PC Pirates?

[Zacharious-khan]

Hello everyone, I come to you today to enter into a discussion about PC gamer stereotypes. While every knows of the PC gaming master race from ZP which I have no problems with, Ever since the GTAV petitions I have been seeing a lot of "All PC gamers are thieves" moop out there and I'd like people to weigh in.

Personally, I have never pirated a PC game in my life. So i really feel annoyed when I get told that i don't deserve a console port because I'm just going to steal it. which i find to be a very odd argument for 3 reasons.

1.Money is better than no money:
Piracy exists and there's nothing we can do about it but what exactly is the offset cost? Even if 50% of people pirate the game that's still 50% of the money you get with significantly less effort. In an episode of Extra Credits they mention that a lot of the time there are some programmers who just have nothing to do at the end of a development cycle. If they just push some dev time over to a PC version it would come out even cheaper.

2.Emulation exists:
Say they don't put out a PC version of a game, out there exists emulators for even the latest consoles and while they aren't super well maintained, and this isn't an overall great point its still exists and is troublesome.

3.Steam
Steams DRM is pretty damn good, protective and not intrusive. Literally everything you want from copy protection software. It isn't perfect but its also free copy protection that while won't stop crackers forever, it gives a definite edge, and i mean guys... steam sales.

That's my two cents, feel free to let me know what you think, send me trophies or insult my lineage.

 

[Rutabaga_swe]

1. No, it's expensive to do a good job of porting a game. I don't think it's so much a matter of piracy as it is they don't expect enough people will buy it to make it worth while. I suppose piracy might weigh in there but one copy downloaded does not mean one sale lost by any stretch of the imagination so i don't know how to gauge the effect of piracy here. The effects of piracy on games are fuzzy at best imo. That said, i don't condone it, but i'm also very skeptical to it being the bloody bane of the PC gaming market it's cracked up to be by some publishers/press.

2. Yeah, find me an emulator that runs 360 or PS3 and i'll be utterly stunned. There's just no way.

3. No, steam as DRM is bullcrap. It does NOTHING to stop the pirates and it does NOTHING for the consumer. The platform offers a lot of good things, the DRM is not one of them.

 

[Eve Charm]

Well the problem is PC piracy isn't 50% of people pirate it, The number of sold copies vs estimated illegal download is astounding.

http://www.destructoid.com/only-4-of-volgarr-the-viking-players-bought-the-game-264070.phtml

Basically only 4% of the people playing Volgarr a game that came out in September On Steam, Gog and so on, one way being DRM-free actually paid for it and this comes from the dev himself. It was also a kick starter title that was funded.

Also witcher 2 is worth a mention
http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/11/29/interview-cd-projekts-ceo-on-witcher-2-piracy-why-drms-still-not-worth-it/

Why even tho DRM kinda isn't the answer still even with all the hype of " this game is not going to have drm please buy" they sold a million copies which is awesome for a pc game, but looking at torrents they can easy see while it sold that million copies it was illegality downloaded 4.5-5.5 times as much illegally and saying true numbers are probably much higher.

I think they are probably right with not deserving a console port because those sales even for Consoles having piracy aren't anywhere near that much, and would cut into the sales of the console version if people could pirate the pc version.

 

[Weaver]

A lot of this would be more accountable if Valve released their fucking sales data.

 

[spartandude]

The reason its become such a big issue is because publisher's/devs seem to think that when PC sales are lower than expected, its not because most people weren't interested in it but because everyone who didn't buy it pirated it. To be honest its mostly an excuse they use for shareholders.

 

[antidonkey]

I think that most people that pirate a game never had any intention of ever buying it in the first place. Steam with its crazy sales has probably done more to combat piracy than any DRM has. I know how easy it is to get a PC game for free but if it's something I'm interested in and it only cost me $15 or less, I'll just buy it. The music industry had this same problem until Itunes and Amazon made getting songs cheap and super easy. Now they're back to enjoying their profits again.

