Poll: Does pirating a game to test it make it okay?

[CrimsonBlaze]

As a gamer, I would say that it isn't a bad thing if you are truly committed to only testing the game out and either buying the game if you like it or uninstalling the game after you have no interest in playing it anymore.

As a consumer, it's a big no no. I would say that if you are on the fence about buying anything, you should wait for reviews to come out, go online and see other gamers playing the game and walking through its features. You could also just wait a while for the price to go down and pick up the copy then.

 

[tmande2nd]

If they dont put out a demo for the game then I dont think its wrong.
If they have a demo out...then no.

 

[Ledan]

Due to the age of no demos.....
There are times when you just really need to try something for yourself to see if it is something you would like. If you don't like it after an hour of playing, then don't buy it. Otherwise you really should, and are otherwise just an asshole.
The hour thing can differ depending on the price of the game, like a 5 dollar game probably only has that much anyways.

 

[Schlen]

This thread has been done so any times.
No its not OK, while you are downloading you are still supporting the others who wont just try it. I'm a hypocrite in this topic as I don't support it but I'm glad I did from time to time, I was going to buy Sniper Elite for example, dodged a bullet there

 

[Prosis]

I have a modified Intel HD 3000 card, with dedicated 128MB VRAM.

What this means is that it is not in SystemRequirements Lab's database. Thus, it can never compare my graphics card to game requirements. Furthermore, people do not do benchmark tests with this card (they use the Intel HD 3000 with 256MB VRAM). As is such, it is very difficult for me to tell if my computer to run a game.

I don't pirate copies to test (the risk of viruses and stolen info is too great IMO). Generally I'll either borrow a friend's stem account in order to install and test it on my computer (only to see if it works. Not as a free demo). If it works, I'll buy it. If it doesn't I won't.

Sometimes I take a risk, but only if its really cheap, as $60 is an expensive gamble for me at this time. There has been a number of games, such as the Witcher 2, Fable 3, Dark Souls, that I have passed on simply because I have no way to determine if I can run the game.

 

[GamingAwesome1]

I'm not going to attempt to force my set of morals and values onto you, make your own decisions about whether or not it's right. I will, however, break it down for you as I think the answer to this question is a personal one.

Assume a person with great self-control who will upon pirating a game and seeing that it functions on their machine, will immediately go buy the product, I don't see this as anything bad, if anything it's a net positive for the developer.

However, assume a person with no self-control, that will end up finishing the pirated copy and then never pay for it, with various justifications that pirates tend to use, not going there, some arguments hold more weight than others, can't cover all of them. That puts you straight into the camp of an outright pirate regardless of your logic for doing so.

I'm aware this is an extreme dichotomy and there are many positions that you could take that occupy the middle of the scale somewhere. My question to you, that you will need to answer honestly before you can then make a call for yourself on this very morally grey question, is "Do you trust yourself?"

 

[Kathinka]

i'd say it's perfectly fine.

i live in a country where it's perfectly legal to download copyrighted material. i therefore pirate the SHIT out of every game that i'm not sure is worth it's money. if i like it, i buy it anyway, if i don't, i play the downloaded copy instead. so yeah, i utilize that exact mechanism since forever.

not a single cent was lost by the industry because of me doing this btw. whenever i didn't buy a game, i wouldn't have bought it, regardles of it's avaiability for free. if a game was for me personally worth the price they asked, then i bought it.

 

[RaNDM G]

Here's an idea. Why not get it for PS3?

That's the reason we have consoles. Not everyone has a mid-range desktop. I'm stuck with a laptop as well, so my only avenues are my 360, Wii, and emulation. You're not getting the "best" experience with some games, but when you put the disk in the tray you don't have to worry about starting it up. And if she absolutely has to, buying a new console is cheaper than shelling out a grand for an entry level desktop or $600 for the parts to build her own.

Payday on the PS3 is free if you get a Playstation Plus account, so that may be another factor to consider.

As for the murder thing? But I'm not murdering him, I just want to see if my gun will shoot that and still be effective. I have no intent to actually murder him, or even shoot him, I just want to see what a 7.62x39 round will do at 50 feet, but to do so, I'd HAVE to shoot him. Without shooting him, how will I ever know if it would be effective or not? Obviously, the ACTION of shooting him is wrong regardless of why, so no reason I have for doing so could JUSTIFY said action. Get it now?

