Poll: What's wrong with piracy

[Devin Griffin]

I just wanted to say I am impressed at the level of common-sense and maturity that is shown here on the Escapist - compare to other sites like Youtube... or Gametrailers.

Pirating is stealing.

Good-day.

 

[Xanthious]

My figure was actually based upon the week sales numbers in the US of when Skyrim came out, which (I thought) must have included Steam sales.

Here's the source:
http://www.vgchartz.com/charts/weekly.php?reg=USA&date=40860

Really, why wouldn't someone release these numbers with the Steam sales? That makes everything completely inaccurate and misleading.

Yeah Steam is pretty tight lipped about their sales information for some reason. Because of that and the fact that digital PC sales have bypassed boxed PC sales it's almost impossible to gauge how well any particular PC title is or isn't selling unless the actual developer releases numbers and even then you can't help but wonder if they may be spinning those numbers for some reason or another.

If I had to estimate though I'd wager Skyrim is well over a million total PC sales by this point and could well be pushing 1.5 million or more if you assume it's selling just as well (if not better) digitally as it is in retail which isn't hard to believe. If you look to The Witcher 2 as an example which has 660k retail sales when you look on vgchartz but according to the developer has sold 1.5 million total copies.

 

[Alexander Bradley]

You know, if the gaming industry goes down from piracy, then they've obviously goofed pretty bad with their salesmanship. Anyone is going to steal anything if they want it bad enough, but if more people are stealing an item than there are people buying it, that usually means that the industry isn't marketing their products well enough.

If best-selling games like Skyrim, Portal 2, Deus Ex: Human Revolutions, or other games sold for $30 or less, instead of $60, I'd guarantee that there would be a lot more consumers and a lot less pirates out there. The amount of money earned from sales and investment returns would be more than enough to earn a fairly hefty profit for the producers and developers of the game.

But since gaming companies insist on making these games unreasonably high-priced, people are going to want it either a) pre-owned or used for a better price or b)they're just going to pirate the game to see if it was even worth its pricing. Which, in my opinion, is rarely ever the case considering I could fill up my car completely and be set for about 2-3 weeks off of the money I could risk on buying a game that may not even be worth the hype.

It would also help if the gaming industry was willing to take more risks and actually listen to their targeted marketing denominations instead of playing things safe and going off of what's been easier to do in the past. I'm more than certain that plenty of wonderful game designs and ideas have been shot down by major gaming companies because it wasn't something they were 'comfortable with investing in'.

 

[Death God]

Because industries loose money and if online piracy is accepted the people will begin to wonder what else can be pirated.

 

[Peteron]

Piracy is stealing, stealing is bad. Not that hard to figure out.

 

[Knight537]

I disagree with piracy because video game companies lose money over their games so publishers are less willing to take chances that won't guarantee them money because they know some sales will be lost to piracy. And good people have to pay a lot of money to get a game nowadays and not having to pay for when others do is just wrong. That being said piracy should be allowed for old games that are no longer available on the market like "Doom" or other really old games.

 

[Magnicon]

Piracy is stealing, stealing is bad. Not that hard to figure out.

Piracy is sharing, sharing is good, sharing leads to awareness, awareness increases fan base if the product is good, fan base leads to sales. Only slightly harder to figure out.

 

[The Chaz]

There is another website I frequent. During a podcast they had this very same discussion. To paraphrase a paraphrased quote made by one of the members of the podcast; Piracy is like a hole in the fence of a popular amusement park. People can sneak in through that hole and ride free rides all day. However, this is terribly unfair to anyone not utilizing that hole in the fence. The park is kept running by the people buying tickets. The more people using that gap in the fence, the higher ticket prices are raised, and now these people who were doing the right thing all along are being punished for the disobedience of others.

Yes, games like MW3 and Skyrim are still making millions, but because there are contributing citizens paying for them. Those who pirate are stealing, not only from the industry, but from those citizens; their fellow gamers.

So, in short, it is unfair and insensitive. That is why it's wrong.

 

[CodeOrange]

Yes and no.

Yes because of all of the aforementioned reasons and that it's technically STEALING.