 

[Bad Jim]

Well the problem is PC piracy isn't 50% of people pirate it, The number of sold copies vs estimated illegal download is astounding.

http://www.destructoid.com/only-4-of-volgarr-the-viking-players-bought-the-game-264070.phtml

Basically only 4% of the people playing Volgarr a game that came out in September On Steam, Gog and so on, one way being DRM-free actually paid for it and this comes from the dev himself. It was also a kick starter title that was funded.

Sales and downloads are not the same thing. A lot of the games I've paid for have been downloaded multiple times. Also, given the fact that many of us have only played half the games we've got in Steam sales, it's not hard to imagine that many pirates just download everything and only bother to play a small fraction of it.

Even with a number like 4%, it's not implausible that the number of pirates that actually played Volgar is reasonably close to the number that paid for it.

 

[RikuoAmero]

Well the problem is PC piracy isn't 50% of people pirate it, The number of sold copies vs estimated illegal download is astounding.

http://www.destructoid.com/only-4-of-volgarr-the-viking-players-bought-the-game-264070.phtml

Basically only 4% of the people playing Volgarr a game that came out in September On Steam, Gog and so on, one way being DRM-free actually paid for it and this comes from the dev himself. It was also a kick starter title that was funded.

Sales and downloads are not the same thing. A lot of the games I've paid for have been downloaded multiple times. Also, given the fact that many of us have only played half the games we've got in Steam sales, it's not hard to imagine that many pirates just download everything and only bother to play a small fraction of it.

Even with a number like 4%, it's not implausible that the number of pirates that actually played Volgar is reasonably close to the number that paid for it.

Like yours truly? http://steamcommunity.com/id/RikuoAmero/games?tab=all

Also, it is entirely possible that most of the people who torrented Volgarr without subsequently paying for it did it as a form of demo (just checked its' Steam page, and the devs don't offer a demo themselves), decided they didn't like it and thus didn't want to pay.

Oh and moderators? Just before you delete my comments here...this isn't the "hur hur, defend piracy, I've gotta get everything for free" type of pirate. This is a guy who USED to be a hardcore pirate, but who has gradually converted almost entirely to paying, but who still sees legitimate value in downloading commercial titles for free. If talk such as this is never tolerated on major websites like Escapist, then...well, the gaming industry is doomed.

 

[Rutabaga_swe]

Yeah, the Völgarr example is completely pointless. Ok, 4% sounds like a tiny fraction but you have to ask then, how many pirated the game? A few million? Maybe, i would guess so. 4 percent out of that is still decent numbers for what is basically a marginally modernized take on Rastan, an arcade game from the 80s. The game might have been pirated to hell and back, but i imagine they got enough sales to make it on to their next project.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Yeah, the Völgarr example is completely pointless. Ok, 4% sounds like a tiny fraction but you have to ask then, how many pirated the game? A few million? Maybe, i would guess so. 4 percent out of that is still decent numbers for what is basically a marginally modernized take on Rastan, an arcade game from the 80s. The game might have been pirated to hell and back, but i imagine they got enough sales to make it on to their next project.

Yeah, because "they still probably made a profit" is such a good defense for not paying for a product. The fact that less than one in twenty paid for the game is downright atrocious and is a good display of just how entitled many gamers are, especially when they then try to make up excuses for why not paying for a product you use is "not really a bad thing" or "not as bad as it seems".

And then we PC gamers act all surprised and hurt when the big publishers are hesitant to put their games out on PC...

 

[Little Gray]

A lot of this would be more accountable if Valve released their fucking sales data.

They don't need to because when a company releases the sales data it includes sales from steam.

Well the problem is PC piracy isn't 50% of people pirate it, The number of sold copies vs estimated illegal download is astounding.

http://www.destructoid.com/only-4-of-volgarr-the-viking-players-bought-the-game-264070.phtml

Basically only 4% of the people playing Volgarr a game that came out in September On Steam, Gog and so on, one way being DRM-free actually paid for it and this comes from the dev himself. It was also a kick starter title that was funded.

