video game piracy: a question

[SenseOfTumour]

Ok, I think we've agreed it's not technically theft, but it is wrong, I'd suggest it's closest to illegal inflation.

The more access there is to pirated copies of a game, the more the original is devalued.

The easier it is to pirated something, combined with the cost of the item, combined to place, the bar on the moral slider, I believe.

What I mean is if there's a new game out, and then it's easy to pirate, it's immediately lessened in value because there's a place effectively selling it for zero dollars.

If a new game is $60, it's all over the internet for free, and you hear it's only about 5 hours long, I think it's more likely to tempt those who only sometimes pirate, than say a great game that's $20.

Since I got Steam, I've bought SO many games, I think I'm currently at about 160, because I don't think I've paid more than about £10 for any of them, and many have been under £3.

Now I'm not saying there's no room for $60 games, but I do think perhaps the industry needs to consider scaling down, not every game is going to be worth $60, so maybe not every game tneeds teams of hundreds working for years. If it's a good idea and a good game,the majority are not going to dismiss it based on a lack of anti aliasing.

Also, I still firmly believe a $20 game will be pirated less than a $60 one.

"But the indie bundle" yeah, yeah, but, putting aside people that just pirate everything, I'm sure some people realised that if they couldn't pay (no card etc) or couldn't afford to make a reasonable offering, they were actually doing the bundle less damage by torrenting it, than paying 1 cent and causing them server and banking charges.


TL;DR version, you may not be 'stealing' but you are saying 'I think your entire life's work is worthless' to hundreds of people who work to make the games you love, each time you pirate.

 

[Laxman9292]

Well, the person who says "I wouldn't buy it anyway" is really just making an excuse.
Obviously, if you are putting in the work to pirate a game, you have some desire to play it, and you might as well support the developer by actually paying for the game.

And what if a game costed half a persons salary?

I understand the outrage that certain people might have when they see someone getting something for free that they had to pay for but let's face facts here people, pirates are people who can't afford games. Be it some teenager whose parents don't want/can't afford to buy him/her games or just some student struggling to get through college, pirates are not all self entitled jerks like most people here seem to think. Hell, if it wasn't for piracy most of the people living here wouldn't be able to game because the prices are so outrageously high and the salaries are so outrageously low. Hell, if it wasn't for piracy I can outright say not only would I have not been introduced to gaming but I would have probably never bought any games at all.

Show some compassion people. It's not that hard.

Then that person is shit out of luck. We have rules for a reason. And fuck the person who thinks that their case is special and they're above the law. They don't have money to pay for it? They don't get it, simple as that. Come back when you're less poor. If money is really an issue then they should be worrying about buying food not video games. It is self-entitled to think you should be able to get something for free. A poor person who thinks they deserve to game for free is just entitled as a rich person who games for free.

 

[ameliaaa]

Maybe it's just me, maybe it misses the point completely, but the only time I've ever used a prate copy of a game was when:
A- i was torn on if to fork out £40+ for it
B- blockbuster didn't have it available to rent yet
C- it wasn't one of the demos that came with OXM
because the console alone took nearly a year of saving (by the time i'd saved enough for the arcade, the elite had already come out and the newest xbox has been out a few months)
Cause, really, I don't have the cash to fork out £40 on a game that looks good but I could get 5 minutes into and hate. If I'm gonna save for something, I want it to be worth the saving.

So I'll test a pirate copy if A, B & C apply to make sure I make the right decision.


TL;DR
Folk who pirate to get a taster of the game and intend to either stop playing that copy or buy an official copy - fine with me.
Folk who pirate because maybe their official disc is wrecked/lost - fine with me.
Folk who pirate just for the hell of it if they can afford to buy it/know they'll like it - not fine, not by a longshot.

 

[zehydra]

It's not that I don't empathize with the people who only have the option of piracy, it's just that I find it morally wrong.

Do you find it morally wrong to give free food to those who cannot procure it?

Careful, he's going to tell you that food is a necessity and videogames are a luxury, ignoring the fact that giving free food actually costs money, while making free videogames takes nothing but a little time.

which would be a good response. Food doesn't actually cost money any more than producing a video game.

Except,as I pointed out above, we're talking about a copy of a game that was made using resources not connected to the company, so that specific copy cost the company nothing, compared to food that somebody had to buy before it could be given away. This is also why copyright infringement is a different crime, and a much less serious offense, than theft.

and I'm saying that technically, the food didn't have to be bought, although yes, you can't copy a fruit. You are also correct, in that it is not theft, but it's still fairly serious, because of the nature of the societies we live in. In our societies, whether or not an industry can exist, is if it can make a profit on its own. Piracy and the whole copying problem puts a dent in not only the Game industry, but Music as well as Film, to the point that in the context of the world we live in, it is as bad as stealing a farmer's crop.

