Because it doesn't have any games to pirate?SpcyhknBC said:
...
I'm sorry, it's such an old one and I haven't heard it in a while. [slaps self in face with dualshock]
And the Most-Pirated Game of 2010 Is...
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
...
I'm sorry, it's such an old one and I haven't heard it in a while. [slaps self in face with dualshock]
Mmm, Amnesia. The single most terrifying game I have ever played. There have only been three moments in gaming Survival Horror history that I've uttered that phrase. The first was the introduction of the genre to me; Resident Evil 1. The second was the game that captured atmosphere and used it as a tool; Silent Hill 1. And most recent was Amnesia which is atmosphere refined.Daedalus1942 said:
I pirated ME2 only because I bought and beat it on 360 when I was a console gamer. Not right but I tel my self its justified that way
Old gag, to be sure.MiracleOfSound said:Because it doesn't have any games to pirate?SpcyhknBC said:
...
I'm sorry, it's such an old one and I haven't heard it in a while. [slaps self in face with dualshock]
If you laid that down in 2008, there'd be a torrent of laughter. But now, it's a torrent of puzzled gamers wondering which rock you've been living under. 
It pains me a lot when pirates hurt the small developer, like in the case of Alan Wake. A lot of my friends are probably counted in the statistics in the OP, but I doubt they have the enough decency in them to even care about these numbers.
Still, I ask myself, Why would you hurt what you love?;_;
Still, I ask myself, Why would you hurt what you love?;_;
Obligatory-MiracleOfSound said:Because it doesn't have any games to pirate?SpcyhknBC said:
...
I'm sorry, it's such an old one and I haven't heard it in a while. [slaps self in face with dualshock]
Pretty sure Jesus didn't steal. Something to do with him being the embodiment of all that is good and the son of God, or something.barbzilla said:
OT: Haters be hatin', pirates be piratin'.
It's disgusting and we have all probably done it at some point.
personally I don't understand why people pirate games, buying the game is always more satisfying then downloading it: you can craddle and snuggle the game case because it feels as hard as you
and you can proudly show the disk to your friends and say "I'm that bit more awesome then you"
and you can proudly show the disk to your friends and say "I'm that bit more awesome then you"
ITT: People who don't know what theft is, and what intellectual property is.
Piracy is not the disease, it's a symptom of bad business practices and unwillingness for the industry to adapt to the current state of the world. (Yes, movie, music and game industry)
Long story short, as long as the companies will insist on people paying 60$ per game, it won't go away. The thing is, 60$ is a number not everyone is willing to shell out on a whim, now if this price was reduced to let's say 15$ (at least on Steam), you'd probably get a LOT more sales, mostly because people would say 'fuck it, I can risk 15$', so in effect there would be more impulsive buyers. This would in turn also open up people into risking games they might not like, thus opening the way to a more experimental video game market. But hell, what do I know... let's just rage on THOSE DAMN PIRATES.
Piracy is not the disease, it's a symptom of bad business practices and unwillingness for the industry to adapt to the current state of the world. (Yes, movie, music and game industry)
Long story short, as long as the companies will insist on people paying 60$ per game, it won't go away. The thing is, 60$ is a number not everyone is willing to shell out on a whim, now if this price was reduced to let's say 15$ (at least on Steam), you'd probably get a LOT more sales, mostly because people would say 'fuck it, I can risk 15$', so in effect there would be more impulsive buyers. This would in turn also open up people into risking games they might not like, thus opening the way to a more experimental video game market. But hell, what do I know... let's just rage on THOSE DAMN PIRATES.
This statement is rubbish. I'd imagine a significant minority of pirates pirate because it's a free game (in terms of what's coming out of their wallet).dastardly said:
Already happened, with Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. AFAIK that held out for a year. And the sales didn't increase massively. The fact said super-DRM was a version of Starforce might have something to do with it.jakefongloo said:
There is nothing wrong with seafood. Plenty of people live happy, healthy lives on a seafood diet. I, however, cannot stand the stuff. You could offer me eight tons of free seafood. Completely free, no strings or hidden fees. And I wouldn't take it.Delusibeta said:
Why? Because I'm not interested in seafood.
That's exactly what people do with video games they have "no interest" in. They do not play them. Not in any way, shape, or form. They don't go obtain them illegally. They don't demonstrate a clear interest in the game and then just go take it for free. If you're going through the effort to circumvent legal channels and obtain the game through piracy, you're demonstrating interest in the game. That means, at some point, you'd have paid something were it not for the presence of a free "option." There would have been a point at which your interest level and the price crossed, and you'd have paid something.