No because in some cases, games are rare to find and/or are much easier to just be downloaded, legally or illegally. Same thing with music and movies. Don't forget that in some cases, the pirated copy is superior to the purchased ie Spore. There's also the usual argument where a game isn't worth purchasing, and that it's usually the best way to see if a game is worth buying.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

Because there's a fundamental difference between me stealing your car, and me copying your DVD while leaving it completely whole. The car was stolen, I infringed on your right to private property. The DVD was copied, your copy of the DVD doesn't magically disappear because I copied it.

By copying the DVD, you infringed on the owner's right to intellectual property. You are still taking something you aren't entitled to.

It might be useful to look at the original crime of larceny, which was later replaced by theft:

"Larceny: The unlawful taking and removing of another's personal property with the intent of permanently depriving the owner. The wrongful acquisition of the personal property of another person."

What, in your example, are you taking and removing with the intent of permanently depriving?

The compensation which that person was entitled to when they produced that particular intellectual property? There is no taking, I suppose, but there is still deprivation.

Compensation refers to giving someone back something they've lost. Until you can point to what exactly has been lost here, there's no sense in bringing up compensation.

Compensation:

"Something, such as money, given or received as payment or reparation, as for a service or loss."

That's the second definition taken from thefreedictionary.com

Note the word service. Compensation also refers to payment in exchange for a service, i.e. providing someone hours of entertainment via a video game.

Games aren't a service. They're a good. I can't be providing a service if I'm sitting on my backside doing nothing with no loss incurred. For example if I lent you the use of my garage for a day that would be a 'service' because I could otherwise be using it to sell lemonade from.

http://www.differencebetween.net/business/difference-between-goods-and-services/

 

[Magnicon]

There is another website I frequent. During a podcast they had this very same discussion. To paraphrase a paraphrased quote made by one of the members of the podcast; Piracy is like a hole in the fence of a popular amusement park. People can sneak in through that hole and ride free rides all day. However, this is terribly unfair to anyone not utilizing that hole in the fence. The park is kept running by the people buying tickets. The more people using that gap in the fence, the higher ticket prices are raised, and now these people who were doing the right thing all along are being punished for the disobedience of others.

Yes, games like MW3 and Skyrim are still making millions, but because there are contributing citizens paying for them. Those who pirate are stealing, not only from the industry, but from those citizens; their fellow gamers.

So, in short, it is unfair and insensitive. That is why it's wrong.

Yeah. Thats not how it works at all. The most successful games are the ones that tend to be the most expensive.

The overall cost of games has gone up because EVERYTHING has gone up in every single market. That is how the market system works.

 

[ThePuzzldPirate]

Since this is the fourth time I have been in a argument about piracy in two weeks, one time with a teacher, I just going to say this.

Piracy is not a black and white issues as people try to make it. It is a very grey subject because simply put, it is hard to nail facts for both sides.

Publishers don't seem to realize that one pirate copy does not equal in a lost sale. all it takes is for the pirate to buy the game to even it out. The problem with this also is a lot of Countries HAVE to pirate because it is sometimes the only way to get a hold of these games. Publisher have full rights to protect there IP's and I encourage it but DRM right now is not the answer. You are wasting time putting it in and your treat every customer like a thief when you do. DRM is built by man and it only takes one to destroy it.

On the other side, Pirates need to stop justifying themselves and acting like they are fighting the good fight. You are not fooling anyone, your a thief, own up. Yes I'm well aware that nothing is going missing but that isn't what your stealing. Video Games are an art of refining a experience that you interact with. The developers than sell this experience in hopes that they will make money on it. If you are experiencing it without paying for it, YOU ARE STEALING! end of discussion.

Just an opinion from gamer who has played like a thief.

 

[Peteron]

Piracy is stealing, stealing is bad. Not that hard to figure out.

Piracy is sharing, sharing is good, sharing leads to awareness, awareness increases fan base if the product is good, fan base leads to sales. Only slightly harder to figure out.

No. "Sharing" would be OK if it was at the company's consent, but its not. Thus, its stealing. You are not bothering to pay for the hard work a group put into making a game, so you resort to breaking the law. Sharing would be buying the game, and letting your friend borrow/play it. This allows you to give the company the credit it deserves. You have some flawed logic.

 

[b3nn3tt]

'People spent time and money creating something, and would like compensation from those who want to enjoy the finished product. But actually I think I'll just acquire it for free.'

Yes, piracy is morally wrong. A lot goes into making a game, what gives anyone the right to then play it for free?