Also witcher 2 is worth a mention
http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/11/29/interview-cd-projekts-ceo-on-witcher-2-piracy-why-drms-still-not-worth-it/

Why even tho DRM kinda isn't the answer still even with all the hype of " this game is not going to have drm please buy" they sold a million copies which is awesome for a pc game, but looking at torrents they can easy see while it sold that million copies it was illegality downloaded 4.5-5.5 times as much illegally and saying true numbers are probably much higher.

I think they are probably right with not deserving a console port because those sales even for Consoles having piracy aren't anywhere near that much, and would cut into the sales of the console version if people could pirate the pc version.

Aside from the point that 4% is a completely useless number without actually sales data how do we know that is actually accurate. The article for the witcher 2 you posted is also complete bs. The developer even said later that the numbers were not actually based on any facts and just ones he pulled out of his ass. It was not pirated even a quarter that much and proof of that came out later. The witcher didnt even make the list of the most pirated games that year and yet some that were sub one million did.

 

[Rutabaga_swe]

Yeah, the Völgarr example is completely pointless. Ok, 4% sounds like a tiny fraction but you have to ask then, how many pirated the game? A few million? Maybe, i would guess so. 4 percent out of that is still decent numbers for what is basically a marginally modernized take on Rastan, an arcade game from the 80s. The game might have been pirated to hell and back, but i imagine they got enough sales to make it on to their next project.

Yeah, because "they still probably made a profit" is such a good defense for not paying for a product. The fact that less than one in twenty paid for the game is downright atrocious and is a good display of just how entitled many gamers are, especially when they then try to make up excuses for why not paying for a product you use is "not really a bad thing" or "not as bad as it seems".

And then we PC gamers act all surprised and hurt when the big publishers are hesitant to put their games out on PC...

Ok i think you totally missed my point. What i'm really trying to say is that the people who would have bought it did (myself included), but i imagine out of the people who downloaded it few would have paid for it were piracy not an option. There is now way in hell a title like Völgarr would sell a few million copies. Even if it came out on consoles it probably wouldn't sell more than a couple hundred thousand copies. But also, as stated above this is indeed all conjecture and guesses. What is important to think about is what is your audience like? How many copies can you realistically expect title x to sell and so forth. I imagine Völgarr did alright for what it is, and going "ZOMG, so many lost sales to piracy!!!" isn't the rational way of looking at the situation. Thinking that every copy downloaded is a sale lost is equally stupid to thinking that all games should be free. Besides what we need is not someone to blame, but a solution that works. What can we do to make games as sustainable as possible? How do we offer value in a way that promotes game purchases?

 

[clippen05]

Yeah, the Völgarr example is completely pointless. Ok, 4% sounds like a tiny fraction but you have to ask then, how many pirated the game? A few million? Maybe, i would guess so. 4 percent out of that is still decent numbers for what is basically a marginally modernized take on Rastan, an arcade game from the 80s. The game might have been pirated to hell and back, but i imagine they got enough sales to make it on to their next project.

Yeah, because "they still probably made a profit" is such a good defense for not paying for a product. The fact that less than one in twenty paid for the game is downright atrocious and is a good display of just how entitled many gamers are, especially when they then try to make up excuses for why not paying for a product you use is "not really a bad thing" or "not as bad as it seems".

And then we PC gamers act all surprised and hurt when the big publishers are hesitant to put their games out on PC...

You've got to ask yourself how many of those pirates were going to buy the game in the first place? If the money was never going to go to the developer at all, I can't really call it a loss. I'm never going to pay money to go see Star Trek Into Darkness,0 but if someone is handing out free copies on the street, does that mean I stole it?

Arguing piracy is pointless because so much of it is conjecture and speculation. We just don't know enough one way or another to say how damaging it really is.

There's a difference between someone handing out free copies on the street and you pirating a game off the internet. The former doesn't involve you taking the initiative to get the product for free, the latter does. You actively choose to go to piratebay, it doesn't just happen like some guy on the street handing out free copies.

