Anti piracy in PC games?

[mohit9206]

Do you think more PC games should employ anti piracy measures so that it discourages people from pirating PC games? I don't mean DRM anti piracy but more like Sims 4 and Game Developer Tycoon like where your in game progress is hampered if a pirated copy is detected.It would be for the better if all PC games had this form of anti piracy measure which would only affect pirates instead of DRM which only mostly affects genuine buyers.
So instead of stuffing every PC game with DRM software more games should use this funny way to stop pirates as this measure cannot be countered i suppose and this will hopefully lead to more PC game sales and discourage piracy.

 

[raeior]

Only that systems like that also backfire on paying customers. It happened with Settlers 4 for example, where iron smelters produced pigs instead of iron bars. This should have only happened in pirated versions but it didn't. Sacred had similar problems I think with a NPC that was simply not there if the game thought you pirated it.

This system is as flawed as is the typical DRM system. You will hit people who did nothing wrong and people who pirate the game will find ways around it.

 

[barbzilla]

Do you think more PC games should employ anti piracy measures so that it discourages people from pirating PC games? I don't mean DRM anti piracy but more like Sims 4 and Game Developer Tycoon like where your in game progress is hampered if a pirated copy is detected.It would be for the better if all PC games had this form of anti piracy measure which would only affect pirates instead of DRM which only mostly affects genuine buyers.
So instead of stuffing every PC game with DRM software more games should use this funny way to stop pirates as this measure cannot be countered i suppose and this will hopefully lead to more PC game sales and discourage piracy.

Programming intentional bugs into your game is usually not the best idea, especially since to properly implement it, you would have to use some form of DRM check anyhow. In all honesty, the moment game developers realize they would save money by not putting DRM in their game that will force them to A: buy the DRM license in the first place, B: pay out the ass fixing the bugs said system introduce to the game, and C: lose customers due to shitty DRM, as well as realizing that the pirates will crack anything besides always online anyway and release a better version of your game than you did, the gaming industry will be a much better place. The developers will net larger profits on their games (though I doubt it would be significantly larger, but maybe a 5%- 8% increase in profitability throughout its lifetime, as well as an increase in fan base since DRM is running a lot of people away from certain companies), the customers will get game releases that are more stable and don't include a program that will eat resources on their machine and potentially data-mine them, and the pirates will start to lose some ground since they will have no reason to crack it (meaning that game sharing will become more prevalent and pirate sites less prevalent, not that nobody will steal games).

I like what some of the companies have done, as far as adding in silly things that either make it hard for a pirate to progress, or impossible, but they ultimately failed since to know when to deploy said tactic the game has to either check for digital rights or get a day 1 release patch, which will either be cracked (DRM), or shared (day 1 patch). Still though, some of them were funny.

 

[Mutant1988]

Anti-piracy measures only hurt legal customers. Pirates just disable it, eventually, and get a better game out of doing so.

So no, I don't think any game should use DRM, outside of a simple account functionality to install the games. All it does is harm the ability to keep games playable (Always on DRM or connecting in order to start the game), or them being playable to begin with.

I think what needs to happen is for people to realize that their the attitude "I wouldn't have bought it anyway, so I just pirate it" is hurting the industry (Mainly by making extremely intrusive and overbearing DRM more and more common).

If the game isn't good enough to warrant a purchase, you should not play it. Simple as that. If it's good enough to be playable, then buy it at the price you think it is worth.

Do not pirate a game with the justification that you aren't it's audience. Because you ARE if you pirate it. That clearly states that you want to play it, but not pay for it. How people fail to understand this is beyond me.

Their callous uncaring self interest is ruining the industry just as much as any exploitive and profit generating DLC scheme.

Don't screw developers out of their livelihood just because you chose to spend your money on something else at that point in time. Wait and buy the game later instead.

Don't be a dick.

 

[Silvanus]

Do not pirate a game with the justification that you aren't it's audience. Because you ARE if you pirate it. That clearly states that you want to play it, but not pay for it. How people fail to understand this is beyond me.

There will, however, be a fair number of people who want to play something, but not nearly enough to pay thirty to forty pounds (or however much) to play it. If they couldn't play it for free, they wouldn't play it at all.

(NB: Not advocating piracy, or saying I do it. I don't. But I also would want people to better understand why others do).

 

[Mutant1988]

Do not pirate a game with the justification that you aren't it's audience. Because you ARE if you pirate it. That clearly states that you want to play it, but not pay for it. How people fail to understand this is beyond me.

