incal11 said:
Small scale games seems to be the only way to try and see the link between sales and downloads since the big titles are always cracked from day 1, if not before.
No, small scale games are the only way to establish trends
for small scale games. Extrapolation of these trends doesn't read accurately for larger games. A certain amount of vitamin A is healthy... for a person of one size. That same amount of vitamin A could be a poisonous overdose to someone of a different size. Think of that, but in reverse as to how piracy "buzz" impacts games -- small games, it can provide a boost in public awareness... but large games, of which the public is already quite aware, it's just plain old piracy.
The alleged "positive" effects do not scale up into larger and better-advertised games
Beside, by your logic hugely marketted games could not be sold at all because of everyone wanting them so much, but they shift millions upon millions of copies.
You seem to be ignoring the fact that a lot of people buy the game because:
1. They want to support the developers.
2. They simply believe piracy is wrong and illegal (it is).
3. They don't trust pirated downloads, so they don't risk it.
It surprises me that you ignore these people, because
they are exactly the reason your supposed "good effects" happen at all. Piracy might raise awareness of the game, but that would just lead to
more people pirating if not for those fine folks who believe that buying it is better (and less dickheaded).
The positive buzz is undeniable concerning excellent work, but some mainstream games can indeed suffer if words about their mediocrity comes out too fast. This would encourage the making of better work over time, since crap is bound to be even less successful. Hardly a tragedy, except for the untalented.
Another gross oversimplification, and false generalization. Positive buzz will only lead pirates to pirate more. It leads
buyers to
buy more. No matter how fantastic a game is, that's not going to dependably turn a pirate into a buyer -- they already have it for free, and it makes no sense to buy it at that point.
Couple this with the fact that
good games get pirated more than bad ones. So it's obviously not an issue of quality.
If the "lost buyer" factor was stronger then there would be a decrease in sales in those links I gave you, and this would be demultiplied by the small scale in the same way.
Take another look at that graph in your second link. The "lost buyer" factor isn't negated by the fact that sales went up "double." Look at the download rate (in blue) versus the purchase rate. Piracy went up, what, 40 times? To get twice the sales. As he puts it, for every 15 pirates, he made 1 additional sale. If we allow that even
one of those 15 pirates is a lost sale (a disgustingly conservative estimate), in a sense that cancels out the gain. If just
two of those 15 pirates would have bought it (if a pirated copy was not available), then
piracy is still costing sales.
The sales "increase" from piracy is just an example of a side effect accidentally making the piracy seem a little less of a problem. Looking at the piracy rates shows you that piracy is clearly a problem, and is clearly causing these people to lose sales they would have otherwise made.
That 'broken window fallacy' is an appeal to sentiments, a downloader who results in several more sales after praising the work is not a "broken window" to begin with, and the one he gives more work to is the very owner of that immaterial "window".
Not even nearly. The downloader clearly represents a broken window, whether or not he's a "lost sale." He does damage to the property by helping make it
more available for illegal download. This is exactly the kind of thing the Broken Window refers to.
Bob breaks a window. Now Jim, the glassworker, has work to do! If we look at
only those two entities, it looks like a net gain for the townsfolk. But Bob broke Jerry's window... so now Jerry loses money that would have otherwise been spent elsewhere. It resulted in a shift of wealth, not an increase. And depending on the cost of the window, it might be a
loss -- Jerry may have spent that money in
several places. When we broaden our view to include the whole picture, we see the "positive" is outweighed by all the negatives.
Still, it is absurd to try and take on what is a false issue with electronic protection.
You haven't established this issue as a "false" one. In fact, the data you've provided seems to indicate it's
more of an issue. It's as though the crime rate in a city has skyrocketed by 40 times, yet for every 15 crimes, one new good deed is inspired... and you're calling that a "win."
It's exactly that narrowness of focus that allows people to convince themselves that piracy is a "victimless" crime. Except worse, because you're trying to sell piracy as somehow
beneficial. And your own numbers disagree.
