Good post and this is something people don't seem to get. When I started gaming, it was unthinkable for a game NOT to have a demo. Nowadays it seems to be the exception. Hell, I couldn't wait to get hold of a computer magazine when I was a kid just because they had lots of demos(this was way before I had any serviceable internet connection) on the cd that the magazine came out with. It not only gave you a taste of the game to come but you could see if it ran on your machine as well. The consumer wasn't as shafted back then and the smart companies would put out enticing demos that left you wanting more.DanDanikov said:
Poll: Does pirating a game to test it make it okay?
- Thread starter unstabLized
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I made the mistake to buy a game that should have run on my machine by the stats on the box and then it just didnt at all, THREE times last year. I wont buy any game without testing it EVER. If they lie about the requirements i dont care if its right or wrong. I will test it on my machine, by rental, borrowing from friends, or just downloading it.
Look,I've always believed that if you're going to pirate a game, just be honest with yourself about it. You want to pirate the game because you want to play something and you don't want to pay for it. Don't try to make it seem like it's an honest "robin-hoodesque" thing and that you should have the right to.
I think you've missed the entire point of the thread. I don't think anyone is seriously debating that it's illegal, because it rather blatantly is in the eyes of the law. The question IS whether it's right or wrong, it's neither irrelevant or meaningless, it's the entire discussion.Bhaalspawn said:
And I would argue that the system requirements on the back of the box don't tell the whole story, it's a decent general indicator but when it comes to certain games, the only way to truly know is to play, and lacking demos I can completely understand why some choose to use piracy as a demo, most aren't willing to take a $60 gamble like that and I can't blame them.
Illegal, yes. Morally reprehensible, no. I don't see why the consumer's the one who should be forced to bite the bullet on this one.
This is why I think demos should be outright required on the PC, I'm presently in the process of downloading the XCOM:EU demo to see if it runs on my rig. This WILL be the deciding factor in whether or not I purchase the game, if this game lacked said demo no purchase would have been considered at all.
I'm just glad I live in the UK, meaning I can get a refund pretty fast should something not work because delicious UK law. Seriously, if you live in the EU, this is a non-issue. Not wishing to bring politics into this but I'm genuinely surprised that certain countries don't actually have any such law that allows to return faulty stuff.
It's okay as long as game developers keep trying to milk you for more money via DLC, exclusive content, and rushed gameplay. It's better to pirate and test than to buy and regret. There are developers I don't ever bother pirating from: Bethesda, Paradox Interactive, Valve, and The Creative Assembly, because so far they've been nothing but consistent and faithful to their users.
Bioware, Ubisoft and Blizzard recently fell off that list for some of their recent releases and antics. Why pay them $60 (which is quite a lot of fucking money, mind you) for a game that has a good chance to be unsatisfying, include exclusive content, feel rushed, and have obnoxious DRM? It's better to find out if their games are actually worth it first before giving them your hard-earned money. As I see it, it isn't the studio losing out, it's me being safe. They're going to sell millions of copies anyway, but I only have a limited budget to spend on games, which are my favorite hobby. Why let cynical business practices ruin that for me?
Bioware, Ubisoft and Blizzard recently fell off that list for some of their recent releases and antics. Why pay them $60 (which is quite a lot of fucking money, mind you) for a game that has a good chance to be unsatisfying, include exclusive content, feel rushed, and have obnoxious DRM? It's better to find out if their games are actually worth it first before giving them your hard-earned money. As I see it, it isn't the studio losing out, it's me being safe. They're going to sell millions of copies anyway, but I only have a limited budget to spend on games, which are my favorite hobby. Why let cynical business practices ruin that for me?
I think a better analogy would be a clothing store with no changing rooms. It's stupid for them not to have changing rooms but does that make it morally upright to break in in the middle of the night and try on their clothes?fenrizz said:
I'd say, no, it really doesn't; even if you pick the locks, don't cause any damage and put everything back where it was the action still isn't ethical, it's just kinder than breaking all the windows and stealing everything you can get your hands on.
O.T.
All of these threads about piracy are trying to veil an unethical action in a cloak of justice. For some reason everybody pirating software wants piracy to be considered just. It's not. It's very much like the Kantian theoretical situation of a starving man stealing a loaf of bread, except you aren't starving.
Of the pirates I've known, none of them have been so naive that they think they are righteous when they pirate something. Anybody that tells you piracy is ethical under "specific situations" is lying. It's never ethical, why should it matter to you that it's ethical or not? You'll pirate it either way, you just want to feel as if you hold the moral highground before doing it.