There will, however, be a fair number of people who want to play something, but not nearly enough to pay thirty to forty pounds (or however much) to play it. If they couldn't play it for free, they wouldn't play it at all.

(NB: Not advocating piracy, or saying I do it. I don't. But I also would want people to better understand why others do).

I see no problem with people just not playing what they can't afford. Or more often, won't even make an effort to afford.

Using things without paying for them, without showing the most basic and direct form of respect for the creators, is despicable.

Doing so is essentially saying "I like your stuff, but not enough to let you be successful or even be able to survive making it".

I'm not without fault in this matter either. But I regret any and all of my piracy, outside of the rare times where it's simply impossible for me to legally play games (I HATE region restrictions with a burning passion).

Moderators, that's not apologizing for piracy in any way. It should be blatantly obvious that I do not condone piracy.

If anything, I wish for all developers to be able to sell me their products and not have it limited by limited copies, region locks, localization issues and abandoned services (Server side data storage is nothing but negative to me).

As for people that wouldn't pay a high price - If they won't pay for it at a high price, they can damn well wait until it drops in price. That has worked for me with about 90% of the games I own.

 

[SoreWristed]

Don't be a dick.

If it was up to me I'd add this message as a sticker to the cover of every single piece of piratable media.

I feel DRM shouldn't get any more intrusive than they are now. I don't want to get kicked out of my singleplayer diablo game because I lost server connection for 0.03 seconds. Even though I understand why devs and publishers want these systems, but I find myself starting to avoid games that have overly intrusive DRM. So that defeats itself.

 

[Silvanus]

Using things without paying for them, without showing the most basic and direct form of respect for the creators, is despicable.

Doing so is essentially saying "I like your stuff, but not enough to let you be successful or even be able to survive making it".

Devil's Advocate Form Activate!

When one borrows a book from a library (or even borrows it from a friend), they are using it without paying for it. You can even borrow games from some libraries (my old one, for example). Similarly, if you buy it second hand, none of your money will go to the creator or publisher.

It's also worth noting that in the music world, at least, the artist will receive only a fraction of the money from direct sales: often 10% or less. This doesn't counter your argument, of course, as the artist still makes money, but it's worth remembering that the money paid to show respect to an artist is almost entirely going to a publisher.

As for people that wouldn't pay a high price - If they won't pay for it at a high price, they can damn well wait until it drops in price. That has worked for me with about 90% of the games I own.

They can, but that's far from certain to actually happen. Many places will keep the original price, or close to it, for new copies, simply as a matter of course-- and the only cheaper ones will be pre-owned.

And, of course, with pre-owned copies, none of the money goes to the artist anyway, defeating one's purpose.

 

[Mutant1988]

Don't be a dick.

If it was up to me I'd add this message as a sticker to the cover of every single piece of piratable media.

I feel DRM shouldn't get any more intrusive than they are now. I don't want to get kicked out of my singleplayer diablo game because I lost server connection for 0.03 seconds. Even though I understand why devs and publishers want these systems, but I find myself starting to avoid games that have overly intrusive DRM. So that defeats itself.

What's especially insulting to me is how systems like these are framed as a service. So it doubles as DRM as well as a barrier to gameplay, if you don't log into the "service" or worse, unless you pay a subscription fee of some sort.

Say what you will about Steam, but it doesn't charge you continuously for playing games. Only games that legitimately use server side content does. Meanwhile, all multiplayer on Xbox and Playstation requires payment. Why? To maintain the "service", which is really just a glorified DRM and marketplace.

Publishers and developers, feel free to check my integrity on purchase and then leave me and the game the **** alone. Please? If I want to play online, don't force me to use your awful servers (*Cough* EA *Cough*) to do so and then shut them down forever barring me from that feature of the game I paid money for.

Can you tell that this is a major peeve of mine? Anything that imposes restrictions on buyers (Operative word there - Buyers) is BAD.

 

[Mutant1988]

Using things without paying for them, without showing the most basic and direct form of respect for the creators, is despicable.

Doing so is essentially saying "I like your stuff, but not enough to let you be successful or even be able to survive making it".

Devil's Advocate Form Activate!

When one borrows a book from a library (or even borrows it from a friend), they are using it without paying for it. You can even borrow games from some libraries (my old one, for example). Similarly, if you buy it second hand, none of your money will go to the creator or publisher.