 

[Nuke_em_05]

It's not that I don't empathize with the people who only have the option of piracy, it's just that I find it morally wrong.

Do you find it morally wrong to give free food to those who cannot procure it?

That's a rather abbreviated comparison.

A person spending their own money willingly to buy or grow food themselves with the intention of giving it away without compensation is different than a person who created media at their own expense with the intention of selling it to recover that cost.

A better comparison might be "is it morally wrong to steal food from someone else and give it to others?"

Then, one would have to ask, is there free food available naturally? If there are no legitimate sources of free food, then some would say that is is morally acceptable to cross that line. If there are legitimate sources of free food, one might find stealing it morally unacceptable.

When translated to the gaming comparison; are there sources of legitimate free games? Yes, there are.

You can make the case for entertainment being just as necessary as food. I won't argue for or against it, and even assume that it is. Food being necessary doesn't entitle everyone to 5-star gourmet meals three times per day. A soup kitchen fulfills that need just as well. Much in the same way that entertainment is necessary but does not entitle everyone to AAA games, free games and other forms of entertainment fulfill that need just as well.

 

[Zenn3k]

Personally, I when I pirate a game, its because I want to see if its worth the purchase.

EVERY game I've pirated, if I enjoyed it, I went out and purchased it (usually because I want access to content patches), something I likely wouldn't have done otherwise.

If I don't like it, I don't purchase it, something I wouldn't have done anyway.

So as far as I'm concerned, piracy has INCREASED the number of games I buy.

 

[Robert Ewing]

If I have lost the product then I will pirate it. Because I've already paid for it.

If saaay, a game company... Not mentioning any names Mr. You Beesoft, royally screwed me over with some horrible DRM that has me take an exam before playing a game, I will probably crack the game.

If the game is too old to be making any sort of revenue, or has been scrapped altogether, I will probably pirate that.

But other than these, I will fuel the gaming industry with my hard earned coins.

 

[INF1NIT3 D00M]

if a person really had no intention of getting the game unless he could get it free or if the person couldnt get it any other way (no money) what does the developer lose? how from that point of view is it wrong?

Oh, somewhere buried in your seemingly never-ending post there actually *was* a question!
Horrible sentence structure aside, I think I've deciphered what you're asking: "If a person has interest in but can't afford a game, or has the money but not even the slightest interest, what does a developer lose if the person pirates the game?"

Well they lose out on the money they're supposed to be paid for their product, duh. The person with no money is getting a free copy, in most cases that means there's anywhere from $00.50-$60.00 lost to the people publishing, developing and/or retailing the game. If the person with money finds interest after pirating, that makes no immediate difference, because chances are they won't buy the game. As for the person who has interest but no cash, why bother spending the cash now? That second one, of course, is assuming it's not a situation as described in part B) of my last post. I show my friends the game, give them temporary access to it, and then they decide they like it (or in some cases "need" it) and buy their own copy. This really works best with Steam, since you can download all your friends games that you want, but you can only play the games while that person is logged on.

And it doesn't matter what the situation is. Piracy is wrong, ethically. I explained that in my previous post. That doesn't make you the scum of the earth, it doesn't make you a bad person. I compared it to stealing candy from the supermarket, and I stand by that. It's petty theivery. Petty, but still thievery. People have similar views on both subjects, I think the comparison fits nicely. However, I don't feel that point B) of my previous post is really piracy, considering one person bought the game and is now using it to try to convince others to do the same. That's more like free advertising, only more persuasive.

PS. I don't mind much that you called me an "ASSHAT". You're not going to draw me into a name-calling game. I was simply pointing out your atrocious writing style because it made reading your posts both annoying and overly difficult. I'll chalk it up to the utter failure of the American educational system and move on.

 

[the spud]

The only times pirating is acceptable is when the game in question isn't available where you live or the game is "out of print". Like my emulated versions of Terranigma and Earthbound. Otherwise, there really is't a good reason for pirating unless you already own the game.

 

[INF1NIT3 D00M]

Personally, I when I pirate a game, its because I want to see if its worth the purchase.

EVERY game I've pirated, if I enjoyed it, I went out and purchased it (usually because I want access to content patches), something I likely wouldn't have done otherwise.

If I don't like it, I don't purchase it, something I wouldn't have done anyway.