I'm not for or against piracy, I'm against mental self-indulgence which is what this is. You're just revving up your engine before you go off the ramp and break through several federal laws and the probably the intentions of the media's creator. If you're going to do that, do it, more power to you, welcome to the club, but never dilute yourself into thinking while your doing it that you're a white knight vanquishing a dragon.
The only time I feel pirating would be "okay" would be either when the game is unobtainable, such as so many emulator games, or when they are not released in your country. If there's no demo, then watch some videos. If you don't wanna do that, rent the game for an evening.
If pirating were just used as a means to test out a game, it would be okay, but sadly, and not pointing fingers at anyone here, there are many who don't feel that way. Just because some people will be just about it doesn't mean they all will. You're still doing something illegal, whether it's for slightly less selfish reasons isn't the point.
If pirating were just used as a means to test out a game, it would be okay, but sadly, and not pointing fingers at anyone here, there are many who don't feel that way. Just because some people will be just about it doesn't mean they all will. You're still doing something illegal, whether it's for slightly less selfish reasons isn't the point.
Wow, I flicked through these pages cause there's alot of people with excuses for why piracy is ok.
To the rocket scientists who say a demo would make everything better, you've obviously never had a demo run fine and then had the full version glitch, or vice versa. That being said if you were supposed to have a demo to test the game out then one would have been made, the publisher didn't make one, then make your own mind up based on what has been released
To the crowd that says you want more info about how well it will run on your very specific computer config. Suck it up. The publisher is giving you as much information as they'll give you, wait until after release day, read reviews or just buy it and test for yourself.
To the guy that said its ok to pirate it if you're boycotting the company and don't want to give them your sale... you're a thief and a hypocrit.
Then there is my favourite group of people... the ones who want to pirate it to make sure they'll like it. Thats literally got to be the most pathetic attempt at justifing piracy ever. Read a review, oh you think they've all been bought and paid for... watch a full playthrough on youtube... thats not fun and boring watching someone else play the game... Buy your own damn copy and play it.
When all is said and done the publisher owns the rights to all those bits of code we love to play with so much, you can't take their toys, digital or otherwise, without their permission and being anything other then a thief. You might say you're just "borrowing" the game, but legally you're not. Piracy is piracy, do or it don't but don't pretend that your being all virtous and right about it.
To the rocket scientists who say a demo would make everything better, you've obviously never had a demo run fine and then had the full version glitch, or vice versa. That being said if you were supposed to have a demo to test the game out then one would have been made, the publisher didn't make one, then make your own mind up based on what has been released
To the crowd that says you want more info about how well it will run on your very specific computer config. Suck it up. The publisher is giving you as much information as they'll give you, wait until after release day, read reviews or just buy it and test for yourself.
To the guy that said its ok to pirate it if you're boycotting the company and don't want to give them your sale... you're a thief and a hypocrit.
Then there is my favourite group of people... the ones who want to pirate it to make sure they'll like it. Thats literally got to be the most pathetic attempt at justifing piracy ever. Read a review, oh you think they've all been bought and paid for... watch a full playthrough on youtube... thats not fun and boring watching someone else play the game... Buy your own damn copy and play it.
When all is said and done the publisher owns the rights to all those bits of code we love to play with so much, you can't take their toys, digital or otherwise, without their permission and being anything other then a thief. You might say you're just "borrowing" the game, but legally you're not. Piracy is piracy, do or it don't but don't pretend that your being all virtous and right about it.
A friend of mine once came up with the phrase:
"The fact that you're trying to justify it means it's wrong."
That being said, depending on how you pirate it/how many updates you keep/what your testing motif is, determines how badly the piracy is. Whilst it does make some sort of sense in a few situations, wholeheartedly I'd go with a no.
But really. You're the one trying to do good, whereas millions of people pirate games every day...
"The fact that you're trying to justify it means it's wrong."
That being said, depending on how you pirate it/how many updates you keep/what your testing motif is, determines how badly the piracy is. Whilst it does make some sort of sense in a few situations, wholeheartedly I'd go with a no.
But really. You're the one trying to do good, whereas millions of people pirate games every day...
If I try it and it doesn't run on my computer, I'm not buying it.
If you take away that option, I buy the game, and it doesn't run on my computer...well, fuck you, I will never buy another one of your games and I'll tell my friends, too.
Stop treating your potential customers like assholes and sheep, put out a decent product, stop wasting $70 million on the advertising to keep budgets to non-insane levels...it's not that hard, but the big publishers are morons that are run by executives that have probably never played a video game in their lives.
If you take away that option, I buy the game, and it doesn't run on my computer...well, fuck you, I will never buy another one of your games and I'll tell my friends, too.