There's restrictions to the use of the library, in the form of return times and reservations. You cannot indefinitely acquire and use a book, movie or game from a library.

The reason why libraries are exempt is as a matter of media conservation and public education. To deny them the right to give people access to information and entertainment would have a catastrophic effect on society.

I'm not being hyperbolic. If you take away the few joys and means of education there is to those less fortunate, then you will see a marked increase in crime and cultural decay.

As for rentals, they always were and still are a scam. The only purpose they serve is to give money to the people least responsible for the creation of the product.

Same goes for second hand sales, which are only excused by the practical fact of limited physical copies.

It's also worth noting that in the music world, at least, the artist will receive only a fraction of the money from direct sales: often 10% or less. This doesn't counter your argument, of course, as the artist still makes money, but it's worth remembering that the money paid to show respect to an artist is almost entirely going to a publisher.

The solution to that issue cannot possibly be to deny them that fraction as well. But do tell, do you pirate music and then send money to the paypal of the artist, circumventing the "evil" record industry? I very much doubt that.

I would though, if I had the thousands required to pay the debt I owe. I'm not innocent by any means, but I actively make an effort to police my usage of things I have no legal or moral right to use.

I don't consider piracy as a necessary evil or some matter of convenience. Piracy is wrong, end of.

But what is also wrong is imposing restrictions to what can be accessed, as a matter of conservation and end user convenience.

I'd love to buy every single thing I've ever pirated. If it were possible. I don't pirate anything with the reasoning that I would never have paid for it anyway. That makes me a selfish jerk that demands things without giving anything back.

Piracy might be a way to circumvent an issue, but it's not a solution. It will never be a solution, because it robs creators of their right to succeed.

They can, but that's far from certain to actually happen. Many places will keep the original price, or close to it, for new copies, simply as a matter of course-- and the only cheaper ones will be pre-owned.

And, of course, with pre-owned copies, none of the money goes to the artist anyway, defeating one's purpose.

Again, the solution is not to steal the product. That benefits no one but yourself.

The solution is to demand a better market. And wouldn't you know it, we have gotten excellent markets in recent years - Like Steam and Good Old Games.

 

[DoPo]

Do you think more PC games should employ anti piracy measures so that it discourages people from pirating PC games?

No.

I don't mean DRM anti piracy but more like Sims 4 and Game Developer Tycoon like where your in game progress is hampered if a pirated copy is detected.

Still no. They don't actually help that much. It's more of a publicity thing than actual working solution.

It would be for the better if all PC games had this form of anti piracy measure which would only affect pirates instead of DRM which only mostly affects genuine buyers.

Here's a lesson in critical thinking: if there was a 100% fool proof solution that would detect pirated copies and would make the game "not work" (for some definition of that) for them, then does it not make sense that it would be used more? It does. Because most people wouldn't want their games to be pirated. This would include all AAA games as well as a lot of others. The fact that this system is not universally adopted, suggests IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.

So instead of stuffing every PC game with DRM software more games should use this funny way to stop pirates as this measure cannot be countered i suppose and this will hopefully lead to more PC game sales and discourage piracy.

How are you going to detect the legality of a copy without DRM? Moreover, why do you think the alternative measures cannot be countered?

You need some sort of DRM to know if a copy has been pirated or not. There is absolutely no way around it. That's pretty much the core purpose of DRM. If you could somehow know otherwise, you wouldn't need DRM. But, unfortunately, we don't ship code with a little gnome hidden in it, that would be able to accurately asses how is the code used.

With that in mind, it's rather simple to "fool" any "alternative" protection system - you find out what the DRM mechanism is and fool that. There are few that don't actually rely on it but that's not because they work better: in Game Developer Tycoon's case, the "faulty" game was distributed by the developer. They've uploaded it to PirateBay. And since it was a small indie game, there wasn't that much of an interest, so it wasn't yet cracked. The game could be cracked (and I believe it was not long after) and it would "work" the same as the legit version when it was.

 

[barbzilla]

Using things without paying for them, without showing the most basic and direct form of respect for the creators, is despicable.

Doing so is essentially saying "I like your stuff, but not enough to let you be successful or even be able to survive making it".

Devil's Advocate Form Activate!

When one borrows a book from a library (or even borrows it from a friend), they are using it without paying for it. You can even borrow games from some libraries (my old one, for example). Similarly, if you buy it second hand, none of your money will go to the creator or publisher.