So as far as I'm concerned, piracy has INCREASED the number of games I buy.

I mentioned in one of my other posts that I've never come across anyone who pirates and then buys a game. I guess you are that person then. I'll take your word on it, and I'm glad to hear that some piracy is working for the better.

That brings up a question, though: If a game has a demo do you pirate it anyway, or do you use the demos when you can and only pirate if no demo is released?

 

[INF1NIT3 D00M]

If I have lost the product then I will pirate it. Because I've already paid for it.

If saaay, a game company... Not mentioning any names Mr. You Beesoft, royally screwed me over with some horrible DRM that has me take an exam before playing a game, I will probably crack the game.

If the game is too old to be making any sort of revenue, or has been scrapped altogether, I will probably pirate that.

But other than these, I will fuel the gaming industry with my hard earned coins.

In those cases, are you really a pirate, though? In case A, you bought the game, so you're entitled to a copy of it. It's the same in case B, since I don't count the crack itself as piracy. You bought the game, the DRM isn't supposed to stop you. If you choose to get rid of it, who could really blame you? In case C, the developer has moved on or gone under, so you couldn't pay even if you wanted to. On top of that, I'd commend you for keeping abandonware alive.

 

[Zenn3k]

Personally, I when I pirate a game, its because I want to see if its worth the purchase.

EVERY game I've pirated, if I enjoyed it, I went out and purchased it (usually because I want access to content patches), something I likely wouldn't have done otherwise.

If I don't like it, I don't purchase it, something I wouldn't have done anyway.

So as far as I'm concerned, piracy has INCREASED the number of games I buy.

I mentioned in one of my other posts that I've never come across anyone who pirates and then buys a game. I guess you are that person then. I'll take your word on it, and I'm glad to hear that some piracy is working for the better.

That brings up a question, though: If a game has a demo do you pirate it anyway, or do you use the demos when you can and only pirate if no demo is released?

Really depends on the demo.

Often I don't download demos, because most demos are so poorly constructed that they actually turn me off a product I was interested in buying.

The shooter demo that gives you 1 gun, on 1/2 of a level, really doesn't show nearly enough to make me excited the play the full game.

I usually look at it like this, if the demo is THAT weak, the full game must be fairly weak as well, or they wouldn't feel the need to hide so much of it from me. A demo should get you excited that the final product will be something worth purchasing, I've come across VERY few demos that accomplish that goal.

To answer your question: I'd likely pirate the game anyway, and use the full experience as a "full demo" that simply lacks support and patches.

Also worth noting, I don't pirate every game I have a thought about purchasing, a lot of them I just go out and buy, regretting the purchase a good 50% of the time. I primary pirate games I'm fairly unfamiliar with.

The most recent example I can give for all this is Civ 5. I had NEVER played a Civ game before 5. I had no idea what to really expect. So I downloaded a pirated copy. The game barely ran, had multiple issues, and was the original release of the title (there have been many patches since). I LOVED it. I played it constantly for nearly 2 weeks. I then decided, I wanted those patches, and additional leaders and to not have the bugs I dealt was dealing with, so I went on Steam and bought it. Still play it off and on to this day, absolutely zero regret in my purchase.

 

[INF1NIT3 D00M]

Snip!

It never really occurred to me to do that. When you put it like that I can't really say I blame you. I was asking purely out of curiosity, and I will consider what you said the next time a game I want is coming out. If I ever get around to buying Civ 5, I will hunt you down and perhaps we can play a round together.

I don't really have much to say, but it was interesting reading what you said and I wanted to let you know. To fill some extra space so I don't get a low content warning, I'll tell you that I played the Space Marine demo and it was actually pretty cool. I think I might go play it again. Oh, and I liked Crysis 2's demo, since it gave you access to a decent sized portion of multiplayer. Also in this category would be Lost Planet's demo. Just a few months ago myself and a few friends downloaded the multiplayer demo just to play a few rounds of deathmatch.

EDIT: I did not mean to imply that I have pirated Civ 5. I just haven't raised the cash for it yet. I'd rather clarify that now and have it seem patronizing than have it be misinterpreted by a mod...

 

[teisjm]

Well, the person who says "I wouldn't buy it anyway" is really just making an excuse.
Obviously, if you are putting in the work to pirate a game, you have some desire to play it, and you might as well support the developer by actually paying for the game.

