Which is the bigger problem? Piracy or DRM?

[Alma Mare]

It's amusing how many people are willing to pull up statistics out of the blue. Anyway, here are some amusing thoughts:

Piracy has been around since distributed media appeared. Hasn't stopped the industries from thriving.

DRM fails by design whenever it makes the legitimate product much less desirable than the pirated versions. I can use my own example, being an avid player of Dragon Age and Mass Effect 1 & 2 while my purchased copies are still wrapped in their celophane.

I've seen the phrase "gaming is a privilege, not a right" thrown around a lot. While this may be ultimately true, it's the single most idiotic stance any company hoping to mass-sell a product could take. In their dream world with a computer in every desk they expect them each to have a copy of their games in there. Better to bait the consumer in than snob them out. A product that sells in average for the price of music albuns (which many argue are overpriced themselves) cannot expect to be placed in the easy consumable category. That and sales projections in the millions are bound to clash.

On the same note, as far as entertainment goes video games have BY FAR the worst quality control around. Placing a product in the small luxury price range and delivering so often buggy software (sometimes to the point of being broken) is not a sound marketing strategy.

Last, no one thought of the poor old hardware developers sheer hardware power can't be pirated and for every downloader of new games giving 0$ to the publishers there is a guaranteed sale of a high-end graphics card and processor. They should have at least a say in this debate.

 

[thedeathscythe]

My experience with DRM has actually been more the same, not much of it has bothered me. Here's the thing though; the pirating community has NEVER bothered me.

You know what, that's a good point too. I don't think it has effected me personally at all, either. My view still stands but I completely see yours, though.

Steam is amazing, from having friends to the simplicity of purchasing and playing a game, then getting a new comp and getting all your games back, or gaming on another persons comp. It's very easy and that's the way to do it. Steam acts as the DRM as well, but still doesn't piss you off, it actually enhances the experience.

 

[Crumpet Man]

I would say piracy, but only because the fact that it exists is the primary reason there's DRM in the first place

 

[Irridium]

Both pirates and Publishers are being dicks to the same large degree.

Only difference is that some pirates can only play the game through pirating(when the game isn't sold anymore/in a nation/in a nation where the cost of the game is equal to a month's salary/DRM doesn't let you play the game).

I really can't support either one. Both tend to be complete assholes and refuse to compromise. It just keeps going in a stupid, vicious cycle.

The only time that piracy is not a really stupid idea is when the dev no longer gets money from it. AKA system shock 2, fallout, other greats like that.

Well the people who made Fallout 1+2, Interplay, are still around. So buy Fallout and support them and their upcoming Fallout MMO.

Really? huh. I shall do that as I recently found it on steam.

I suggest using Good Old Games.com

As each game is $6 on there, you get much more for your money(soundtracks, Fallout Bible, manuals, and basically a bunch of nice little extra's), and you don't have to deal with any DRM. Plus you support a site thats bringing old classics into the modern age and updating them to run on current systems. So supporting that site is a good thing.

I'm probably starting to sound like a prick right now, so I'll stop.

Links:

http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/fallout
http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/fallout_2

 

[Direwolf750]

drm. drm CAUSES more piracy than most incentive to evade cost ever did.

 

[direkiller]

Nintendo says they have had a nearly 50% drop in European DS games after a chip for pirating was made available.

And Nazis blame jews. Whats your point?

it was an example of how after an easy obtainable pirated version is made sales drop for a game
so if a company can delay that as much as possible they increase there profits
so basically DRM's do what there means to do delay piracy

Your articles in order:
1. The money the movie/game/music industry post as a loss is bullshit
2.No way to quantify the amount lost and car parts are being counterfeited
3.do like this "(about counterfeit/piracy)consumers benefited from increased access and lower costs."(NO really i never would have guessed that)
again it talks about $ amount lost cannot be quantified accurately
it also dose not talk about games just music

dint the thing i link also say there figures were bullshit?

i never said he wasn't biast he did(like with fox news)

 

[SenseOfTumour]

Piracy.
Without piracy there is no DRM.

