this."

The most retarded of arguments for one simple reason. If someone owns the pirated game, why would they go and buy it?

 

[incal11]

"Meh I really do not care, and in no way is a download a lost sale. Just look at studies done on this."

The most retarded of arguments for one simple reason. If someone owns the pirated game, why would they go and buy it?

To thank the developpers for making a particularly awesome game maybe.

It's a matter of giving your limited entertainment budget to those who deserve it the most whithout restricting your horizons.
Theoretically speaking: No losses since I cannot go over this budget anyway, and I may become a potential customer for the others. Many of whom I would never have been interested in otherwise.

 

[Aeshi]

• 
  
  Nice broad brush you use there. It ever occur to you that "People like me" would much prefer to see the problems that drive people to piracy in the first place addressed?
  
  Instead, we see people freaking out about (and "treating"...) a symptom of a larger problem. And in the meantime driving still more people to piracy.
  
  Not that you'll listen to, or respect, a "person like me". But at least I tried.

• 
  
  And then "People like you(tm)" will just find new excuses to do so.
  
  If they lower the game prices to £20, "you'll" start whining that they should cost £15 (assuming "you" don't just continue pirating them anyway because "free" is still cheaper)
  
  Games like the Witcher and Indie Bundle have proved quite nicely that removing DRM does not stop "you" from pirating it.

• 
  
  Considering that I, personally, have never pirated a game in my life? Nice try.
  The fact remains, Piracy cannot be controlled or completely prevented. But it can be mitigated. And yet, by outlining (proven) ways in which companies can alleviate piracy, specifically by providing better value than the pirates...
  I'm somehow condoning piracy? Hardly. I'm just being more reasonable than you on how to mitigate it.

• 
  
  So how are they supposed to beat "Free" then? because I'm pretty sure that, by very definition, is better value than anything the legit copy can offer.

 

[Inkidu]

It's stealing. Plain and simple. You can list page after page of rationalization, but at the end of the day you are using someone's intellectual property, which they have every right to charge for without the intent of paying for it. That's called stealing, you don't own it, you didn't pay to use it, and so you shouldn't have it.

 

[Dogstile]

So the Escapist hires trolls to do articles now? Nice how we can't reply to an article without the poster being a total asshat about his replies.

Quoted for truth.

The lack of professionalism displayed by the authour of this piece is astonishing. When your 'journalists' act with such immaturity it's perhaps time to rethink your vetting policies, Escapist.

Adding another voice to this. What the fuck? Reading that was quite disheartening, I thought you guys at least gave warnings when people were dicks to eachother, does it not count when editors do it or something?

Hell, he even missed the point here

And since I want to stop "driving people to piracy" with my attitude, I suppose I'll start advocating the practice in order to quell it ... because that makes sense. Thanks for the tip. Either way, I've got to stop replying to comments and get back to my high horse. He's likely got the munchies by now.

Where the point was more of a case of "hey, you know what stops people from being pirates? A bit of politeness". Screaming at people makes them laugh at you and tell you to go do one (at least it does here in the jolly old UK) whereas if you just explain to a person why they should buy games nicely like I did to my ex-pirate friend, who I still think is a bit of a dick but at least he doesn't pirate without buying anymore.

Anyway, OT: Pirates are dicks, people who are massively against pirates are dicks, numbers are probably smaller if you only include places where the game is actually shipped. Same as usual I guess