Or maybe you're playing it for a few hours at a LAN party, getting it from someones harddisc and installing it making the "work" to pirate it sometimes less than just installing and registering it, if you had bought it.
I wouldn't lay down money for a game i'd only play for a few hours at a LAN party, playing it mainly cause that was what people where playing atm.
I've played many games like that at LAN parties, not touching them even once after the LAN was over, cause i only found them interresting, due to them beeing what was played atm at the LAN.
If i couldn't pirate them, i'd just settle for playing what i had instead, though that would make the LAN less fun.
If you're at a somewhat large LAN 10-15+ people, chances that everyone has the same games are relatively low, so beeing able to share the games makes it much easier, and enables everyone to play together, without having to lay down a lot of money for a game they wouldn't give a fuck about outside of the LAN. Buying them at that point might not even be an option, if you don't have an open game store nearby.

 

[infinity_turtles]

I realize that, but if they wouldn't have bought the game, then why do they consider it worth pirating?
If they have little or no interest in a game, at least not enough to buy it, why bother at all?
Now they've got a game that they really didn't want in the first place.

Didn't particularly care to go through the thread to see if someone has said this already, but I'd like to have a crack at this.

First, the effort and time it takes to pirate something once you know how is basically nothing. Wanting enough to put almost no effort into it is very different than wanting it enough to pay, even on the cheap end of games, 20$. The question of whether you want something enough to pay x amount is not the same as if you want to spend two minutes clicking things and then go do something else for a bit while it downloads.

That reason pales in comparison to this one though. Uncertainty. Will, once I've bought the game, find it to be worth the cost? If I pay nothing, I can guarantee that most games I'll answer yes to this. If I pay 60$? The vast majority of games get a no. Why should I, when I have a viable alternative, decide to buy a game be based on the quality of the marketing instead of the quality of the game? Even if you want to throw in demos, demos are specifically chosen bits of gameplay to make you want more, not representative of the real experience of the game. They are part of marketing.

And hell, you could throw in voting with your wallet as a reason. A sequel to a game you loved has become a game you simply enjoy. They've changed things in way you don't want to reinforce with your purchase, but not enough that the few elements left from the old version aren't enjoyable. Sure, it might "mean" more if you actually suffer through boredom by not playing the game at all in your protest against these changes, but from the Developers side of things, it doesn't really change anything. A lost sale is a lost sale.

Now, I'm not saying these reasons are right or anything, but all of these are plausible beliefs a person can hold that would allow for having enough interest to play, but not be willing to buy a game.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

It's not that I don't empathize with the people who only have the option of piracy, it's just that I find it morally wrong.

Do you find it morally wrong to give free food to those who cannot procure it?

Careful, he's going to tell you that food is a necessity and videogames are a luxury, ignoring the fact that giving free food actually costs money, while making free videogames takes nothing but a little time.

which would be a good response. Food doesn't actually cost money any more than producing a video game.

Except,as I pointed out above, we're talking about a copy of a game that was made using resources not connected to the company, so that specific copy cost the company nothing, compared to food that somebody had to buy before it could be given away. This is also why copyright infringement is a different crime, and a much less serious offense, than theft.

and I'm saying that technically, the food didn't have to be bought, although yes, you can't copy a fruit. You are also correct, in that it is not theft, but it's still fairly serious, because of the nature of the societies we live in. In our societies, whether or not an industry can exist, is if it can make a profit on its own. Piracy and the whole copying problem puts a dent in not only the Game industry, but Music as well as Film, to the point that in the context of the world we live in, it is as bad as stealing a farmer's crop.

In that case, you need to take a look at my first post. Piracy is to digital goods as the Star Trek replicator is to physical goods. Just like how in Star Trek, society ultimately moved to a socialistic state because capitalism was completely obsolete, in real life, our capitalist companies are going to have to find a way to make a profit despite the fact that their main product can easily and freely be copied, or otherwise go out of business. I'll tell you, locking it down with EULAs and denigrating it as a physical product is the opposite of how they need to do that; nice little things like paper or cloth maps for RPGs, and all the other little <link=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Feelies>feelies that used to come with PC games is more like it. What they have to do is make their product a better product than the free one; if they can do that, people will buy it. Right now, however, the free product is significantly better than the paid product, and the only real reason to buy legally is out of the goodness of one's heart, or out of a fear of punishment. Piracy is just the better option for the consumer in far too many cases, and it really doesn't need to be that way.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

In that case, you need to take a look at my first post. Piracy is to digital goods as the Star Trek replicator is to physical goods.

Except that a Replicator converts matter from one state to a desired state, there's no input on a human level. Videogames have human developers, programmers, writers, coders, marketers, producers, publishers, artists etc. When a videogame can be produced as easily as a Replicator can materialise me a cup of Earl Grey then you'll have a point.