As a side note; to those who say that piracy is more forgivable when the game has sold well, where is the cut-off point where piracy is acceptable? What if it sells a million units? What about 900,000? What about 100,000? Either piracy is acceptable no matter the number of sales, or it isn't acceptable at all. I say it's the latter.

EDIT: In my opinion, the only time it is acceptable to pirate is when you already own the game (but not if you've lost or damaged the disc) or if there is literally no legal way to obtain it in your country. Even in these cases, it remains a grey area.

 

[Magnicon]

Piracy is stealing, stealing is bad. Not that hard to figure out.

Piracy is sharing, sharing is good, sharing leads to awareness, awareness increases fan base if the product is good, fan base leads to sales. Only slightly harder to figure out.

No. "Sharing" would be OK if it was at the company's consent, but its not. Thus, its stealing. You are not bothering to pay for the hard work a group put into making a game, so you resort to breaking the law. Sharing would be buying the game, and letting your friend borrow/play it. This allows you to give the company the credit it deserves. You have some flawed logic.

Are you for real?

You're saying that if I buy a game, and let my friend borrow it, that that would be ok and support the company. That is 100% exactly what piracy is. Someone buys the game, then lets others play it. You made a self defeating point.

BTW: The gaming industry is AGAINST people letting friends share/borrow their games.

Flawed logic indeed.

 

[Ympulse]

Oh btw, if you just make every game need some system like Steam to be able to boot it, then piracy would not exist

Quoting for most unintentionally hilarious post of this thread.

 

[Romblen]

Yes, piracy is wrong. Game companies spend a lot of money making their games. Even if piracy only represents a lost sale, the missing revenue can keep them from making a profit.

I always love the arguments about sharing it with one friend is looked down upon. We all know that sharing it with one or two friends is not the issue, the issue is sharing it with thousands, if not millions of people.

To me, piracy is only acceptable if you already previously bought the game. What matters is that the developer received their payment for their product.

 

[DracoSuave]

Games aren't a service. They're a good. I can't be providing a service if I'm sitting on my backside doing nothing with no loss incurred. For example if I lent you the use of my garage for a day that would be a 'service' because I could otherwise be using it to sell lemonade from.

http://www.differencebetween.net/business/difference-between-goods-and-services/

Then by using a good without permission, you are depriving them of the rights to their goods.

You can't have it both ways; if it's a good, then you're using someone's property without permission, and if it's a service, you're using a service without compensation.

Fact is, I get people being upset about the erosion of property rights for consumers. Hell ya. Totally get that.

Which is why piracy is hypocritical. If you gave a shit about property rights, you'd respect them. Pirates don't. Bottom line.

 

[Peteron]

Piracy is stealing, stealing is bad. Not that hard to figure out.

Piracy is sharing, sharing is good, sharing leads to awareness, awareness increases fan base if the product is good, fan base leads to sales. Only slightly harder to figure out.

No. "Sharing" would be OK if it was at the company's consent, but its not. Thus, its stealing. You are not bothering to pay for the hard work a group put into making a game, so you resort to breaking the law. Sharing would be buying the game, and letting your friend borrow/play it. This allows you to give the company the credit it deserves. You have some flawed logic.

Are you for real?

You're saying that if I buy a game, and let my friend borrow it, that that would be ok and support the company. That is 100% exactly what piracy is. Someone buys the game, then lets others play it. You made a self defeating point.

BTW: The gaming industry is AGAINST people letting friends share/borrow their games.

Flawed logic indeed.

Nope. Borrowing and stealing are two different things, champ. Many people like to look and see whether the game is worth the money or not. So, you may find this flawed, and that's cool and all, but your wrong. What it gets down to, is that one is illegal, and ones not. Don't like it, deal with it. And no, borrowing doesn't follow the definition of piracy.

 

[Lhynn]

Assuming that every pirated game would have been a sale is a fucked up kind of logic.

Most people pirate because they cant afford or are not all that interested in the game. Game devs are fucked up in the sense that they are trying to stop piracy, when they should offer advantajes to those that dont pirate the game.

That way, people with the money can enjoy a good game and a good service. instead we get DRM and stupid protections that shorten our play time. When i buy a game i usually inmediatly crack it, because its faster, and i know the game cant fuck up my comp in any way, no origin or things like that.