The statement holds. It's bullshit when people claim that pirates only pirate games they're "not interested in." It's not the game they're not interested in. It's the buying part.
You're throwing the word "most" around a lot. Two places in particular stand out, where there is simply no data out there that in any way backs up these claims. Piracy data is admittedly hard to come by, but what data we do have (such as stats from torrent download sites) shows the exact opposite of these two statements:ZephrC said:
1. "Most pirates also buy the game." If that were true, there would be no games in which the amount of pirated copies ever exceeds the amount of actual sales. Additionally, it would mean that at least half of all customers first pirate the game. You can clearly see from sales data that just isn't true.
2. "Most piracy takes place in countries that don't care about piracy." An unproven and unprovable sentiment. What do you have substantiating that claim?
An interesting article, with plenty of data collected from piracy sites themselves (not the publishers who might claim higher rates), sheds some light on the problem. It's a long read, but well worth it for a realistic picture on how the claims of either side don't quite match up to reality. I think you ought to investigate it:
http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html
Or you can just be one of those people that calls everything "biased" unless it begins and ends with "Piracy is okay and cool!" banners. The research, presentation, and methodology used for this argument are balanced and objective. Really, read it.
I would like to now copy someone's post.dastardly said:
Pirating without any intention of paying, in the case of number 2.WolfMage said:
Ultimately, had you not included the words "amounting to greater than $0" then I wouldn't have had any problem with the statement. As it is, my statement that they do it because it's free holds.
Please.Delusibeta said:
It's easy to say, "Oh, I'd have never bought that piece of shit," when you've already pirated it. You have to justify why, and so you just say whatever you want about what you "would never" have done. And it's horseshit. The shit of a horse.
That's like the idiot kid in class who loses the spelling bee on the word "from," and he says "Well, fine, I didn't wanna play your dumb game anyway." Of course you can say that, after the fact, to try to save face. But everyone knows the truth.
The reason they're taking it "because it's free" is because someone is offering it for free. Illegally, that is. If there were no "free option," these people would have paid something for it. Maybe 10 bucks, but that's more than zero. If there weren't a pirated copy, they still would have paid something for it.
Seriously. If someone were literally NOT INTERESTED in the game, why would they even think to pirate it? If they're acting to obtain it, it's because they're interested. In the absence of a "free version," we can safely surmise they'd have paid somewhere between the $60 full price and at least $1. Why can we surmise this? Because they were clearly interested in the game. Demonstrated not by empty words, but by very clear actions.
As such, every pirated copy can, and should, be treated as lost revenue. Not full price, perhaps, but some lost revenue. If that person would have paid $10, but the free version kept that from happening, that copy lost the publisher $10. It's not $60, but it's certainly not $0, either.
Evidence? Steam. Plenty of people don't buy games at launch. There are tons of games I wasn't interested enough in to pay full price. Then I waited. Steam offers it for $15, and I go, "Well, hmm... that I can do." Ta-da. And lots of folks do it. The price comes down, they jump on board, and the publisher makes money from people who didn't want to pay full price.
Piracy is the problem here. It introduces a leak into the system and prevents it from working properly. It causes these companies to lose sales, even partial ones. If you're interested enough to pirate it, then (like the truth or not), you'd have paid at least $5 for it at some point. But when you see it for free, it's oh-so-easy to justify just stealing it when "no one's looking," and then saying, "Oh, well... I uh.... errr... never would have bought it, so no harm no foul!" You can even convince yourself it's true. But there's nothing true about it, and it makes absolutely no sense--why would you steal and play something you don't want?
This might hold water, if the price of games consistently dropped. As it is, even PC games rarely drop below $20, Steam sales notwithstanding. For the most part, anybody only willing to pay $5 for a game is going to be buying their stuff used, so while the piracy might be a lost sale for Gamestop, it's hard to argue that someone who wouldn't pay anywhere near full price is a lost sale for the publishers. And in my experience, most pirates pirate stuff because they can't afford to buy everything they want to play, because, like the rest of us, they are on a budget. I've been arguing this entire time that with a drop in price to a reasonable level, we would see a rise in sales and probably a reduction in piracy as well. Reduction or not, the additional sales should still lead to an increase in profits.dastardly said:
@dastardly
I liked your link, unfortunately I could read it all the way though. Maybe later.
Anyways, this has been fun but I'm getting bored now. One last question, though:
Does anyone else think this has been an extremely effective troll thread?
I liked your link, unfortunately I could read it all the way though. Maybe later.
Anyways, this has been fun but I'm getting bored now. One last question, though:
Does anyone else think this has been an extremely effective troll thread?