I'm not even sure that would be true, there's a pretty desperate need for control out there, and I'm not entirely sure companies would give all that up even if there wasn't piracy.

If they can make us buy a CD, then a separate digital version because we couldn't rip the CD, they'd not go removing the protection, they'll take the 2nd payment.

I think a simple answer is to supply a digital download code with every CD, DVD, game, and even book. "I've just bought the new Terry Pratchett, but I'm going on holiday and don't want to carry a hardback where it'll be heavy and get damaged, oh look, I can upload it to my phone!" In facts books of all things are probably the least in danger of piracy, as most readers just LOVE having heaving shelves of books that they own.

Also, there's a lot of talk about old games not being available, companies to get off their butts and get them available, and provided you price them right (as in not 6 ancient SNES games for $30 on 360 and PS3), I think most companies would soon see the small investment in making them work on current systems and available for download, repaid over and over.

Stuff like the remakes of Monkey Island have been a success, but us retro gamers don't even demand that, give us the old games with their crappy graphics and 8 bit beepy sound, and we'll throw you a couple of bucks for making them available.

If not Steam, there's GOG (who demand no DRM in their products, yay), and many other options.

Just for heaven's sake, take our money and let us play the game, don't make us jump thru hoops with registration and online activation, you're just throwing thousands of dollars to combat spectres and spirits.

 

[Timmibal]

*snip*

No, you aren't. No, you don't. No, you haven't.

Remember the backlash over the indian company who allegedly DDOSed sites hosting material which couldn't/wouldn't be pulled by DMCA claims? Any AV company pulled what you claim, they would be buried so deep in litigation you'd need industrial machinery to dig through all the summonses.

Please in future limit "Big man on campus" claims to shit which is not instantaneously disprovable.

[HEADING=1]'Piracy' (Filesharing) =/= stealing[/HEADING]

[HEADING=1] 1 download =/= 1 lost sale[/HEADING]


It has never equeled stealing. nothing is taken, data is only copied without permission. It isn't even dealt with in criminal court, it's not really an 'offence' it is just between you and the copyright holder. If my freind copies and pastes an album he wants to see if he likes off my PC then i have not lost anything. No one has. Data has just been copied and a person now has something they would not have tried in the first place.

Doesn't matter how many times you outline it, seems some people just can't get the concept of digital data through their "How can u taek mi apple wivout me losing one LOL INTELLECTEWAL CHECKMATE LOL!" brains.

Piracy only affects sales of digital media when it is fallaciously assumed that a download equals a lost sale. Statistics consistantly prove that 'pirates' purchase more products than people who do not. This is no longer a matter of conjecture. DRM is invasive and has done more to destroy the PC as a viable gaming medium than every pirate since the beginning of time.

You know what? I'm inventing a new internet rule. I'm going to call it the "Digital Fruit" fallacy. In this, any argument which is based on the assumption that a digital download equals a lost sale is immediately rendered void.

 

[Gindil]

Doesn't matter how many times you outline it, seems some people just can't get the concept of digital data through their "How can u taek mi apple wivout me losing one LOL INTELLECTEWAL CHECKMATE LOL!" brains.

Piracy only affects sales of digital media when it is fallaciously assumed that a download equals a lost sale. Statistics consistantly prove that 'pirates' purchase more products than people who do not. This is no longer a matter of conjecture. DRM is invasive and has done more to destroy the PC as a viable gaming medium than every pirate since the beginning of time.

You know what? I'm inventing a new internet rule. I'm going to call it the "Digital Fruit" fallacy. In this, any argument which is based on the assumption that a digital download equals a lost sale is immediately rendered void.

Not really going against what you said (a agree full heartedly.) but I doubt the PC is destroyed. It's just changed to a place where Steam continues to dominate the landscape and GoG has come up.

But I support this Digital Fruit fallacy. Perhaps it could be called Digital Grapes after the Aesop?