 

[Azaraxzealot]

The lines between what IS and ISN'T piracy are so blurry I don't even know why anyone gets worked up about it (especially the Escapist). If I give my friend a free copy of a game I own, is it piracy? If I rip the songs from a CD I bought onto my PC then lend it to someone else and they do the same, is that Piracy? If I show a movie at a sleepover or party, is that piracy? If I create a physical backup of a digital game I own (which is protected by law) is that piracy? If I own a DRM-Free game and my brother downloads it from me, is THAT piracy?

The definitions are just WAAAY to subjective.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

The steam DRM is a bit of a pointless argument I feel, as it takes almost no time for a crack to be put up with or without it.
You yourself said the emulation isn't perfect, though I suppose in a few years it will be good enough. So I'll let that one slide.
Otherwise I agree though, pirates are no reason to not make a port. Though waiting a while like GTA did could pay off as those with consoles might not want to wait for a piratable version.

A good display of just how entitled many gamers are, especially when they then try to make up excuses for why not paying for a product you use is "not really a bad thing" or "not as bad as it seems".

And then we PC gamers act all surprised and hurt when the big publishers are hesitant to put their games out on PC...

Just here to say, I'm sure 90% of pirates don't feel the need to justify it. A few use those flimsy excuses, but most don't think they are 'entitled' to the product, they just take it anyway.
Hell, if I wanted to get a game on PC I would consider the choice between $100 or the moral high ground an easy decision to make.
Thankfully console games drop in price faster than PC games, at least non digital ones.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

Well the problem is PC piracy isn't 50% of people pirate it, The number of sold copies vs estimated illegal download is astounding.

http://www.destructoid.com/only-4-of-volgarr-the-viking-players-bought-the-game-264070.phtml

Basically only 4% of the people playing Volgarr a game that came out in September On Steam, Gog and so on, one way being DRM-free actually paid for it and this comes from the dev himself. It was also a kick starter title that was funded.

Also witcher 2 is worth a mention
http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/11/29/interview-cd-projekts-ceo-on-witcher-2-piracy-why-drms-still-not-worth-it/

Why even tho DRM kinda isn't the answer still even with all the hype of " this game is not going to have drm please buy" they sold a million copies which is awesome for a pc game, but looking at torrents they can easy see while it sold that million copies it was illegality downloaded 4.5-5.5 times as much illegally and saying true numbers are probably much higher.

I think they are probably right with not deserving a console port because those sales even for Consoles having piracy aren't anywhere near that much, and would cut into the sales of the console version if people could pirate the pc version.

This would be a decent point if [i/]any[/i] of these numbers were backed up with actual data and/or studies.

And even then, pirated copies and lost sales are two very different numbers.

OT:
People who start petitions to dent PC ports because of piracy are astoundingly ignorant. Both of the PC platform AND the reasons why publishers don't make ports.

As another person mentioned, it has far FAR more to do with the costs of adapting the game.

 

[residentout1]

right now i can' play fable 3 because of steam drm and the stupid cd keys i have never had pirate but right now it has been more the a week when i got the game on sale with no warning i could not play it i may find a pirate version f the game to play because just look at the form some people are on the there second week

http://steamcommunity.com/app/105400/discussions/

 

[Vylox]

Piracy exists because of the kind of service that many of the popular publishers provide. Granted there are some who pirate just to do so, most of the people who illegally download games, music, and movies do so because of the quality of service.

Which is better for someone: Spend an hour to download a game illegally, or spend $60 to purchase a copy, then spend another 2 hours downloading additional content then add another bit of time looking through your purchase for CD-Keys, pass numbers etc and inputting them.

If the publishers would stop with all of the ridiculous hoops and hassles being applied to the PAYING customers, then fewer people would look to piracy to get their games. Less publisher interference will lead to increased sales, as people will be willing to purchase those products due to it being simpler and easier. Currently it is simpler and easier to pirate games than to purchase and play them legitimately. This is what needs to change.


I really do miss the days of... put game in, start game, play game. Instead of now, where its install game, jump through hoops, start game, jump through hoops, play laggy game.