That's a poor example when you can set up a dummy at a gun range.

 

[Assassin Xaero]

Again, would it be ok with you if I shoot you just to see if you survive, or if one of my guns could shoot that far and still do damage, or whatever reason I make up to say that me shooting you is perfectly ok and legal?

Of course not.
Going around and shooting people is never ok, as they (as you may know) become hurt and may possibly get killed in the process.

Now, can we stick to the matter at hand and not drag gun violence into this?

First off, thank you for proving my point about how people on the internet can't comprehend what an example is and have to take it to an extremely literal sense. And yeah, I'm sure I could win any argument I get into by discrediting or strawmaning any example anyone else brings up with whatever comes to mind right away.

Point is, since you people still can't seem to figure it out, if something is wrong it is wrong. Pirating is wrong, no matter what bullshit you make up to say is "right". Just like shooting someone, it is never right. But if you have to continue to make up whatever it is to make yourself feel better about doing things that are wrong, go for it.

As for the murder thing? But I'm not murdering him, I just want to see if my gun will shoot that and still be effective. I have no intent to actually murder him, or even shoot him, I just want to see what a 7.62x39 round will do at 50 feet, but to do so, I'd HAVE to shoot him. Without shooting him, how will I ever know if it would be effective or not? Obviously, the ACTION of shooting him is wrong regardless of why, so no reason I have for doing so could JUSTIFY said action. Get it now?

That's a poor example when you can set up a dummy at a gun range.

I swear if I had a dollar for every time that someone can't understand what an example is, or complete miss the entire point of it, I'd be rich. Anyway, that doesn't help. For this issue at hand, just find a game that has the same requirements that you don't have to pirate (so, like a dummy) and see if it runs.

 

[crazyrabbits]

I hope it's unintentional, but that post makes you look incredibly arrogant and a bigot. It isn't required for people to read every single post in a thread before replying to one.

Please. I'm probably one of the more rational folks in this topic. I don't mind being proven wrong, but when you jump in and accuse me of not reading the OP (which I fully admit to), while not reading the rest of the topic - and my responses - before commenting, it makes you look like a hypocrite.

Also, I'm pretty sure the OP wants to test that the game works at a reasonable quality instead of seeing if the game works at all. It's kind of a pain in the ass to run round trying to find identicle software when they could just pirate the game then give the company their money ANYWAY if the game actually works. The developers don't actually lose any revenue.

I know full well that piracy doesn't automatically equate to a lost sale, but there is no guarantee that they will just pirate it and delete it, beyond the OP's word. I've already said that "compatibility" is a pretty poor excuse to justify piracy. Either do your homework and research it before buying, or don't bother at all. It's at a cheap enough price that even if you do buy it and it doesn't work, you aren't out much anyway.

I wouldnt bother trying to talk sense into that one, its a lost cause.

You haven't bothered answering my responses (which were quite restrained), and you resorted to veiled insults to mask the fact that you don't want to bother admitting you were outplayed. Better luck next time.

As several other people have pointed out these sites where you can check if the game will run are flawed and do not always give the right answer.

Fully agree, but that's why it's better to get a range of checks first. Doesn't take that long to do. I used it myself a few years back while getting back into the PC gaming scene.

Perhaps not, but since it's a victimless crime it doesn't really matter if it's illegal or not. The letter of the lawn says it's illegal, but I hardly think the spirit of the law was to deny people the opportunity to check if a system will run said game or not.

I'm fairly sure that "in the law's eyes", intent is meaningless when you're downloading a pirated copy. If it's one excuse or another, the end result is the same - you copied the content, ostensibly spending a chunk of time downloading the entire product, and can play at your leisure. I mean, it's not like other arms of the law - "attempted theft" and "theft" are two different animals, but online piracy is a bit more straightforward in this regard.

Really? How isn't it? If I shoot you just to see if you will survive, is it still attempted murder? I had no intent to murder you, but I still shot you. So, if I go to Best Buy and steal a graphics card just to test to see if it will work in my computer, then if it will, I go buy it, that isn't stealing?
...
Someone gets hurt and/or is physically deprived.
That makes a rather major difference, wouldn't you agree?

