Which is the bigger problem? Piracy or DRM?

[Wormthong]

i see a lot of posts saying that piracy created DRM but then why would a DRM only offer a limited number of installs instead of just verifying that the game has been bought.
DRM is not just about piracy its actually not about piracy as much as the industry says in reality its all about second hand games because those account for much more lost purchases then piracy because those people have already shown to be able and willing to buy the game however they wish to do so without paying full price (which means the industry gets nothing from the resale except for the original sale).

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Piracy is obviously the bigger problem. Piracy caused DRM to come about.

If I had to make a wish that would benefit the world of games, I would wish that piracy would be impossible. The minute a pirate thinks of making copies of a game, their mind goes blank and they forget about what they were doing.

Now the more damaging way of wishing the stopping of piracy, I would wish that whenever a person tries to pirate a game, an unstoppable virus is released onto the offender's computer and all memory on it is erased. It is a virus that only effects computers of pirates.

-------

The one thing I just can't understand and it seems to be getting more prevalent with each generation, people with the mentality that they have the right to play a game. There is no such right.

They complain about how expensive games are, that they don't get to play them, so they say that they have to pirate.

No, pirates, you don't have to pirate. You just have to pay like everybody else, if you buy a game and find out it is bad, tough, that is life. If you didn't do the research on a game before buying it, then it is your fault.

Pirates, you don't deserve to play a game. You want to play it, you pay for it. Playing games is a privilege, not a right.

 

[Mordwyl]

Piracy always was here. It's the DRM that scares away potential customers.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

Your statement implies that the value of the game is the cd itself and not the information on the cd, which is absurd.

Oh ho! Someone on the Pro-DRM side actually brings-up a valid point. The value of the purchase is indeed the data contained within the CD (or DVD, these days, let's just say disc and keep it easy), however this still sidesteps the point that when someone downloads a copy of a game from a torrent, the physical copy is still there to be sold. The company hasn't actually lost anything. You might argue that the company lost the sale, but then we get back to my question about the man with $0 downloading 3 games.

Here's another analogy; currently I am reading through The Walking Dead [http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Walking-Dead-Volume-1/Robert-Kirkman/e/9781582406725/?itm=27&USRI=walking+dead]. I have not purchased a single issue, volume, book, or compendium of the series. Rather, I am borrowing them from my brother, reading them, and then giving them back to him. Am I a thief? If not, then how is what I am doing any different from what a video game pirate does? Here's another thought. I have beaten Limbo [http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/Product/LIMBO/66acd000-77fe-1000-9115-d802584109d1] a couple of times and gotten 11 of 12 achievements. I have not purchased the game, but rather I played it at my friend's house. Same questions apply.

 

[Trull]

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
Which means DRM is (in the eyes of people like obi wan in the original trilogy) piracy.
But to us brained people, it means that DRM is the same amount of ass searing pain as piracy.

 

[Murray Whitwell]

Piracy isn't an issue as long as the developers go about managing it the RIGHT way.
I was watching an interview with Gabe Newell and the issue of piracy came up. He noted that people are willing to spend large amounts of money on a computer and an internet connection, so piracy clearly doesn't come down to money and an unwillingness to spend on games.
He also said that piracy is rarely considered a major issue due to the fact that they don't go to any extreme lengths to fight it, and Steam allows games to be so accessible in the first place that people have far less reason to steal. For example, there is always a risk with some DRM that, if I were to change my OS or buy a new computer, my game might not work as it should, if at all. Steam allows me the peace of mind of knowing whatever machine I am on at any place in the world, my games will work. There is no risk in managing a games library on Steam, and games are, for the most part, cheap and quick to download.
TL;DR, it's not about money. People just don't want to, as the OP said, jump through hoops to play their games. Bad strategies in the DRM field are a major issue that many publishers are bringing on themselves

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

It doesn't matter how tangible the product is. Theft is theft. Period.

This is true, but remember that you're explaining how the company is losing something; as to validate comparing it to the theft of a car.