 

[Timmibal]

Not really going against what you said (a agree full heartedly.) but I doubt the PC is destroyed. It's just changed to a place where Steam continues to dominate the landscape and GoG has come up.

I didn't mean to suggest that the PC WAS destroyed as a gaming platform, only that it has been wounded, and DRM has more blood on its hands than piracy. Even with Steam and GoG battling on for the PC gamer, it seems that less and less developers are even bothering with a timely PC release of AAA titles.

But I support this Digital Fruit fallacy. Perhaps it could be called Digital Grapes after the Aesop?

Me likey!

 

[Delusibeta]

i never said he wasn't biast biased he did(like with fox news)

Fixed it for you. I roll my eyes at every time that Tweak article is linked, since, frankly, he's hung up on the "Downloads are high, thus inevitably lost sales are high" theory with zero proof to back it up other than download numbers which are a) unreliable and b) not proof of lost sales.

 

[mew1234321]

I'd have to say that they're both at fault.

Piracy does debilitate the industry, but isn't to the extent many think. Many who pirate games, probably due so because either a) They do not have the disposable income to buy a AUD $120 game, or b) That game is unavailable in whatever region they're trying to get it from, whether due to age, or censorship, the point being, that they wouldn't buy the game anyway. But, when the people from group a) come into some money, they are likely to spend it on the legal purchase of a game, due to the difficult, and morally bankrupt nature of piracy, and be happy such a purchase, knowing the good games from the bad, and then will continue to do so. As opposed to someone who just decided to go without video gaming, and is likely to do so for a long, long time, costing sales, again.

DRM too, on the other hand, does constitute a problem in itself, driving quite a few to piracy, due to its incredibly intrusive nature, (see; Spore/Assassins Creed 2/ Quite a few others), making it simpler just to play it without any annoying security checks.

Yes, it's a flimsy argument, and piracy is obviously worse, but it's always nice to look at several sides of an argument.

 

[incal11]

But, when the people from group a) come into some money, they are likely to spend it on the legal purchase of a game, due to the difficult, and morally bankrupt nature of piracy, and be happy such a purchase, knowing the good games from the bad, and then will continue to do so

If it makes people want to pay for more good games, how is piracy morally bankrupt and obviously worse ?

Now im not saying piracy is good or even defenceable

I agree with the rest of your post, but you are basically defending "piracy" since you explain why it's impossible to stop the spreading of digital data.
I'll also go ahead and say piracy can be both good and defendable.

Eliminating piracy could eliminate both, so it's the biggest issue.

You can't eliminate piracy, and even if you could it wouldn't change anything. DRMs true purpose is only fighting day 1 downloads and the second hand market.

However, never in my life have I re-purchased content that I've gotten through shady means. No matter how much I loved the particular media item. So, as a whole, I disagree with this logic.

If you had a poor backround it's understandable if you became stingy, however you are not the majority in gaming. Big titles PCs and consoles are small luxuries, that is a barrier of entry in favor of gamers with enough income to consider at least donating a bit to their favorite devs.

Second, are we forgetting about demos? Almost every game that I've looked at for purchase had a demo available.

You're only looking at Steam, which would only be good if it wasn't on it's way to become a monopoly, most games don't have demos. Anyways recent demos are purposefully misleading on the quality of the games.

Lastly, if you want to get a better impression about how a game plays beyond the demo, go out and get some friends. And, nothing against online friends, but these friends should be people that you have actual physical

Weirdly most of my friends are not big gamers, you may call loosers the ones who consider online friends to be just as good, but it's a matter of perspective. What is so fundamentally different between online and offline friends ? Meeting someone face to face is not that important in the end. It's something most socialites can't wrap their heads around for some reason.

At the end of the day, piracy is stealing. If the manufacturer wanted to give their property away for free, they would provide an avenue for it ...

Copying data is not stealing, it's not a physical manufactured item.

