direkiller said:
Gindil said:
And yet, the humble indie bundle (which also included World of Goo) made over $1 million+ despite heavy piracy. What I'm not seeing is how a number of people's individual choices is supposed to also equal lost income for a business.
There are still places where the price is too high. Also that money goes elsewhere in the economy. Say the $30 is used by a teenager to buy new clothes. Or the it could be used as a trip to a concert. The money was spent, just not in the games industry. And as I've said before, this is a competition. Not only is it a number of businesses competiting, it's also the developers competing for their customer's time. And what has happened is that people can experiment with the games then decide to buy them and support the industry.
People do make these choices. Judging from the fact that the entire industry has grown regardless of piracy just convinces me that it's still not a huge problem and will continue to not be in the future.
The industry had a 10% downturn for the past 2 years (19% total reduction in sales sense 2008) resulting in lost jobs.
Its not that hard to understand. but here is an example. Starcraft 2 cost $60 when it first comes out. You don't want to pay more then $30 so you don't buy it right away. As the price drops more people will buy the game(theres a few people who are not willing to pay over $55,$45 and so on, so basically as time goes on they get the customer base that was willing to wait to pay a lower price). However if a crack comes out before they run the entire range of prices people who were going to buy the game when it gets down to $30 don't because they have it for free. That is were the lost income comes into play not for the people willing to pay full price for a game but the people willing to buy it 6months from now for $30.
That's like saying people don't use Steam when they run their specials. I can get the same game for free but obviously Steam offers something more than just the game itself. It's subtle but you're still arguing that every download is a lost sale, when it's clearly not. IIRC, Blizzard offers tons more features to its games than just the game itself, which allows them to keep it at $60. As I see it, and as others point out, obscurity is far worse [http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080102/163225.shtml] than piracy.
And you really can't lose income if it was never gained in the first place. I refuse to buy new games at anything more than $20. That's my motto. So if a new game comes out at $60, then how am I a customer that they cater to? I'm not. I'm a fan of used games and Steam deals. If a developer wants my money, they have to go through those avenues and meet me halfway. That's the economics of the situation. Through this scenario, nothing is being said about piracy. But add this to the equation, plus the higher prices in Europe (Czech Republic comes to mind) and you have a black market, as I've discussed earlier. Just to drive the point home, look at Brazil [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_201/6059-A-Nation-of-Pirates]. It had a legal gaming system until the industry lobbied for higher prices. Then it all went to hell in a hand basket.
Gindil said:
Oh, and almost every year during the summer months, it tends to get slow for all console video gamers.
04/20/2010 is when that article came out summer had nothing to do with it
First, the 4/20 thing missed my point about summer being slower for game sales in general. Fall is slow also, but all gaming usually picks up in the Christmas months.
Also the HIB was for charity so the high piracy rates on that just goes to show how little people care.
...
So they make money, and it's not okay because perhaps someone puts it on a torrent and makes it accessible to others and somehow that's bad as well?
Still don't agree that piracy is hurting people [http://www.undergroundthecomic.com/2010/10/pictures-help-us-learn/]. Then again, it's not a science that people will support things if they feel they're for a right cause.