I'm not sticking up for DRM - I hate it. However, DRM isn't illegal and piracy is. It's very obvious which one is harming the industry more.

Perhaps you haven't heard of a guy called Robin Hood. Just because something is legal doesn't mean that it's justified. The opposite is valid as well; just because something is illegal doesn't mean that it is wrong. See, that's the biggest problem I see with society today. People seldom think for themselves. They see a law and decide that it must be right because we were raised to think that way. People see someone breaking a law and instantly demonize him without even pausing to consider; "Why is he breaking this law? Is the law perhaps too much? Maybe he was actually in the right for doing what he did." No, instead they just see him breaking a law and instantly side with it. The truly humorous thing is when those same people talk about how much they love the story of Robin Hood. >.>

Build your own Mustang?...

...

Really?

So people don't steal a copy of the game, they make it?

Terrible analogy.

That's pretty much exactly what you're doing when you download something. Your computer reads the file and re-writes it; and thus makes it. Granted that you aren't programming the game from the ground-up, but you're still making a duplicate. And why not build your own Mustang? Plenty of mechanics have taken a pile of scrap and made a functional car out of it. Heck, I think there's even a few TV shows based around that very idea.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

Piracy isn't an issue as long as the developers go about managing it the RIGHT way.
I was watching an interview with Gabe Newell and the issue of piracy came up. He noted that people are willing to spend large amounts of money on a computer and an internet connection, so piracy clearly doesn't come down to money and an unwillingness to spend on games.
He also said that piracy is rarely considered a major issue due to the fact that they don't go to any extreme lengths to fight it, and Steam allows games to be so accessible in the first place that people have far less reason to steal. For example, there is always a risk with some DRM that, if I were to change my OS or buy a new computer, my game might not work as it should, if at all. Steam allows me the peace of mind of knowing whatever machine I am on at any place in the world, my games will work. There is no risk in managing a games library on Steam, and games are, for the most part, cheap and quick to download.
TL;DR, it's not about money. People just don't want to, as the OP said, jump through hoops to play their games. Bad strategies in the DRM field are a major issue that many publishers are bringing on themselves

Can... can I have your children?

 

[thedeathscythe]

DRM is worse.

Most pirates wouldn't buy the games(potential sale lost*) while DRM has stopped people from purchasing games(guaranteed loss).

*[sub]I hate using "potential sale" but I guess it fits here.[/sub]

DRM has also potentially lost sales, it hasn't guaranteed lost sales though. Maybe for you it has, but the funny thing is, you don't represent the majority. You probably don't even fit into a fraction of a fraction of their audience. Maybe it didn't work for you and now they lost your sales from now on, but many feel annoyed and then go buy the next game (that's not me, I don't PC game minus like, CSS and L4D and a couple others). In both cases, it isn't guaranteed, it's potential. It just depends what potential loss equates to more money in their pocket (and I guess they sided on the "annoying DRM that is barely thought out" option).

Your statement implies that the value of the game is the cd itself and not the information on the cd, which is absurd.

Oh ho! Someone on the Pro-DRM side actually brings-up a valid point. The value of the purchase is indeed the data contained within the CD (or DVD, these days, let's just say disc and keep it easy), however this still sidesteps the point that when someone downloads a copy of a game from a torrent, the physical copy is still there to be sold. The company hasn't actually lost anything. You might argue that the company lost the sale, but then we get back to my question about the man with $0 downloading 3 games.

Here's another analogy; currently I am reading through The Walking Dead [http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Walking-Dead-Volume-1/Robert-Kirkman/e/9781582406725/?itm=27&USRI=walking+dead]. I have not purchased a single issue, volume, book, or compendium of the series. Rather, I am borrowing them from my brother, reading them, and then giving them back to him. Am I a thief? If not, then how is what I am doing any different from what a video game pirate does? Here's another thought. I have beaten Limbo [http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/Product/LIMBO/66acd000-77fe-1000-9115-d802584109d1] a couple of times and gotten 11 of 12 achievements. I have not purchased the game, but rather I played it at my friend's house. Same questions apply.