 

[mew1234321]

But, when the people from group a) come into some money, they are likely to spend it on the legal purchase of a game, due to the difficult, and morally bankrupt nature of piracy, and be happy such a purchase, knowing the good games from the bad, and then will continue to do so

If it makes people want to pay for more good games, how is piracy morally bankrupt and obviously worse ?

Oh wow.

Take em' all and cut them down.

And make some, really, really good points.

For my point, yeah, I probably shouldn't have phrased it that way, but piracy is still akin to stealing, as you are getting content without paying for it, against the content owners wishes. (And this is where the whole little line in the EULA that says 'You don't actually own this game, just paying for the right to play it.' turns around and bites you in the arse).

So, yeah, while piracy, in the long run, probably isn't going to cripple the industry, or boost it into a pantheon of gloriousness, it's still theft, man.

But then again, now that the thought occurs, all the money developers spend on DRM could possibly go into making their game better...

Oh, the old Piracy vs. DRM debate. You will always live on.

 

[Something Amyss]

but it must be pretty bad to justtfiy all the hoops us honest consumers have to jump through just to play a game (like assassins creed 2, yeah ubisoft that was real FUCKING brilliant of you)

That's like saying "I don't know why he shot that guy, but the guy must have done something wrong to justify it."

Seeing how for some games are pirated more than they sell, and DRM would not exist if it were not for piracy, piracy is the problem. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either a pirate, wrong, lying, or an idiot.

DRM would likely exist regardless. But that's hard to tell, because as long as there was even one pirate out there, they would justify it. And that's part of the problem. Sweeping, crippling DRM is not the fault of pirates but a deliberate choice by companies who would rather punish consumers than let piracy happen.

Piracy is a scapegoat. We're told recent losses are due to piracy, even though it's more likely the losses are due to expensive products in a recession. Oh, I hear people say, but gaming is recession proof. Because repeating something makes it true.

Piracy has been used as an excuse to attack our fair use rights and the first sale doctrine, two things they were already conveniently against when they were making money hand over fist. It's a great excuse, but it's just that.

 

[incal11]

piracy is still akin to stealing, as you are getting content without paying for it, against the content owners wishes.

Everything had a price only up to when digitalisation came along, but even before that no control over intellectual property wasn't that bad in truth:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,710976,00.html
Are the owners wishes entirely justified in all cases ? I think not.

But then again, now that the thought occurs, all the money developers spend on DRM could possibly go into making their game better...

You're not the first to bring that up, if DRMs were not needed crappy games would be just as crappy. Because the publishers can only want to pocket the extra money, as the likes of Kotick says "why make great games when good games sells well enough ?"

*swish swish*

 

[3LANCER]

If the piracy is bigger problem, how come console games don't have DRM? Heck, you can even copy-paste PS2, Wii and Xbox360 games on your computer which is something you can't do with PC games.

Also - there are countries in this world (like mine) that didn't have means of buying original games until few years ago.Piracy was the only way of getting anything from music to video games here, because there weren't any shops that sell original stuff, because we couldn't order online 'cause we're banned on most online pay systems (PayPal is still not present here), people have a strong fear of online shopping even though it's year 2010. And people got used to that state, where you can go out and get a pirated copy of Starcraft 2 for 5 euros instead paying it 60 euros in video game store. For someone who is only interested in campaign mode that is the only logical solution, I don't blame them because the long period of pirating created an image that you shouldn't pay more than a few euros for the game. Most games get released much later here, for example PC version of Arkham Asylum was available in our stores more than a month after it's European release so people were impatient and got it warez'd (not to mention it was more expensive than in other EU countries). Prices are usually unreal, too - only rich people get a PS3 (cost: 400 euros) or X360 (cost: 300 euros) because new games are 70-80 euros while their PC versions are 40, dropping to 10-15 during next 6-9 months. And then we got DRM in AC2, people actually bought that game and started yelling on the forums because they didn't know they have to be online all the time (because they're using 56k modems even though ADSL/cable is widely available). And... I forgot the question...


Oh yeah - DRM bad!