Dragon Age 2 leaked

[Hiphophippo]

On a different note, I wish the PC version had leaked as well. I've already pre-ordered it long ago but if the chance arises to play it a week early I don't think I could resist the temptation...

Likewise. I've actually already bought to copies of the game in full (for myself and a friend. He bought me the first. seems fair.) and will be picking it up come tuesday. But that's not to say I wouldn't appreciate a little pre-street date loving.

 

[TechNoFear]

In the digital world, if you copy something you have not hampered the creator to sell copies of it.

Actually you have hampered the creator's ability to sell their product, as they must now compete with your free version.

As a budding developer myself I can say that if some 10 year old pirates a game I make in the future and likes it enough to become a loyal fan of mine. Chances are he/she will probably buy my products when they grow up and earn an income. This is a new age, and new rules are required to make it work fluently.

Your and the Minecraft dev's biggest problem (in selling your work) is obsurity; no one knows you make a product they may want.

This is not the case for a title like Crysis 2 or DA2.

Business models will change to bypass piracy. This change will move away from offline games to online subscription/RMT based, online achievements and purchaseable DLC, a move we are seeing more often at the moment.

I have developed commercial software since the 80's and now create asset protection and safety systems for mining multinationals. I do not make money from the software I create (in fact I often lose money on it), I make money from the service agreements and hardware.

 

[BeeRye]

Case 1: Person A Pirates game. Persons B,C,D buy game. Net gain: 3 sales
Case 2: Person A Doesn't Pirate game, and doesn't buy game. Net gain: 0 sales.

People need to stop with this shit argument. Far more often than not person A pirates the game, shows it to persons B,C, and D, who in turn go and pirate the game or simply have person A stick it on a disc for them at the time. I'm sick of hearing about people who "download a game to see if it's worth buying", then go and buy it afterwards. We all know you play your pirate copy and never buy the game, no need to lie.

The whole word of mouth argument works quite conveniently for Notch as an indie developer. Sure word of mouth was the best way for his game to gain exposure. Dragon Age 2 has a massive advertising campaign both online and in the print media. It does not need pirates to tell their friends it's great. If you play games and have had access to the internet during the last 3 months, you know what Dragon Age 2 is and you most likely know if it's a game you want to buy.

There is a disturbing trend with people's sense of entitlement. The amount of times I've seen "I can't afford more than a few games a year so I pirate the rest" as an excuse on these forums is unreal. You aren't entitled to the game, if you can't afford you don't get it, it really is that simple. The attitude of a pirate very much is a thief's attitude. Argue all you like that "you're not depriving them of a physical copy they can sell". Do you think someone who steals an ipod from a store does it to deprive the store of the item? Of course not, they do it because they want the item but they don't want to pay. It is the exact same motivation with piracy, people want things but aren't willing to pay so they take them. It really is the attitude of a thief.

 

[tiamont]

People who support piracy seem to love making up scenarios. Lets make up one, shall we?

You are writing a book. And I mean a book upon the popularity and money attracting levels of GRRM, Robert Jordan, Tolkien, James Patterson, ect. While you are writing this book I sneak into your house and, with my handy dandy little flash drive, make a copy of your book. I leave the house and go to a publisher and promptly get a deal because, hey, it is an amazing book. I sit back and make a million off the book because I'm charging $1 for it on the e-readers while you are left standing there going 'well, damn' or if you were lucky published it as well to compete against me.

You started out with nothing physical. Just data on a hard drive. A copy of that data was created. People paid for that copy and there were no profits sent to the original creator which is you. And now since obviously you are completely okay with this as you say 'yes online copying/piracy/whathaveyou is good!', you go back to writing another book and hope no one steals it while I never ever fear about getting sued. The only difference in this scenario is I charged $1, while some copy-cats/pirates charge nothing. The argument of "A copys, B, C, and D hear it is great form A and buy it" doesn't hold water. The only way it would happen is if A thinks B, C, and D should pay and he shouldn't. Or B, C, and D are idiots and pay instead of getting the free version. If they're not idiots the only thing that I could see keeping them from pirating the item would be having a moral aversion to it.