I'll tell you, locking it down with EULAs and denigrating it as a physical product is the opposite of how they need to do that; nice little things like paper or cloth maps for RPGs, and all the other little feelies that used to come with PC games is more like it.

This I can kind of agree on. Publishers do need to provide incentive for consumers to purchase their product instead of getting it for free. On the other hand they still have to protect against copyright infringement and IP theft, so treating it as a limited, physical product is a valid way of doing that. Treating it as an unlimited product removes (or at least drastically lowers) the value of the product.

What they have to do is make their product a better product than the free one; if they can do that, people will buy it. Right now, however, the free product is significantly better than the paid product, and the only real reason to buy legally is out of the goodness of one's heart, or out of a fear of punishment. Piracy is just the better option for the consumer in far too many cases, and it really doesn't need to be that way.

By definition the product you purchase is infinitely better in that you actually have the rights to it in all its glory. When you purchase your copy of Battleground 3: Modern Combat 12 you have the exclusive rights to use all of the features you paid for, such as multiplayer components and future patches and updates. If you download B3MC12 you first have to wait for a torrent to arrive, to have the DRM and security stamped out of it, for someone to host cracked servers. You might have to use a crack or workaround to patch the game too.

There are several complications to pirating that sometimes make it less than desireable. Sure there are perfect torrents out there, but they're usually of games that have been out for a month or two.

 

[akahitsuki]

for me it's all about the help the developers lose, if i wanted a game, i would buy it, if i didnt want it why would i waste my HDD space pirating it?

 

[Vault101]

Well, the person who says "I wouldn't buy it anyway" is really just making an excuse.
Obviously, if you are putting in the work to pirate a game, you have some desire to play it, and you might as well support the developer by actually paying for the game.

And what if a game costed half a persons salary?

I understand the outrage that certain people might have when they see someone getting something for free that they had to pay for but let's face facts here people, pirates are people who can't afford games. Be it some teenager whose parents don't want/can't afford to buy him/her games or just some student struggling to get through college, pirates are not all self entitled jerks like most people here seem to think. Hell, if it wasn't for piracy most of the people living here wouldn't be able to game because the prices are so outrageously high and the salaries are so outrageously low. Hell, if it wasn't for piracy I can outright say not only would I have not been introduced to gaming but I would have probably never bought any games at all.

Show some compassion people. It's not that hard.

Im not showing compassion for people who are the reason I get slapped in the face with DRM

there is NO reason to pirate if you can buy the games....full stop

and even if you cant...boo hoo they are hurting the industry and the legit gamers

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Then that person is shit out of luck. We have rules for a reason. And fuck the person who thinks that their case is special and they're above the law. They don't have money to pay for it? They don't get it, simple as that. Come back when you're less poor. If money is really an issue then they should be worrying about buying food not video games. It is self-entitled to think you should be able to get something for free. A poor person who thinks they deserve to game for free is just entitled as a rich person who games for free.

Yeah those fucking entitled poor people. How dare they get access to the same things us rich folk have. Just let them rot in their small homes and live from paycheck to paycheck, they deserve nothing because they're poor and don't have an amazing high paying job like the rest of us. I bet you're also against paying taxes because that would give poor people a pavement to walk on. Hell, what about that communist socialist medcare they've been talking about? I mean how dare they raise taxes so everyone can have access to free healthcare. It infringes on my rights to discriminate against poor people!

You can make the case for entertainment being just as necessary as food. I won't argue for or against it, and even assume that it is. Food being necessary doesn't entitle everyone to 5-star gourmet meals three times per day. A soup kitchen fulfills that need just as well. Much in the same way that entertainment is necessary but does not entitle everyone to AAA games, free games and other forms of entertainment fulfill that need just as well.

Sure, being entitled to food doesn't entitle you to a 5 star gourmet dinner. Then again, you can't buy a 5 star gourmet dinner, make a digital copy of it and download it whenever you feel like eating a fancy dinner. You'd have to actually steal the food whereas with piracy you buy a legitimate copy and make copies of it.

Im not showing compassion for people who are the reason I get slapped in the face with DRM

there is NO reason to pirate if you can buy the games....full stop

and even if you cant...boo hoo they are hurting the industry and the legit gamers

You actually think piracy is the reason such restrictive DRM is being introduced? You're quite naive if you do so. Also, how are they hurting the industry and the "legit gamer"? Lost sales could be anything from a person pirating the game to another person just buying a different game.