There's restrictions to the use of the library, in the form of return times and reservations. You cannot indefinitely acquire and use a book, movie or game from a library.

The reason why libraries are exempt is as a matter of media conservation and public education. To deny them the right to give people access to information and entertainment would have a catastrophic effect on society.

I'm not being hyperbolic. If you take away the few joys and means of education there is to those less fortunate, then you will see a marked increase in crime and cultural decay.

As for rentals, they always were and still are a scam. The only purpose they serve is to give money to the people least responsible for the creation of the product.

Same goes for second hand sales, which are only excused by the practical fact of limited physical copies.

It's also worth noting that in the music world, at least, the artist will receive only a fraction of the money from direct sales: often 10% or less. This doesn't counter your argument, of course, as the artist still makes money, but it's worth remembering that the money paid to show respect to an artist is almost entirely going to a publisher.

The solution to that issue cannot possibly be to deny them that fraction as well. But do tell, do you pirate music and then send money to the paypal of the artist, circumventing the "evil" record industry? I very much doubt that.

I would though, if I had the thousands required to pay the debt I owe. I'm not innocent by any means, but I actively make an effort to police my usage of things I have no legal or moral right to use.

I don't consider piracy as a necessary evil or some matter of convenience. Piracy is wrong, end of.

But what is also wrong is imposing restrictions to what can be accessed, as a matter of conservation and end user convenience.

I'd love to buy every single thing I've ever pirated. If it were possible. I don't pirate anything with the reasoning that I would never have paid for it anyway. That makes me a selfish jerk that demands things without giving anything back.

Piracy might be a way to circumvent an issue, but it's not a solution. It will never be a solution, because it robs creators of their right to succeed.

They can, but that's far from certain to actually happen. Many places will keep the original price, or close to it, for new copies, simply as a matter of course-- and the only cheaper ones will be pre-owned.

And, of course, with pre-owned copies, none of the money goes to the artist anyway, defeating one's purpose.

Again, the solution is not to steal the product. That benefits no one but yourself.

The solution is to demand a better market. And wouldn't you know it, we have gotten excellent markets in recent years - Like Steam and Good Old Games.

While I don't agree with Piracy, it is hardly the thing that is killing the industry like many people make it out to be. Even with all of their research, they haven't been able to prove that a pirated game is equal to a lost sale (or any form of lost income). Which is why it isn't punished as theft. In fact it is punished as a trust violation (copyright is a trust law, not an ownership law).

What is really hurting game developers are second hand stores buying player's used games for pennies on the dollar, then reselling them for between 85% and 93% of the price of a brand new game, even though they only paid around 5%-10% of the new game price for said item. Neither the publisher or the developer see a cent off of those purchases either, and to top that off stores like Gamestop are strong arming the publishers/developers to create custom content for them and give them exclusive rights to things that cost money to develop.

The other thing that isn't helping them is the stupidly intrusive DRM they keep buying and putting in their games. They have to pay for those licenses, then they have to pay to patch the problems they create, and throughout all of this, it didn't even manage to stop the game from being pirated. It only managed to cause the game to have issues and drive their paying customers away.

If they eliminated those two problems, they (publishers and developers) would be in much better shape overall.

 

[Mutant1988]

While I don't agree with Piracy, it is hardly the thing that is killing the industry like many people make it out to be. Even with all of their research, they haven't been able to prove that a pirated game is equal to a lost sale (or any form of lost income). Which is why it isn't punished as theft. In fact it is punished as a trust violation (copyright is a trust law, not an ownership law).

What is really hurting game developers are second hand stores buying player's used games for pennies on the dollar, then reselling them for between 85% and 93% of the price of a brand new game, even though they only paid around 5%-10% of the new game price for said item. Neither the publisher or the developer see a cent off of those purchases either, and to top that off stores like Gamestop are strong arming the publishers/developers to create custom content for them and give them exclusive rights to things that cost money to develop.

The other thing that isn't helping them is the stupidly intrusive DRM they keep buying and putting in their games. They have to pay for those licenses, then they have to pay to patch the problems they create, and throughout all of this, it didn't even manage to stop the game from being pirated. It only managed to cause the game to have issues and drive their paying customers away.

If they eliminated those two problems, they (publishers and developers) would be in much better shape overall.

Except that I'm not disputing that the industry has issues. It most certainly does.

What I'm disputing is the notion that it's right or a necessary evil that people pirate games and other products to use, when they have no interest in purchasing them.