 

[tiamont]

All pirates charge nothing. Nobody is making money off of pirated games. Nor is anybody claiming that they created the games which they distribute/leech. So your made-up scenario doesn't really hold water.

Not arguing for piracy here, just poking holes.

True true. Usually the only ones you hear charging for things are people who are selling the fake games anyway to swindle you. But what is the difference if they say 'I made this' versus 'I copied this'? Why does it matter if the pirate is making profit or not? The only ones that care if someone pirated something or not are people who don't want to download pirated things. I can't see a person who supports piracy getting all up in arms about a copy-cat saying 'I AM !' They are copying a game, why should it matter if they are copying a simple name? If there is a clear reason for any of these, I just don't see them. But it is 1AM and I just got home from work, so that might be why.

 

[Zechnophobe]

I don't see that. I see piracy spreading through word of mouth too. After all, consider if B, C and D also pirate the game. Then consider person E. He would've bought the game, but after seeing how easy it was for A through D to pirate it, he decides to pirate it too. Net gain: -1 sales

Making up hypothetical scenarios doesn't really prove anyone's point, because someone else can probably construct one in which the opposite thing happens.

Minecraft's Success is not hypothetical, however.

 

[Redingold]

I don't see that. I see piracy spreading through word of mouth too. After all, consider if B, C and D also pirate the game. Then consider person E. He would've bought the game, but after seeing how easy it was for A through D to pirate it, he decides to pirate it too. Net gain: -1 sales

Making up hypothetical scenarios doesn't really prove anyone's point, because someone else can probably construct one in which the opposite thing happens.

Minecraft's Success is not hypothetical, however.

How many people bought Minecraft because their friend pirated it? How many people who would've bought it didn't buy it, but pirated it instead because their friend did? It's difficult to find evidence of sales lost, and impossible to attribute Minecraft's success to piracy. For all we know, Notch might have made more money if people hadn't pirated it.

 

[Hiphophippo]

I don't see that. I see piracy spreading through word of mouth too. After all, consider if B, C and D also pirate the game. Then consider person E. He would've bought the game, but after seeing how easy it was for A through D to pirate it, he decides to pirate it too. Net gain: -1 sales

Making up hypothetical scenarios doesn't really prove anyone's point, because someone else can probably construct one in which the opposite thing happens.

Minecraft's Success is not hypothetical, however.

How many people bought Minecraft because their friend pirated it? How many people who would've bought it didn't buy it, but pirated it instead because their friend did? It's difficult to find evidence of sales lost, and impossible to attribute Minecraft's success to piracy. For all we know, Notch might have made more money if people hadn't pirated it.

I pirated Minecraft because I wanted to get a feel for the survival aspect of it instead of just the building bits. Then I found out I got all future versions for free if I bought it.

Sold. Not all pirates are bad. Some just want a demo.

 

[Redingold]

I don't see that. I see piracy spreading through word of mouth too. After all, consider if B, C and D also pirate the game. Then consider person E. He would've bought the game, but after seeing how easy it was for A through D to pirate it, he decides to pirate it too. Net gain: -1 sales

Making up hypothetical scenarios doesn't really prove anyone's point, because someone else can probably construct one in which the opposite thing happens.

Minecraft's Success is not hypothetical, however.

How many people bought Minecraft because their friend pirated it? How many people who would've bought it didn't buy it, but pirated it instead because their friend did? It's difficult to find evidence of sales lost, and impossible to attribute Minecraft's success to piracy. For all we know, Notch might have made more money if people hadn't pirated it.

I pirated Minecraft because I wanted to get a feel for the survival aspect of it instead of just the building bits. Then I found out I got all future versions for free if I bought it.

Sold. Not all pirates are bad. Some just want a demo.

My friend pirated the ME2 DLC, which he would have paid for, because I pirated it first.

Anecdotal evidence proves nothing.

 

[Hiphophippo]

My friend pirated the ME2 DLC, which he would have paid for, because I pirated it first.