You're sidestepping the point, you're creating a duplicate of the data. In your case, only one copy exists, when you're at your friends. When you borrow the comic from your friend, he has to ask you one day "hey, can I have those back?" yet if you downloaded them, there would now be two copies. I see your point though, but how about we stop this here, because this is completely off topic. Now we're getting into the morals of piracy when the real topic is what is the bigger problem?

Piracy can be a problem even if it is morally right (which is all subjective), and DRM can also be a problem even if it's the right course for publishers to take.

Now, my stand on it all? Well, I haven't encountered annoying DRM, having my only PC gaming amount to Starcraft (1 and 2), Warcraft 1-3, World of Warcraft, Counterstrike Source, Left 4 Dead 1 and 2, and Day of Defeat Source. Pretty much all my games have DRM that has been taken down, and yet they all sell really well and have very large legitimate fan bases. I think this is the best approach; enough DRM to make it annoying for the average user to surpass (and trust me, I could find a way, but I'm lazy) but at the same time, not too much DRM to annoy the potential fan base.

 

[Nunny]

Easy Piracy, as it causes DRM.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Perhaps you haven't heard of a guy called Robin Hood. Just because something is legal doesn't mean that it's justified. The opposite is valid as well; just because something is illegal doesn't mean that it is wrong.

Okay, this makes no sense. Because of the subject, the only things you can be comparing to Robin Hood, are the pirates.

Also, "because something is illegal doesn't mean it is wrong", so piracy is illegal, but according to your statement piracy does no wrong. Yes I am making claims that aren't in your statement, but you didn't put in anything that would make me think otherwise.

You see, being clear helps, in you're trying to attack DRM, you keep looking like you support piracy. Give support for your argument that doesn't have analogies that make piracy look great.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

Piracy causes DRM. Before there were pirates, there was no need to try and stop them. Back in the hazy times when gaming was new people starting pirating games, so devlopers had to try and stop them so they could keep making games.

I'm going to say this as loud as I can because it's important.

THIS IS ALL THE PIRATE'S FAULT, IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN AND IT ALWAYS WILL BE, PIRATES CAME FIRST AND EVER SINCE THEN PUBLISHERS HAVE BEEN TRYING TO BLOCK THEM. IF PIRATE'S STOPPED OR HAD NEVER EXISTED WE WOULDN'T NEED DRM OR ANY OTHER FORM OF CONTENT CONTROL.

If you are a pirate, you are the cause of the problem, always.

 

[Murray Whitwell]

Can... can I have your children?

;] sure

 

[Om Nom Nom]

And as it hits page 3, the discussion is almost totally opinionated (I'm guilty of that too, probably) and unresolvable. That was predictable.

-snip-

♥

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Perhaps you haven't heard of a guy called Robin Hood. Just because something is legal doesn't mean that it's justified. The opposite is valid as well; just because something is illegal doesn't mean that it is wrong. See, that's the biggest problem I see with society today. People seldom think for themselves. They see a law and decide that it must be right because we were raised to think that way. People see someone breaking a law and instantly demonize him without even pausing to consider; "Why is he breaking this law? Is the law perhaps too much? Maybe he was actually in the right for doing what he did." No, instead they just see him breaking a law and instantly side with it. The truly humorous thing is when those same people talk about how much they love the story of Robin Hood. >.>

I see that after I quoted you the first time, you added some stuff before I finished commenting on it.

How does your statement not show support for piracy? What law are we blindly following? Piracy is illegal, end of story. It isn't a wrong law, it is a right law in every instance. If you pirate, you should be punished.

What is too much about laws against piracy? Nothing.

Game pirates are not Robin Hood, the analogy doesn't fit. Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor because it was the rich that were taxing the poor so much that they couldn't live off of what they had left. So he got back the money that was wrongly taken and gave it back to the poor.

Game companies aren't the nasty rich king that is taking the money of the peasants. The companies/publishers are the merchants that are deciding on what they deem is a fair price. Pirates are thieves that think they deserve something, or think it is their right to have something, but in reality, they deserve squat and the have no rights when it comes to the situation.