Since downloading hurts no one (in the specific example we are discussing) they cannot be compared.

That's a fallacy.

Whether or not there's intent to harm (in this example) is not the issue. It's copying copyrighted material for what could ostensibly be testing compatibility, but could just as easily be intent to distribute or sell. In these sorts of matters (and judging from what I've seen before in other publicized piracy cases), "hurting no one" is not an excuse. You took that property, and you didn't pay for it. Saying, "oh, but I'll pay after the fact" could mean anything.

 

[fenrizz]

Again, would it be ok with you if I shoot you just to see if you survive, or if one of my guns could shoot that far and still do damage, or whatever reason I make up to say that me shooting you is perfectly ok and legal?

Of course not.
Going around and shooting people is never ok, as they (as you may know) become hurt and may possibly get killed in the process.

Now, can we stick to the matter at hand and not drag gun violence into this?

First off, thank you for proving my point about how people on the internet can't comprehend what an example is and have to take it to an extremely literal sense.

No, no, I do understand what an example is.
Problem is, you example does not fit.
I pointed this out to you in the very same post you are quoting from, but you seem to have conveniently snipped that part out.

And yeah, I'm sure I could win any argument I get into by discrediting or strawmaning any example anyone else brings up with whatever comes to mind right away.

Did I try to discredit you?
Don't think so, I merely pointed out that our example does not fit the scenario at hand.

Point is, since you people still can't seem to figure it out, if something is wrong it is wrong.

No, it is not.
If you believe that the law is the law no matter what, then sure, breaking any law is as wrong as breaking any other.

I however do no believe that.
I believe some laws are more important than others, while some serve no real purpose in our society.
Right or wrong is not black and white.

Pirating is wrong, no matter what bullshit you make up to say is "right".

What I'm trying to argue is that what the OP is asking is not really piracy (i.e. getting shit for free).

Just like shooting someone, it is never right. But if you have to continue to make up whatever it is to make yourself feel better about doing things that are wrong, go for it.

There you go again with the accusations.
And you are accusing me of trying to discredit you?

 

[Inconspicuous Trenchcoat]

Instead of a serious answer, I'll contribute something useless:
If I ruled the world, here are my arbitrary rules for people in the OP's friend's situation:

-If there is no other convenient solution to demoing the game on your system, such as using a friend's Steam account etc., then you may download a copy.
-Download traditionally if possible (i.e. not a torrent), so you are not seeding to other pirates. If you must use a torrent, turn off seeding. Yes, you'll be a dirty leecher, but who cares what pirates think? Which you totally are not .
-Play the game for no longer than 60 seconds. Cast spells, run around, fire guns, throw grenades; do the most graphically intensive things you can in the beginning of the game.
-If the game begins with a cutscene or in game story, skip through to actual gameplay. If it is unskippable, leave the room for several minutes.
-Do not play for more than 60 seconds. After testing, Alt-F4 out and delete the game.
-Make your purchasing decision.
-If you followed the rules you are not a bad person; If you played even a second longer than 60 seconds or watched the opening story sequences, you are foul pirate scum.
-Pirates report to the Scary Shack for punishment; everyone else disregard this rule.

It'd be nice if Steam did the hour long demo thing like Playstation Plus or OnLive do.

 

[370999]

If this is just for the purpose of testing if it runs on your computer then I don't have a major problem with it. I think it would be very difficult to avoid the tempetation of not buying the game after having it on your computer but if your friend is dead set certain then okay.

 

[unstabLized]

I was trying to convince a friend to purchase Payday: The Heist through steam so that we can play co-op together. However, she has a pretty weak laptop (2 years or so old). She can run some older games, along some F2P games like NFS: World on Medium, or sometimes high, so I did a bit of research to see if she can at least run Payday on minimum settings. After a bit of researching, it seemed like too close of a call, so I suggested that maybe she can, for this once, pirate the game, just so that she can actually test if the game can run with a decent FPS on her computer. She would simply install the game, jump in a game, move around a bit If it was playable, and then uninstall and delete the crack. Then she would immediately buy the game. And from there on, we got into arguments about piracy, if it's okay or not, blah blah blah.

So I ask you this escapists, is pirating okay if you're planning to test a game and then later on, buy it? Is pirating ever okay, under any condition?

Why not just log into your steam account on her laptop, install the game and test it.
No?

Did that later on, but wanted to post this for the sake of argument.

Instead of a serious answer, I'll contribute something useless:
If I ruled the world, here are my arbitrary rules for people in the OP's friend's situation:

-If there is no other convenient solution to demoing the game on your system, such as using a friend's Steam account etc., then you may download a copy.
-Download traditionally if possible (i.e. not a torrent), so you are not seeding to other pirates. If you must use a torrent, turn off seeding. Yes, you'll be a dirty leecher, but who cares what pirates think? Which you totally are not .
-Play the game for no longer than 60 seconds. Cast spells, run around, fire guns, throw grenades; do the most graphically intensive things you can in the beginning of the game.
-If the game begins with a cutscene or in game story, skip through to actual gameplay. If it is unskippable, leave the room for several minutes.
-Do not play for more than 60 seconds. After testing, Alt-F4 out and delete the game.
-Make your purchasing decision.
-If you followed the rules you are not a bad person; If you played even a second longer than 60 seconds or watched the opening story sequences, you are foul pirate scum.
-Pirates report to the Scary Shack for punishment; everyone else disregard this rule.

It'd be nice if Steam did the hour long demo thing like Playstation Plus or OnLive do.

I do like your rules. Wish something like that sort of existed, actually. We actually ended up doing exactly what you posted above, except my friend used my steam account. Literally jumped in the game, opened up a single player game, walked around, shot the guns, messed with graphics,etc. for about a minute, then found out that she can run the game perfectly fine. Then she logged off my account (I told her to keep the game in her library in case she buys it), and today, she bought the game + DLC.

So yes, I do see how people can take advantage of the whole "test" thing, but from a moral view, I guess you're "cleaner" if you actually do only test the game, and not go in 2 hours and then say "Nope. It has a tiny bit of lag.."

 

[karloss01]

if you've bought it, you could log into steam on her laptop and download it to see if it works.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

So, if I go to Best Buy and steal a graphics card just to test to see if it will work in my computer, then if it will, I go buy it, that isn't stealing?

You need better examples.

Really? comparing piracy to MURDER? And just an FYI, if you buy a graphics card from bestbuy and it doesnt work with your system you are able to return it, the not is true of games.

Again, you people are missing the point (I swear there is not a single person on the internet that comprehends what the concept of an example is, they all have to take it extremely literally). Let me spell it out for you so it may be easier for you to understand...

Piracy is an ACTION. It is wrong because you are taking (or copying since I know some people will go "it's not stealing it is making a copy") something that doesn't belong to you without permission. It ends there.

Pirating a game to "test it" is JUSTIFICATION for an action. It is the reason why you are trying to say that something wrong is not wrong.

As for the murder thing? But I'm not murdering him, I just want to see if my gun will shoot that and still be effective. I have no intent to actually murder him, or even shoot him, I just want to see what a 7.62x39 round will do at 50 feet, but to do so, I'd HAVE to shoot him. Without shooting him, how will I ever know if it would be effective or not? Obviously, the ACTION of shooting him is wrong regardless of why, so no reason I have for doing so could JUSTIFY said action. Get it now?

With Best Buy, again, you missed the point. I'm not talking about returns or anything. It is the concept of taking something just to see if it will work. I could, like any person should unless they know better, look at what I need to run said graphics card, look at what I have, and see if it will run, just like you can do with games. It is never right to steal, even if I plan on paying for it if it does work.

I think it might actually be you that is failing to understand what is going on.

If you're going to pick shitty, completely irrelevent and out-of-scale examples... you should expect to be ignored. One thing isn't like another just because you say it is. I, for one, scoff at what you're suggesting.

You brought up violence, which is interesting. As a species we've had a long-long time to decide when it is and when it isn't acceptable to be violent, or when killing is and isn't acceptable... and we still don't agree on this shit! How can anyone be surprised that there isn't uniformity of moral opinion on something as inane and contrived as copyright infringement?

 

[BarbaricGoose]

snip

I did state why I think it's wrong, it was the very first thing you quoted.