Anecdotal evidence proves nothing.

Fair, but by that measure your point isn't valid either. All I was really saying is that -I'm honest-. Perhaps not everyone is, but some are.

Indisputable.

 

[znix]

Anecdotal evidence proves nothing.

The only way to get a really good look at piracy is by asking a huge amount of people a great deal of nuanced questions. As such, anecdotal evidence may form the basis for a theory. Right now, most of the industry's understanding of piracy is infantile at best.

 

[babinro]

I find Notch's argument to be complete crap. If I steal a new 3D TV but watching it convinces 4 friends to by it it is still stealing. If you pirate a game it is the same thing.

Oh great, more childish arguments like this. He's written a length post discussing the economics and intrigue in the scenario and you basically 'lulz' it away with the same old tired "But if you stole a material good blah blah blah" argument. As always incorrectly trying to apply physical goods economics to a virtual good.

His argument is very simple:

Case 1: Person A Pirates game. Persons B,C,D buy game. Net gain: 3 sales
Case 2: Person A Doesn't Pirate game, and doesn't buy game. Net gain: 0 sales.

This is his point. And yes, He'd much rather person A bought the game, but he can't deny that the availability of the game via other means did end up turning better than zero profit. He's making an argument from an economic standpoint, not an ethical one.

This kind of analysis is about as reasonable as saying "Buying games when they are on sale is unethical, because you didn't pay full price!" The merchant knows they can get more total sales by having the sale. They might even give away free ones to build up hype.

Yes there is a difference of volition here, in one case the merchant is purposefully taking the per unit price hit for the overall gain, and in the other they aren't, but they do end up with similar results.

Please, if you want to discuss this, at least address the full issues at hand, and don't reply to thought out prose with the equivalent of a 'party line'.

In my history, if person A pirates something...persons B,C,D all learn how A did it, or borrow a flash drive to get it. The single act of piracy, even from someone who had no intention of buying the product often leads to lost sales from others who wanted to purchase, but no longer will because they have it for free.

I suppose my life around those who pirate could be a huge exception to the norm since the above argument implies sales will increase...but I doubt it.

 

[ImprovizoR]

I hear PC version got leaked as well. Probably just someone who was able to buy it in a store before it's release date :/

 

[znix]

I hear PC version got leaked as well. Probably just someone who was able to buy it in a store before it's release date :/

Yeah, on the bright side the DRM is working to prevent access to the game code before the official release date. Only on the PC platform though. If they had implemented the same kind of online check for the console versions, they also would be locked down. There's always next time

 

[LiudvikasT]

I find Notch's argument to be complete crap. If I steal a new 3D TV but watching it convinces 4 friends to by it it is still stealing. If you pirate a game it is the same thing.

Oh great, more childish arguments like this. He's written a length post discussing the economics and intrigue in the scenario and you basically 'lulz' it away with the same old tired "But if you stole a material good blah blah blah" argument. As always incorrectly trying to apply physical goods economics to a virtual good.

His argument is very simple:

Case 1: Person A Pirates game. Persons B,C,D buy game. Net gain: 3 sales
Case 2: Person A Doesn't Pirate game, and doesn't buy game. Net gain: 0 sales.

This is his point. And yes, He'd much rather person A bought the game, but he can't deny that the availability of the game via other means did end up turning better than zero profit. He's making an argument from an economic standpoint, not an ethical one.

This kind of analysis is about as reasonable as saying "Buying games when they are on sale is unethical, because you didn't pay full price!" The merchant knows they can get more total sales by having the sale. They might even give away free ones to build up hype.

Yes there is a difference of volition here, in one case the merchant is purposefully taking the per unit price hit for the overall gain, and in the other they aren't, but they do end up with similar results.

Please, if you want to discuss this, at least address the full issues at hand, and don't reply to thought out prose with the equivalent of a 'party line'.

In my history, if person A pirates something...persons B,C,D all learn how A did it, or borrow a flash drive to get it. The single act of piracy, even from someone who had no intention of buying the product often leads to lost sales from others who wanted to purchase, but no longer will because they have it for free.

I suppose my life around those who pirate could be a huge exception to the norm since the above argument implies sales will increase...but I doubt it.

It's not like pirating is hard. Everyone know how to do it, so this argument fails.

 

[darkcommanderq]

Actually you have hampered the creator's ability to sell their product, as they must now compete with your free version.

Your and the Minecraft dev's biggest problem (in selling your work) is obsurity; no one knows you make a product they may want.

1st off, the hardcore pirates are going to pirate things just because they can. You are not going to stop these people, but they are in the minority. This ties into the the fact that most responsible gamers who have money will buy games/software if it is just as continent to aquire as piracy. (If not more convent like steam or stardock). You are correct companies do need to compete with the free copies, and by them slapping on unnecessary layers of DRM it makes it hard for some people to stick with them.

Game companies have experimented with this before, world of Goos chose your own payment, the humble indie bundle, etc... Each time a company tries these methods they still make a profit. Despite pirates.

Sure the minecraft guy was obscure, but he still made enough money off of one product despite piracy to START HIS OWN COMPANY. But how is he obscure now, every gamer practicably knows about it if not has played it. You can bet that people will buy his next game regardless of what it is, more people will buy that the first one.

 

[TechNoFear]

1st off, the hardcore pirates are going to pirate things just because they can. You are not going to stop these people, but they are in the minority.

Pirates are the majority, not the minority.

Devs like Stardock report piracy rates close to 9 times that of legit sales. When it released Demigod had 120,000 connections to the online servers, over 100,000 using pirated copies (85%). This conectivity problem lead one game site to give lower reviews for Demigod.

You are correct companies do need to compete with the free copies, and by them slapping on unnecessary layers of DRM it makes it hard for some people to stick with them.

The music industry sued its fans, the game industry uses DRM, neither has worked.

Locks on cars, houses etc will not keep out all criminals, but simply discourage the majority. DRM is (incorrectly) viewed in the same way.

No DRM will not work for long. Except for a DRM system as nasty as the 90's 'CIH' viruses, which screwed your BIOS often bricking your system, creating a real risk to pirates (of course this is just asking for trouble...).

We are already seeing game companies move to other business models (RMT, DLC, F2P etc) to combat piracy and give gamers a reason to actually purchase the games (ie new ways to compete with free by adding value only available to the orignal purchaser).

Sure the minecraft guy was obscure, but he still made enough money off of one product despite piracy to START HIS OWN COMPANY.

Sure, but...

Less than 1/3 of registered users have bought Minecraft.
Minecraft was created by 4 people (and uses some GPL software) so has a low cost per unit and break even point. [so did not require a lot of paying customers to make a profit]

This is not true of most games or any AAA game titles.

But how is he obscure now, every gamer practicably knows about it if not has played it.

So Notch has overcome the problem of obscurity and correctly states that piracy has 'helped' him do so.

My point was that his future releases will not need the publicity (as he is no longer obscure), so will piracy still be as 'helpful'?

You can bet that people will buy his next game regardless of what it is, more people will buy that the first one.

I would not be so sure of that.

 

[darkcommanderq]

snip

You have quite a few valid points. One though that I still feel your not sold on is that squeals attract more sales. (and more pirates just by ratios).

Just look at blizzard and starcraft. The original starcraft/brood war game did not really sell a ton of units compared to starcraft 2. It was because of starcraft success that starcraft 2 sold so well comparatively just because so many people knew about it from its predecessor.

Ill give you my personal example with anime. Several years ago my friend introduced me to fansubs of bleach. I enjoyed it and continued to download/stream them. Now that I have money to spend on DVDs I buy them fairly regularly. If it had not been for fansubs I would never have become an anime customer.

I think this has happened to a lot of people over the years. Honestly I would LOVE a subscription plan for HD legal speedsubs similar to netflix. So I really hope that the industries in general move towards that type of system. Sorry kinda changed topics a bit, but I think its related to games as well.