Stop treating your potential customers like assholes and sheep, put out a decent product, stop wasting $70 million on the advertising to keep budgets to non-insane levels...it's not that hard, but the big publishers are morons that are run by executives that have probably never played a video game in their lives.
No. No its not ok. Just have your friend use that Can i run it site. Theres probaly other sites that can test that stuff to. Though yea i agree that we need more demos of stuff. Pisses me off when my 360 gets a demo but my ps3 doesnt get one of a multiplatform game. I like to test the controls and see which system runs it better before i decide which to buy it for. Though there are some series i only get on certain systems no matter what.
I find it funny that the person who is telling people to check minimum system requirements is the same person who is basically the self proclaimed technically inept when it comes to the computers. You know who you are Mr. "I wouldn't know the first thing about building a PC despite never trying". Now "Can I run it" site should only be used as a yard stick comparison for PC games. In no way should anyone take it's results at 100% face value.
Now I don't agree with using piracy as an excuse to test a game, but people need to learn that some times meeting, or in some cases, exceeding the minimum requirements for a PC game means shit all. Sometimes there are problems with the game, not the system it's running on. Whether it be on the developers side in the form of poor optimization or something else. You can have the ideal "minimum" requirements to run a game but still not have it run due to unforeseeable issues.
Remember the RAGE debacle where the driver manufacturers failed to supply the required drivers for the game to work properly? Many people, including myself, far exceeded the minimum requirements for that game and still couldn't play it properly if at all.
I don't blame people for wanting to test a game out first, especially considering how absolutely crap some ports can be.
Now I don't agree with using piracy as an excuse to test a game, but people need to learn that some times meeting, or in some cases, exceeding the minimum requirements for a PC game means shit all. Sometimes there are problems with the game, not the system it's running on. Whether it be on the developers side in the form of poor optimization or something else. You can have the ideal "minimum" requirements to run a game but still not have it run due to unforeseeable issues.
Remember the RAGE debacle where the driver manufacturers failed to supply the required drivers for the game to work properly? Many people, including myself, far exceeded the minimum requirements for that game and still couldn't play it properly if at all.
I don't blame people for wanting to test a game out first, especially considering how absolutely crap some ports can be.
So I'm completely blown away by how even the sides are on this topic, I came in here thinking "It is obviously okay, why would anyone say it isn't?". Still not entirely convinced why anyone would say it isn't.
Outcomes of shooting someone to see if they live:
1. They die
2. They live but are in excruciating pain
Both outcomes are pretty damn bad, which is why no one in their right mind would do it. On the other hand, possible outcomes of pirating a game to test it:
1. It works
2. It doesn't work
Neither or which I would say are negative consequences for anyone.
As for the slippery slope argument (you didn't say it, but some other people in this thread did), why don't you just say it's wrong to keep playing the game after you find out it works? You could just as easily say it's wrong to use the internet because it's a slippery slope that could lead to piracy. Judge the thing that's harmful, not the thing that could potentially lead you to doing something harmful. If you inadvertently play through half of the game and decide you don't like it in the process of testing it then yeah, that's wrong.
For the record I'm adamantly against piracy. That is the "I'm too good to pay for things" piracy, not the "I don't want to waste my money on a game that I can't play" piracy
Big difference there and I don't see why I'm bothering to explain it.Assassin Xaero said:
Outcomes of shooting someone to see if they live:
1. They die
2. They live but are in excruciating pain
Both outcomes are pretty damn bad, which is why no one in their right mind would do it. On the other hand, possible outcomes of pirating a game to test it:
1. It works
2. It doesn't work
Neither or which I would say are negative consequences for anyone.
As for the slippery slope argument (you didn't say it, but some other people in this thread did), why don't you just say it's wrong to keep playing the game after you find out it works? You could just as easily say it's wrong to use the internet because it's a slippery slope that could lead to piracy. Judge the thing that's harmful, not the thing that could potentially lead you to doing something harmful. If you inadvertently play through half of the game and decide you don't like it in the process of testing it then yeah, that's wrong.
For the record I'm adamantly against piracy. That is the "I'm too good to pay for things" piracy, not the "I don't want to waste my money on a game that I can't play" piracy
I'm late to the party, but whatever. What worries me is that "no" is losing to the other two answers, which is quite troubling, seeing as "no" is the only answer to this question.
I'd post the extra credits piracy video, but I'm betting that it has already been posted.
If it is against the law, then the answer is always, "No it is not okay".
This is a small subject, but the outcome does tell me that proper society really is going down the drain, at least when it comes to the rights of the company over the consumer.
People have no right to play a game that they didn't pay for, doesn't matter if, "boo-hoo, I had to do the illegal thing because they didn't release a demo." That excuse is a load of crap and the people doing it, know it is.