That's a paradox. If it wasn't worth anything then you wouldn't waste the bandwidth to download it. If it is worth something, you owe the creator of the work money. How much? That can certainly depend on how good it is, but it's not for you to decide what something is priced. Or rather, it's not right for you to take something just because you disagree with it's current pricing.

Paying for what you use is not about legality or politics. It's doing what's right. We pay for what we use. Or at least, we pay for what we own the right to use, resell or lend to others.

It's that simple and it's not a question about practicality or legality. Taking what you want because someone unrelated (Used product retailers, the record industry, etc) to what you take does something wrong, is just as wrong!

DRM is here to stay because people pirate games. There is a correlation between those two things. It doesn't work, at all. But that's the reason why it exists and screws over everyone that doesn't steal their entertainment.

A big reason why this and that isn't sold here and there is the clusterfuck of loyalty and obligation unique to each market. A scenario that should have been done away with digital distribution, but nope. Got to appease the physical distributors and retailers. That's why we have pre-orders (Which was originally a means to determine appropriate inventory) and retailer exclusive "dlc". To make this shit and brick store more worth using that the other shit and brick store.

Yes, used games is an issue (But undermining the right to resale would be an even bigger issue). But stealing is still wrong. If you want to undermine the used market, if you genuinely care about the industry, you don't steal games. You buy the game when it's an appropriate price.

And I do insist on calling it theft. You take an experience and give nothing to the people that made it.



And yes, piracy will happen. It's practically unavoidable. But I'll be damned if I'm going to accept such flimsy and self serving justifications as those put forth by oh so many pirates. If you pirate, you do it because you want something without paying. There's no greater purpose to it than just that. It doesn't matter how, why, what, when. You're a jerk for not paying the people that made it.

 

[Yan007]

I'm not without fault in this matter either. But I regret any and all of my piracy, outside of the rare times where it's simply impossible for me to legally play games (I HATE region restrictions with a burning passion).

"Geez guys. Don't pirate games because they're too expensive. Instead, pirate games because they're too expensive to import."

You should at least practice what you preach.

 

[Jiffex]

The best Anti Piracy methods I've seen were in Batman Arkham Asylum, where if you pirated the game you couldn't jump at all and Game Dev Tycoon where you lost more money to piracy and couldn't progress through the games. I feel like these are clever ways to identify those who have pirated the game and if it can be tweaked to minimize the amount of paying customers this is probably the best way to try stop piracy.

 

[Mutant1988]

I'm not without fault in this matter either. But I regret any and all of my piracy, outside of the rare times where it's simply impossible for me to legally play games (I HATE region restrictions with a burning passion).

"Geez guys. Don't pirate games because they're too expensive. Instead, pirate games because they're too expensive to import."

You should at least practice what you preach.

The difference is that I don't try to justify it. I'm well aware that I'm being an enormous ass in doing so.

What I dispute is the idea of defending piracy, as a concept. It is not a solution to any issue. It's just a means to ignore the issue entirely to satisfy your own needs.

And yeah, I make an exception when it's literally impossible for me to play the game on the hardware they sold me (That's still not condoning anything!). Even then though, that's not that many games (Doesn't excuse it still).

And with the PS3, PSP and Vita, I've imported far more games - Because I'm able to play them. It's amazing how much more willing people are to pay for things when it's actually possible to use those things. That being the entire point I was making about region restrictions.

So yeah, I don't apologize or try to defend my own jerk behaviour. Neither should you.

And I am, in fact, striving to be less of a jerk (In all matters actually). So should you.

Also, the entire idea that I wouldn't have bought the games anyway? I would.

 

[Yan007]

I'm not without fault in this matter either. But I regret any and all of my piracy, outside of the rare times where it's simply impossible for me to legally play games (I HATE region restrictions with a burning passion).

"Geez guys. Don't pirate games because they're too expensive. Instead, pirate games because they're too expensive to import."

You should at least practice what you preach.

The difference is that I don't try to justify it. I'm well aware that I'm being an enormous ass in doing so.

What I dispute is the idea of defending piracy, as a concept. It is not a solution to any issue. It's just a means to ignore the issue entirely to satisfy your own needs.

And yeah, I make an exception when it's literally impossible for me to play the game on the hardware they sold me (That's still not condoning anything!). Even then though, that's not that many games (Doesn't excuse it still).

And with the PS3 and PSP, I've imported far more games - Because I'm able to play them. It's amazing how much more willing people are to pay for things when it's actually possible to use those things. That being the entire point I was making about region restrictions.

So yeah, I don't apologize or try to defend my own jerk behaviour. Neither should you.

And I am, in fact, striving to be less of a jerk (In all matters actually). So should you.

My goode sir. You already admitted to stealing games when it's too inconvenient for you to buy them AND the platform. You need to stop lecturing others about being jerks as your reason for pirating is as bad as anyone else's. You should take a page from your own book and not pirate games you can't afford to play, regardless of your reasons.

If you live in the US, they are selling you a US-console. Wanna play your Japanese games? That's fine. Go to an online retailer and order a Japanese console like the rest of us who actually respect game devs and pay for both the games and the platforms to play them on. Sure, I'd love my 3ds to be region-lock free, but I like importing games enough that I've bought the Japanese version of the console to play my imported games. So should you.

I understand consoles are more expensive than games themselves, but relatively speaking the price itself does not make piracy right. A game alone may be relatively affordable to you, but it may not be affordable to a 12 year old kid living in a poor neighborhood in the same way every console on the market is relatively affordable to me.

As an example, I don't own a PS4 yet and was about to pull the trigger on an Japanese one when I heard of the Dragon Quest Warriors spin-off. Now that it's coming to the West I'll buy a US version instead, for now. I'll end up buying the Japanese one eventually when they get a great exclusive. Yes, I sometimes buy a console to play a single game.

 

[Mutant1988]

If you live in the US, they are selling you a US-console. Wanna play your Japanese games? That's fine. Go to an online retailer and order a Japanese console like the rest of us who actually respect game devs and pay for both the games and the platforms to play them on. Sure, I'd love my 3ds to be region-lock free, but I like importing games enough that I've bought the Japanese version of the console to play my imported games. So should you.

Here's the thing - In doing so you accept a $200-ish premium to be able to play games from a different region. That is, the price of an entire system.

I don't find that convenient in the slightest. Had there only been the matter of paying for shipping of a game, I would have no issues whatsoever.

Have had no issues whatsoever in fact. That's part of my point when I criticize region restrictions. I don't mind paying for "games". It's the addition of region locks that force me to buy additional hardware that pisses me off.

As for affordability, I can afford just about everything. Finding copies (Which usually means giving money to someone else but the developer, which we have already concluded can be an issue) or making copies run? That's far trickier.

I'm not using that as an excuse anyway. I don't excuse anything whatsoever and in fact, try to avoid doing such self serving selfish things.

I fail to see how I'm a hypocrite when I deride my own behaviour just as much. If anything, I don't criticize the practise as much as I do the justifications for it.

The entire "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" reasoning.

But maybe I'm the only one capable of making a distinction between the two.

You seem to misunderstand a very basic thing in my argument though - I'm also a jerk. I'm not making an exception of myself.

 

[Muten]

For me, the only things that matters is accessibility and easy to use services. I bought gtaIV on steam when i was living in the US for 6 months, when was time to return to the motherland, well the game was not avialiable to the region, so i went on and pirate the game.

When i was playing neverwinters nights 2, i was doing so with a cracked copy, having bought it, because it was more convenient for me then to have to put the CD on your drive everytime you want to play.

Just make things easy for buyers. People who pirate games, always will find a way, and most of the piracy are from countries that the publishers dont even marker to, like South America.

 

[Mutant1988]

For me, the only things that matters is accessibility and easy to use services. I bought gtaIV on steam when i was living in the US for 6 months, when was time to return to the motherland, well the game was not avialiable to the region, so i went on and pirate the game.

When i was playing neverwinters nights 2, i was doing so with a cracked copy, having bought it, because it was more convenient for me then to have to put the CD on your drive everytime you want to play.

Just make things easy for buyers. People who pirate games, always will find a way, and most of the piracy are from countries that the publishers dont even marker to, like South America.

Honestly, I don't mind people in Brazil or other countries of political turmoil pirating. Why? Because given that they have to live with the fact that all their belongings can be stolen at any time or that they might get shot to death any given day... Well, I think it's pretty fair all things considered.

Does that make me a hypocrite, wanting the absolutely miserable lives of some people to be less shit? I don't think it does.

Doesn't really help matters that the prices for legal products in such regions tend to be marked up to absurd degrees.

And yeah I don't really see any issue with what you did. Well, as long as no one took over the Steam account you originally bought the game on. That is essentially a resale and you no longer has a "right", legally or morally, to keep using the product.