Piracy, I believe, is wrong no matter your justification. It's real easy to say that you're going to purchase this once you've tried it out. It's a lot harder to in real life. Someone earlier said I was calling people stupid because they can't handle the temptation; that's not stupidity, that's human nature and I'll bet on that eventually taking over. You have a copy of the game now; it's a lot easier for you to decide to skip payment once you've gotten what you wanted out of the deal.

How long do you play the pirated version until you're done with your self-created demo? You stated that you could play a game for more than three hours before you figure out if it's worth the money. Is three hours long enough? Maybe you're not 100% sure if you like it, so maybe you'll try it for five hours. Eh....still on the fence? Maybe you'll try it for eight hours. Oh...well, I beat the game. That wasn't worth the money so I won't buy it now.

Everyone says "Oh, that's not going to be ME. I have WAY more self-control than everyone else". Maybe you're right and you have the virtue of Jesus Christ but I'm going to bet on human nature over someone's word.

And yes, paying $60 for a game that might not work does suck but again, that's a risk you take with PC gaming (and a large reason why I'm personally a console gamer). If you are unwilling to accept the risk, allow the price to drop or research the game against your equipment before dropping that money.

So you believe piracy is bad because people are bad? Couldn't that be said about anything, though? I'm not saying piracy is right, but again, in this case I think it's perfectly justified.

And I never said, "you could play a game for more than three hours before you figure out if it's worth the money." I did say that Civ5 doesn't demo well, which it doesn't. Maybe Civ5 IS an exception, but that's only Civ5. I think with most games it really depends on how long the "Story" is. If it's just your average 12-20 hour affair, 2 hours is plenty. If it's a JRPG with a 20 hour long tutorial, or something... eugh. Who knows. If demos were just longer, people wouldn't need piracy for this reason. Like I said, you'd be hard pressed not to enjoy the demo of a game; pretty much every game is going to be fun for 30 minutes.

And I can see your point with human nature, but I disagree. I think as long as you're not an asshole you'll be fine. But maybe assholes aren't aware that they're assholes. Anyway, I find that around post #3 is when internet arguments tend to deteriorate into name-calling, so I'll let you have the last word (if you want), and we'll agree to disagree.

Ciao.

 

[TheTurtleMan]

Morally, I think you'll find it just as easy to sleep at night. In the eyes of the law? Still a pretty grey area.

I will say that people trying to morally justify pirating for this reasoning don't usually stick to this principle of buying the game later. As always with the subject of pirating games, I will always believe there is something incorrect with stealing (yes it is stealing) something that is a luxury to begin with. However the fact that people pirate doesn't annoy me, it's just annoying when people try to defend it from a moral perspective.

Just pirate your copy of Call of Battle Toads and keep your head low when you play it.

Edit: Forgot about the fact that almost every major release has free playable demos. Anything that doesn't probably doesn't have the funds to. Even more holes to this piracy, morality loophole.

 

[MasterBrief]

I went with depends and for me I have done this a couple times played it liked it bought it almost immediately. I did it with Arx Fatalis, Vampire Masquerade Bloodlines and a couple others way back. I don't condone pirating games I've played a couple and didn't like them and deleted them. Thing is I know some people will say yes just to test it and then will not buy a copy. What could solve having to do this is way more games getting demos. I've noticed on PS3 that there is barely any demos coming out for games. I think games should get a demo either before or within a week after release. I think that would fix the problem for people who legit download just to try.

 

[RaNDM G]

I swear if I had a dollar for every time that someone can't understand what an example is, or complete miss the entire point of it, I'd be rich. Anyway, that doesn't help. For this issue at hand, just find a game that has the same requirements that you don't have to pirate (so, like a dummy) and see if it runs.

I got your message. I just wanted to point out why someone would even bother shooting a man when they can get better results with a better alternative. You would have been better off bringing it down to a similar crime with controlled variables.

A better example would be going to the store and trying Monster. There aren't any taste testers around, so you decide to take a can off the shelf and crack it open. Regardless of how it tastes, as long as you pay for it you've done no harm. If you're not paying for it, you just committed petty theft. But if an employee catches you in the act, you're paying no matter what. Naturally there's a degree of risk involved since you are still drinking store property, even if you intended to buy it.

What are the other alternatives? Buy it first or don't even bother.

It's the same basic principle. If you doubt your system can run a game, don't even bother.