I'd post the extra credits piracy video, but I'm betting that it has already been posted.
If it is against the law, then the answer is always, "No it is not okay".
This is a small subject, but the outcome does tell me that proper society really is going down the drain, at least when it comes to the rights of the company over the consumer.
People have no right to play a game that they didn't pay for, doesn't matter if, "boo-hoo, I had to do the illegal thing because they didn't release a demo." That excuse is a load of crap and the people doing it, know it is.
It is playing without paying, so it is illegal. Demoing a game is not a right. If the game doesn't have a demo, you wait and make your decision, to buy the game, on reviews and other player testimonies.The Almighty Aardvark said:
If I ran a gaming company, it wouldn't matter your excuse, if you don't pay and are playing, I would bring the full force of the law down upon you.
It's not your right to know if you're throwing away $60? Let's for a second not think about what's legal or not. Let's say that you illegally download a game that you want to buy to see if it works on your computer. Case 1, you turn it on, walk around for a minute and say "Hooray, it does work!", and then go to Steam and buy it. Case 2, you turn it on and are met with a black screen so you don't buy it. Does anything bad happen? Let's say EVERYONE in the world who was skeptical about whether they'd meet the requirements did that. Would anything bad happen? At all? Worst case scenario would be that the game publishers now don't have the money of people who can't play their game.Sonic Doctor said:
I can see both sides. I'm sure it sucks to lose money to pirates who download your game and enjoy it, and replay it without you seeing a penny. But it also sucks to pay 50-60 bucks for a game that was shit, and you would have known it was shit if there were a demo for it.
Skyrim is good, and I do like the game quite a bit. But it doesn't need to be $60. $50 is good. Basically, it's level design and that's the end of it. Almost everything else is just adjusted by your level. There is ultimately little reason to explore side dungeons other than just to play a game. It's rare to see anything new or unique in the design of the dungeon, it's enemies, or even the items. Pick 50 random dungeons in the game and the differences, beyond layout, is minimal.
From what I've seen and heard of Dishonored, it's kinda nifty, but I'd peg it at $40. Not $60. Black and white "morality system" and nothing really new or innovative about the play style and very linear.
Some games just aren't worth what they ask for them and it really sucks when you don't feel like you got your money's worth. Even more so when you feel like it was wasted. A game without a demo is like making a movie and your trailer is simply the name and nothing of it's content. It seems most developers only release movies, or specially arranged screenshots that don't tell you crap about what it's actually like to play the game. If you don't release a demo and/or good detailed information about your game you're basically asking to get it pirated. People don't need specific reasons to do it in the first place, so giving them a good one is just dumb.
You shouldn't have to wait for the game to be released to get all the relevant and useful information from other players. Some times, it's downright criminal what some developers (probably mostly their publishers) do. Like what happened with Legends of Pegasus. Trying to sell a game as complete when it's really somewhere in the late alpha stage.
Skyrim is good, and I do like the game quite a bit. But it doesn't need to be $60. $50 is good. Basically, it's level design and that's the end of it. Almost everything else is just adjusted by your level. There is ultimately little reason to explore side dungeons other than just to play a game. It's rare to see anything new or unique in the design of the dungeon, it's enemies, or even the items. Pick 50 random dungeons in the game and the differences, beyond layout, is minimal.
From what I've seen and heard of Dishonored, it's kinda nifty, but I'd peg it at $40. Not $60. Black and white "morality system" and nothing really new or innovative about the play style and very linear.
Some games just aren't worth what they ask for them and it really sucks when you don't feel like you got your money's worth. Even more so when you feel like it was wasted. A game without a demo is like making a movie and your trailer is simply the name and nothing of it's content. It seems most developers only release movies, or specially arranged screenshots that don't tell you crap about what it's actually like to play the game. If you don't release a demo and/or good detailed information about your game you're basically asking to get it pirated. People don't need specific reasons to do it in the first place, so giving them a good one is just dumb.
You shouldn't have to wait for the game to be released to get all the relevant and useful information from other players. Some times, it's downright criminal what some developers (probably mostly their publishers) do. Like what happened with Legends of Pegasus. Trying to sell a game as complete when it's really somewhere in the late alpha stage.
pirating a game to test it is a very slippery slope. in fact its pretty much just a straight drop. once you have pirated a game it is incredibly easy to think of justification to keep playing the pirated copy and never pay for the game. im sorry but no, in my opinion the case you described is not justification for piracy. i know you want to play with your friend but if it seems like her computer cant handle the game, just forget about playing with her until she upgrades her machine
I wonder how many people voted in the polls without reading the OP. The OP is talking about testing in the sense of seeing if your computer can run it, not a demo.BoogieManFL said: