Popular Android Dev Blasts Pirates for Forcing Him Freemium

[veloper]

It's sad how many people will blast this guy because they want to justify their actions.

Piracy is never justifiable, if you wanna pirate something, fine do so, but don't think it somehow makes you better than someone who shoplifts.

People aren't blasting the guy because they defend pirates, rather mr. Rabas is derided because he might aswell blame the wind.
Pirates exists sure as gravity. Everything gets pirated. Pirates are not your audience. You simply ignore them and you certainly cannot stop them.

Plenty of good games do sell very well.
So if your game doesn't sell it means the legit guys aren't interested either and you should look more closely at your own product.

 

[Allthingsspectacular]

Oh god why did Critical Miss have to make that comic...

 

[SnowBurst]

dont charge rediculous amounts of money for a min of game and a life time of cut scenes *cough* fps's *cough* then people wont do it. it doesnt cost the world for a box and a disc or even just an online download and if u charged less then more would buy it...

 

[Signa]

If someone goes out of their way to pirate a game and play it, the only reasonable conclusion to draw is that they are interested in the game.

Interested, or dedicated to it? When you buy a game, you are dedicated to it. Yes, you can't argue that people aren't interested in a game when they pirate it, but you can't expect that interest to mean the game has value to that person. Say this guy could see exactly how many people played his game, and that's what he's basing his comments on. Does he have the facts about how long each player played? If they just booted it for a few minutes, he might get a unique ID on that person having played it, but I doubt he knows if that person liked it enough to care to play it more. It's THOSE people he should be concerned about, because they did pirate it, and they did like it enough to keep playing. To those, the game does have value, and it is criminal for them to keep playing without paying for it.

 

[Sylocat]

His mistake is trying to poke holes in the pirates' arguments. It's a waste of time, because pirates themselves don't believe their own arguments. The constant whining excuses that pirates make, their defensiveness, their copy-pasted monologues, aren't meant to convince us. They're trying to convince themselves. They're telling all this tripe to themselves in an attempt to justify their own bad behavior. They're twisting their beliefs to suit their actions rather than vice versa (a trick that humans excel at), and latching onto these tattered shreds of self-justifying nonsense to nourish their own selfish delusions.

It's like climate change denialists. They know perfectly well that their arguments are blatant lies, but they just don't want to admit that their own selfishness and laziness are contributing to the ecosystem collapse, so they stick their fingers in their ears and prattle on about already-disproven counterstudies.

 

[Dastardly]

It's THOSE people he should be concerned about, because they did pirate it, and they did like it enough to keep playing. To those, the game does have value, and it is criminal for them to keep playing without paying for it.

To be clear, it's criminal regardless. If you don't feel you have enough information about a product to buy it, you don't buy it. You go try to find information from another source, and come back when you feel more confident. You don't just take the product without paying, and then decide whether or not it was worth paying for after the fact.

It's the same logic as going to a car lot that tells you 'No test drives,' and deciding to just sneak in and 'test drive' after hours on your own by taking the car home. Even if you don't keep it, what you did is clearly wrong and not a mature way to handle the situation. Instead, you just tell them, "No test drives? I'll go buy my car elsewhere." And then you never touch that product again.

Reasons:

1. If you're trying to send the message that you don't like their policies, going back and stealing the product later doesn't do that. It shows them you very much want their product, but you're just a criminal jackass. If you don't buy it, don't steal it, and just walk away, now they have reason to believe their policies lost them a customer.

(Corollary to 1: If your leaving doesn't make a big enough impact to change their policies, sorry. You must be in the minority. So move on. Don't try to fake your way to the majority by trying to hurt them extra. You don't want them, they don't want you, it's done.)

2. If you're trying to send the message that you don't like their prices, just don't buy it. And don't pirate it, either, and give them the easy scapegoat. See, if no one plays it, they'll lower the price until people start buying it. In doing so, you'll see the average price of games come down. But these companies know they can't compete with "Free," so they have no reason to even bother trying as long as people defend piracy.

(In short, piracy directly prevents the market dialogue we need in order to push publishers to lower their prices.)

 

[Signa]

It's THOSE people he should be concerned about, because they did pirate it, and they did like it enough to keep playing. To those, the game does have value, and it is criminal for them to keep playing without paying for it.

To be clear, it's criminal regardless. If you don't feel you have enough information about a product to buy it, you don't buy it. You go try to find information from another source, and come back when you feel more confident. You don't just take the product without paying, and then decide whether or not it was worth paying for after the fact.

It's the same logic as going to a car lot that tells you 'No test drives,' and deciding to just sneak in and 'test drive' after hours on your own by taking the car home. Even if you don't keep it, what you did is clearly wrong and not a mature way to handle the situation. Instead, you just tell them, "No test drives? I'll go buy my car elsewhere." And then you never touch that product again.

Reasons:

1. If you're trying to send the message that you don't like their policies, going back and stealing the product later doesn't do that. It shows them you very much want their product, but you're just a criminal jackass. If you don't buy it, don't steal it, and just walk away, now they have reason to believe their policies lost them a customer.

(Corollary to 1: If your leaving doesn't make a big enough impact to change their policies, sorry. You must be in the minority. So move on. Don't try to fake your way to the majority by trying to hurt them extra. You don't want them, they don't want you, it's done.)

2. If you're trying to send the message that you don't like their prices, just don't buy it. And don't pirate it, either, and give them the easy scapegoat. See, if no one plays it, they'll lower the price until people start buying it. In doing so, you'll see the average price of games come down. But these companies know they can't compete with "Free," so they have no reason to even bother trying as long as people defend piracy.

(In short, piracy directly prevents the market dialogue we need in order to push publishers to lower their prices.)

yada yada yada, same old anti-piracy rant and analogies (why is it always cars?). Look, if these guys were trustworthy, they wouldn't be bitching about losing a dollar per game played when they have other revenue sources in-game. They just want to scam you legally. Defending them and their ilk is just setting you or someone else up to be screwed.

Piracy is a service issue. It's more or less a proven fact with services like Steam. They weren't offering a valid service by charging an admission fee that anyone wanted to pay. Mature response or not, people did it, and the game got more exposure. Those that liked it paid for the extra content. Those that didn't, aren't anyone the devs should be concerned with.

 

[Dastardly]

yada yada yada, same old anti-piracy rant and analogies (why is it always cars?). Look, if these guys were trustworthy, they wouldn't be bitching about losing a dollar per game played when they have other revenue sources in-game. They just want to scam you legally. Defending them and their ilk is just setting you or someone else up to be screwed.

Who's defending them? I hate the practice of charging "admission" and then also charging "per ride." It's why I'm not playing The Secret World, for instance. So I'm on board with hating that business model. And do you know what I do about it?

I do not support their games, either by buying them or by playing them. Because if I buy it, I'm telling them it's okay. And if I play it via piracy, I'm still just telling them their product is a-okay... but I just don't want to spend money.

Piracy is a service issue. It's more or less a proven fact with services like Steam. They weren't offering a valid service by charging an admission fee that anyone wanted to pay. Mature response or not, people did it, and the game got more exposure. Those that liked it paid for the extra content. Those that didn't, aren't anyone the devs should be concerned with.

1. Steam is DRM that also provides a service. And because Steam's DRM largely curtails piracy, it allows them to experiment with pricing without having to compete with "free." The result? Lower prices on a great many games. Thank you for proving my point -- maybe do the same for your own?

2. I love that you believe we can't assume that any pirated copies represent lost sales, but you readily assume that none of them do. What about folks that would have bought the game... but then a friend said, "Nah, here, I have a free copy." The hardcore pirates aren't the issue, it's the people on the fence.

A game can be as awesome as it wants. It can run as smoothly as it wants. It can be anything and everything to everyone at the same time. But none of that matters if someone can get it for FREE.

So you can yaddayadda all you want. When a game drops the DRM, it still gets pirated to hell. When a game is good, solid, and everyone likes it, it still gets pirated to hell. When a game comes down in price, or even allows people to name their own, it still gets pirated to hell. And what that means is that all of the excuses are complete fabrications.

And not a word of this defends developers for shady or annoying business practices.

 

[Baresark]

I agree that piracy is problematic.

That said, he has stated several things that are outright wrong.

1. He cannot know many times his game is pirated. He may be right, he may be wrong, but to estimate so pessimistically and make blanket statement makes him appear unintelligent and like he jumps to conclusion about things.

2. Ad supported games are actually a fantastic idea. Now he can add the total downloads of his game for his stats and charge more from advertisers. He simply needs to make a non ad supported version of the game for people who pay. Sure, people will still pirate the non ad supported version, but those numbers will sharply decline because it's now easier to get the ad supported version versus pirating the non ad supported version.

3. The thing that hurts this games sales is previous games shortcomings. I bought their game, Shadowgun, and after playing that I wouldn't buy another product without trying it out. And they don't have a demo of the game he is talking about. So, with that in mind, you make bad games, people remember it, and then you have to pay for past mistakes. I didn't pirate this game, I skipped it completely without any interest despite my love of zombie games.

 

[Signa]

yada yada yada, same old anti-piracy rant and analogies (why is it always cars?). Look, if these guys were trustworthy, they wouldn't be bitching about losing a dollar per game played when they have other revenue sources in-game. They just want to scam you legally. Defending them and their ilk is just setting you or someone else up to be screwed.

Who's defending them? I hate the practice of charging "admission" and then also charging "per ride." It's why I'm not playing The Secret World, for instance. So I'm on board with hating that business model. And do you know what I do about it?

I do not support their games, either by buying them or by playing them. Because if I buy it, I'm telling them it's okay. And if I play it via piracy, I'm still just telling them their product is a-okay... but I just don't want to spend money.

Piracy is a service issue. It's more or less a proven fact with services like Steam. They weren't offering a valid service by charging an admission fee that anyone wanted to pay. Mature response or not, people did it, and the game got more exposure. Those that liked it paid for the extra content. Those that didn't, aren't anyone the devs should be concerned with.

1. Steam is DRM that also provides a service. And because Steam's DRM largely curtails piracy, it allows them to experiment with pricing without having to compete with "free." The result? Lower prices on a great many games. Thank you for proving my point -- maybe do the same for your own?

2. I love that you believe we can't assume that any pirated copies represent lost sales, but you readily assume that none of them do. What about folks that would have bought the game... but then a friend said, "Nah, here, I have a free copy." The hardcore pirates aren't the issue, it's the people on the fence.

A game can be as awesome as it wants. It can run as smoothly as it wants. It can be anything and everything to everyone at the same time. But none of that matters if someone can get it for FREE.

So you can yaddayadda all you want. When a game drops the DRM, it still gets pirated to hell. When a game is good, solid, and everyone likes it, it still gets pirated to hell. When a game comes down in price, or even allows people to name their own, it still gets pirated to hell. And what that means is that all of the excuses are complete fabrications.

And not a word of this defends developers for shady or annoying business practices.

So what your point boils down to is faith in the consumer. You have no faith that someone playing a good game and the desire to pay for good content will actually separate themselves from their cash. I'm saying that I believe they do if they are serious. I also believe that those that don't are a lost cause, and you're saying damn them for not playing by the rules you strictly hold yourself to.

Maybe I'm stretching things a little, but the fact we are having the conversation says you care about the conduct of people I don't give two shits about.

 

[antipunt]

Piracy really does suck and I feel for the guy, but I'm always skeptical of these "piracy % numbers that are fact that are over 9000%" because where the F did they come from. Also, did they factor in places like china/India, because that's just disingenuous

 

[Britisheagle]

Was going to say 'Inb4 pirates slamming a guy who's working hard to make a game complaining that lots of people are stealing it'

However pirates and pirate defenders are so quick off the mark to attack anybody who critiques or complains about what happens, it's impossible.

^ This.

If a developer complains about piracy, the number of people who reply by saying "ah well, your game wasn't good enough" is ridiculous. And the ludicrous argument that you wouldn't buy an empty box with a "game" in it always seems to crop up too, despite the fact that for generations that's exactly what gamers do.

The joy of this day and age is that most of these Android phones actually have a search functionality so if you wish to read about the game, or check compatibility all the data is there with practically no effort required.

Piracy exists on a massive scale, those who say that the game wasn't purchased enough and thus developers are blaming piracy really do ned to wake up. Google a game. And game. See how many times that has been downloaded on a torrent site or similar? A lot I am guessing.

Hopefully Freemium will stop pirates but it is such as shame that these steps need to be taken at all.

 

[weirdee]

wait, are people actually arguing that the majority pirating the game actually keeps the game in business as opposed a situation where those same people not interacting with the game at all?

is their imaginary business necessary to the process?

somebody else raised a good point though, they could just start cramming ads in there

 

[jmiller1980]

Aside from issues of piracy and the freemium model, perhaps the developer should realize that they're not living in the pre-crash eighties. Piracy damaging profits notwithstanding, modern game developers have to face the fact that video games aren't the path to incredible cash and a rock star lifestyle anymore. The days of video games generating billions of dollars of profit without the company first paying out the nose for it are long past. If you don't believe that, I suggest you ask your local video arcade owner how their business is doing.

The simple fact is piracy hurts gaming (and other industries, but let's not get into that) but it is also a simple fact that piracy is here to stay. There will always be an arms race between DRM and piracy with no winner in sight. Game development is no longer the golden ticket for small companies to make an easy buck. It takes a huge investment of capital to develop and produce a blockbuster video game, with only the rare indie success story to bolster the hopes of the little guy. The freemium model can help mitigate this by giving a small developer greater control over access to content. But it's not a golden goose. It's a way to make a profit in spite of people who would rather get the product for free.

Where this particular developer goes wrong is his apparent disgruntlement with being forced to switch models to the only way he can (in his perception at least) make any profit. He might be right to blame pirates, or some of the posters in this forum could be right that the game is crap and the developer is to blame for their own losses. But either way, the biggest mistake of this and other small developers is the expectation that they'll make a fortune off their intellectual property. It doesn't happen anymore.

 

[GAunderrated]

This is probably not going to be a popular point of view but I am sick to death of both people complaining about piracy and trying to debunk piracy accusations.

My basic problem with both arguments is people are trying to legislate morality and you can't. One says its moral for these reasons, one says its immoral for this reason, neither side is completely correct and neither side is willing to admit the other side has a valid point.

The world isn't black and white, its tons and tons of grey. People like to make it black and white for convenience and because people are prone to easy answers.

The funny thing is people put a blanket over piracy to assume every single person that pirates has the same reasoning. People don't like to hear this but each and every person that pirate has their own reason for doing so. Some may have similar reasons, some may have reasons that even you haven't thought of, but to make blanket assumptions on pirates from either argument is a fallacy.

Piracy does have a possible effect on the gaming industry, problem is not a single person knows the exact extent of how piracy affects it and anyone who says they know is a fool. No one knows the real answer so we are either arguing with personal experience that doesn't reflect everyone's unique experience, or we are arguing with sectioned data from the industry that doesn't reflect the real reason.

This post probably wont change anyone's mind but I hope it can at least make some people think about this fruitless argument that people engage with 20 times a year.

-Under

 

[Dastardly]

So what your point boils down to is faith in the consumer. You have no faith that someone playing a good game and the desire to pay for good content will actually separate themselves from their cash. I'm saying that I believe they do if they are serious. I also believe that those that don't are a lost cause, and you're saying damn them for not playing by the rules you strictly hold yourself to.

No, my point has nothing to do with the consumer. Because pirates aren't consumers, they're parasites. Consumers are great--they spend the money, they play the game. Some enjoy it more than others, some regret the purchase. But they only use the products they've paid for, and if they don't like the price they simply go elsewhere.

Your problems are:

1. You make an exclusion for the "Just Trying It Out" pirates, as though this is acceptable. No, it's not. Is it okay for games not to have demos or refunds? No, it's also not. That doesn't suddenly make it okay. Instead, you stop playing those games until the developers get the message (No demo = no sale). There is no moral high ground for the "test drive pirates."

(Also, it's far too easy after having played the whole game for free, to turn around and say, "Nah, wasn't really worth it" when it comes time to pay. Even if you enjoy a game immensely and find it practically perfect, it's not easy to convince yourself to volunteer money. So most folks just skip that and retroactively declare the game "a dud; not worth it.")

2. You group all of the non-test-drive-pirates into one group and label it "lost cause." There are, of course, some hardcore pirates who will pirate no matter what. There are also some people who rape or rob banks despite the fact that these are illegal. Some people just aren't swayed by right and wrong. They are a lost cause -- don't reason with them, just punish them when you get the chance.

But the far, far larger group are what I call "pirates of convenience." These are people that, under normal circumstances, would buy the $5 game, give it a go, and if they hated it they'd just not buy from that developer in the future. Or the people who would wait for a new game to get some reviews before deciding to drop $60, or wait a few months for the game to go on sale. They WOULD do this... but then they're made aware of an easy-to-reach free copy of the game, and they decide to go that route instead. Those are the people that represent the lost sales, and they're the ones that (some of them) could be swayed back through sound reasoning.

Maybe I'm stretching things a little, but the fact we are having the conversation says you care about the conduct of people I don't give two shits about.

Firstly, yeah, you're stretching things a lot. I have to keep telling you what is/isn't my stance, because you keep attributing one to me that you've maybe heard elsewhere. It borders on strawman sometimes, really, but we'll go with "stretching" for the moment.

And secondly, the fact that you keep coming back to this conversation actually proves you wrong: You really do care a great deal about what other people do/don't think of that group. Seriously, if you really didn't care, and you really believed they were a lost cause, you wouldn't have even bothered replying to this thread, let alone continuing this exchange.

 

[1337mokro]

That guy is ridiculous. The 'try before you buy' piracy exists, demos or not. The blame for that lies squarely with game publisher's and retailer's policies of 'fuck you consumer, no refunds ever'.

I mean, would you pay ? 50 to purchase a plain box with unknown content that contains 'a game' that may or may not work and may or may not be enjoyable? No, you wouldn't. And gamers as a whole are no exception to this sentiment. I do feel that the effect of buying a game you already downloaded for free is also overestimated, but the high prices and no returning or refunding policies are definately contributing to piracy.

Also, like others pointed out, the guy tried to sell half games for full price. People don't like being scammed like that, so his business got sunk over it. That's how it works.

BLAH BLAH, the same old tried justification for theft. I only robbed the bank because they wouldn't lend me the money to by a Ferrari. If you don't like something don't buy it and he will soon got out of business. If you like it enough to steal a half game the you can pay for it. Anything else amoral bullshit.

I am holding a random game here in my hand.

Please tell me. Do you like this game?

That's basically the experience you go through buying a game on day 1. You purchase on good faith without ANY option to return the game after playing without selling it to someone else.

The anti-piracy guys are always so vehemently opposed to having options to try out games with demo's. They would rather just trust Mr Big marketing corporation to give them their information. I suppose you also get your reviews from gamespot .

Any way did you figure out if you like the game I'm holding in my hand? Not yet? Well guess I sort of made a point. I could Borrow it to you... but that is also illegal according to the EULA. You'll just have to take a leap of faith and send me 50$ to buy this game. I'll even send you a photo of the bland box art and the marketing blurb on the back.

It's always nice to see people defending corporate greed and suffocating legislature and business practices under the defence of "stopping theft".

My gaming library exists of exactly 2% pirated games. These games are so ancient you can't buy them any more. The rest have all been bought either on recommendation from others or by playing a demo. When no demo was available. I simply pirated the game, play it for an hour and if I didn't like it I simply deleted it and never looked back.

Come on. Please tell me how I'm evil and horrible for stealing games that nobody sells. I mean I'm so horrible right? Or maybe. A crazy idea here. What if games ALWAYS came with demo's? What if we reinstated the 24 hour trial of the olden days? Before CD-keys ruined that.

It would allow people to buy games more freely and return them, the store usually just gives out credit so the credit will still be spent on games. Just not on the one that sucked. I think that is a fair trade off right? Instead of making a purchase of games permanent, making a short lapse in judgement a punishment worth maybe 10% of someone's monthly income.

Let's not suck the cocks of corporations shall we? Let's instead look at why people pirate. Address the issues and then condemn those that still do it because they can.

 

[Signa]

So what your point boils down to is faith in the consumer. You have no faith that someone playing a good game and the desire to pay for good content will actually separate themselves from their cash. I'm saying that I believe they do if they are serious. I also believe that those that don't are a lost cause, and you're saying damn them for not playing by the rules you strictly hold yourself to.

No, my point has nothing to do with the consumer. Because pirates aren't consumers, they're parasites. Consumers are great--they spend the money, they play the game. Some enjoy it more than others, some regret the purchase. But they only use the products they've paid for, and if they don't like the price they simply go elsewhere.

Got no problems here, except with the "elsewhere" part. It's not like when people wanted play Spore they had a chance to buy an alternative game made by Bethesda. The only options if you are unsure about a product is completely deprive yourself of the game with no gratitude for taking the high ground, or just pirate it to find out. Buying blindly shouldn't be an option, because it's not a requirement for any other consumer good. We owe NOTHING to a developer if we feel their game is bad, so taking the moral high-ground does nothing for anyone. It's a pointless gesture. I'm not saying you shouldn't take the high-ground if you don't get any kick-backs, but I forgive anyone who feels that way.

Your problems are:

1. You make an exclusion for the "Just Trying It Out" pirates, as though this is acceptable. No, it's not. Is it okay for games not to have demos or refunds? No, it's also not. That doesn't suddenly make it okay. Instead, you stop playing those games until the developers get the message (No demo = no sale). There is no moral high ground for the "test drive pirates."

(Also, it's far too easy after having played the whole game for free, to turn around and say, "Nah, wasn't really worth it" when it comes time to pay. Even if you enjoy a game immensely and find it practically perfect, it's not easy to convince yourself to volunteer money. So most folks just skip that and retroactively declare the game "a dud; not worth it.")

As stated above, I'm a forgiving sort. I know everyone has their tastes, and budgets. A try-before-buy pirate is a customer on the fence. If you count them among those who steal just because they can, then you are going to lose that customer. Personally, I take lack of demos as a sign of lack of faith in their product (especially in smaller venues like the phone games we are talking about here). It's circumstances like this one that a dev is just begging for their game to be stolen. Hell, I don't even trust demos that are released, because sometimes they will showcase the best part of the game. I know the demo for Too Human was literally the best part of the game they showed off, and that ended in 15 minutes. If a TBB Pirate feels the same way I do, then them demanding a demo isn't going to make them a future customer. Besides, being at the mercy of the dev is pointless if you can get what you are looking for without their help. That help you might be demanding could cost them thousands of dollars, and there's no telling if it will make that pirate a customer.

2. You group all of the non-test-drive-pirates into one group and label it "lost cause." There are, of course, some hardcore pirates who will pirate no matter what. There are also some people who rape or rob banks despite the fact that these are illegal. Some people just aren't swayed by right and wrong. They are a lost cause -- don't reason with them, just punish them when you get the chance.

Robery and rape are not the same as piracy, and I shouldn't have to be telling you that. A crime that hurts someone deserves punishment, but intellectual property theft's damages are nebulous at best. It certainly should be illegal so that no one starts to profit off of someone else work, but the kind of piracy we are talking about here has no profiteers. So what I'm getting from this is that piracy is only wrong because it's illegal. It's more or less a victimless crime at this point, because we've been hearing for decades about how various medias are going to choke and die because of piracy being enabled through some new technology, yet they all keep growing stronger and even posting record profits. Granted, there are some fringe cases where piracy did hurt someone a lot, but I bet you 99.9% of everything on Pirate Bay would still flourish with our without TPB's influence. I'm willing to wager there are more cases of TPB giving exposure to something great than it crushing something into financial oblivion. I know I've heard of a few success stories. All the other negative stories are like this one, where the dev just cries about lost potential profits, and not how they are about to close up their shop if they don't start selling.

But the far, far larger group are what I call "pirates of convenience." These are people that, under normal circumstances, would buy the $5 game, give it a go, and if they hated it they'd just not buy from that developer in the future. Or the people who would wait for a new game to get some reviews before deciding to drop $60, or wait a few months for the game to go on sale. They WOULD do this... but then they're made aware of an easy-to-reach free copy of the game, and they decide to go that route instead. Those are the people that represent the lost sales, and they're the ones that (some of them) could be swayed back through sound reasoning.

I feel that scenario is generally false. There is a lot of mass consumerism in the media industry. Games like Diablo 3 get a lot of hype built around them, despite the warnings. You and I are smart enough to not fall into those traps (or at least I didn't). That doesn't mean that a person isn't instantly willing to snap up the next Call of Duty, despite being jilted by the last. See, if people were that smart, we wouldn't have games being released at $60, because no one would be buying them. They'd all wait for it to be a price they know they will be content with, and publishers wouldn't make a cent while the price was so high.

If pirates were only pirating because they can, that would mean that they would buy if they couldn't pirate. I just don't see that happening either. Most pirates are pirating because it's free, and you can't argue with free. It can be a shit game, and it's still worth a download. See, things like DRM would actually have a point if they could encourage those pirates to buy, but they don't.

Maybe I'm stretching things a little, but the fact we are having the conversation says you care about the conduct of people I don't give two shits about.

Firstly, yeah, you're stretching things a lot. I have to keep telling you what is/isn't my stance, because you keep attributing one to me that you've maybe heard elsewhere. It borders on strawman sometimes, really, but we'll go with "stretching" for the moment.

And secondly, the fact that you keep coming back to this conversation actually proves you wrong: You really do care a great deal about what other people do/don't think of that group. Seriously, if you really didn't care, and you really believed they were a lost cause, you wouldn't have even bothered replying to this thread, let alone continuing this exchange.

So, it didn't occur to you that I might be returning because you keep quoting me with what I consider to be hard-headed, woefully blind and one-sided comments? This is multifaceted issue that I don't think either of us are able to gauge correctly. Everything you've said stems from only one facet, and ignores all the other factors and possibilities, simply because you don't believe they exist.

If you read what I said, I said I don't care about pirates, not that I don't care about this conversation. If you want to be done, just tell me to shut up and leave you alone. Setting a verbal trap doesn't make you win the argument. You've basically stated that the only way for me to win is to not play, but then that leaves you with your comments as the last word, and as you can see by this post, I have more to say on those last words.

 

[BanZeus]

The term "Piracy" when used in relation to software is propaganda. You can't steal information no matter how many ships, parrots, or missing body parts you have.

 

[Dastardly]

Got no problems here, except with the "elsewhere" part. It's not like when people wanted play Spore they had a chance to buy an alternative game made by Bethesda. The only options if you are unsure about a product is completely deprive yourself of the game with no gratitude for taking the high ground, or just pirate it to find out.

Utterly false. First, "deprive" yourself of a game? Melodramatic crap. I can't afford a Ferrari, but I'm not "depriving" myself of it. To deprive someone of something means they are entitled to it, but it is not being given. That's not the case here.

Second, the alternative to not buying the game is to wait for more information. Reviews, Let's Play videos, friends, there are plenty of sources out there from which you can collate data and make an informed decision. All it requires is a little waiting and a little research. If you don't want to do that, then don't buy it.

Personally, I take lack of demos as a sign of lack of faith in their product (especially in smaller venues like the phone games we are talking about here). It's circumstances like this one that a dev is just begging for their game to be stolen. Hell, I don't even trust demos that are released, because sometimes they will showcase the best part of the game.

So you're intentionally being disingenuous. You propose that demos are the only solution, and then immediately state you won't trust demos. You're trying to create a problem that's impossible to solve, all to justify stealing the game.

That help you might be demanding could cost them thousands of dollars, and there's no telling if it will make that pirate a customer.

You can provide me no data on the number of pirates that, after having played the game for free, go back and pay just for giggles. So rather than data, we have to fall back on how likely it is. And the kind of person that will take something without paying generally doesn't have the moral fortitude to then go back and pay. Your TBB Pirates are at best a slim minority, and at worst a complete myth.

Robery and rape are not the same as piracy, and I shouldn't have to be telling you that. A crime that hurts someone deserves punishment, but intellectual property theft's damages are nebulous at best. It certainly should be illegal so that no one starts to profit off of someone else work, but the kind of piracy we are talking about here has no profiteers.

Gaining something without compensating the person you gained it from is profit. Propagating a free copy that can reach people who would otherwise pay is harm. Just because you can't measure the harm accurately doesn't mean there is none. (For instance, many crimes also result in emotional harm, which can't be measured, but we don't dismiss it outright.)

Simple assault (threatening someone with a weapon) doesn't hurt anyone physically, and the criminal might not gain anything in the end, but it's still a crime. You just have a personal dislike of copyright law, and you use that to fuel all kinds of "but it's so completely different from all the other crimes" crap.

So what I'm getting from this is that piracy is only wrong because it's illegal. It's more or less a victimless crime at this point, because we've been hearing for decades about how various medias are going to choke and die because of piracy being enabled through some new technology, yet they all keep growing stronger and even posting record profits. Granted, there are some fringe cases where piracy did hurt someone a lot, but I bet you 99.9% of everything on Pirate Bay would still flourish with our without TPB's influence. I'm willing to wager there are more cases of TPB giving exposure to something great than it crushing something into financial oblivion. I know I've heard of a few success stories. All the other negative stories are like this one, where the dev just cries about lost potential profits, and not how they are about to close up their shop if they don't start selling.

No, piracy is wrong because it results in people getting something of someone else's without paying for it, and also making it more readily available for others. And just because the victim isn't as pitiful as you'd like (and we've already established vis-a-vis the demo problem that you're more than willing to continually move the standard to suit your case), that doesn't mean it's victimless.

The rest is just anecdotal, "I know a guy who," crap. And it still doesn't stand up to what anyone on the planet understands about human beings. Most folks, if they've already used it for free, won't turn around and pay just to be nice -- if they were that nice, they wouldn't have stolen it in the first place. Any exceptions to that will be few.

If pirates were only pirating because they can, that would mean that they would buy if they couldn't pirate. I just don't see that happening either. Most pirates are pirating because it's free, and you can't argue with free. It can be a shit game, and it's still worth a download. See, things like DRM would actually have a point if they could encourage those pirates to buy, but they don't.

Yes, they do. Just because they don't stop ALL THE PIRACY!! doesn't mean they stop none. They delay the piracy long enough, in most cases, that at least a portion of the on-the-fence customers decide to just buy it rather than waiting for the crack. That's what it is supposed to do, and it does.

But where your logic completely fails to live up to the name? You concede that most pirates do so because it's free... but then you only let that truth apply to "shit games." The same is true of fantastic games. They pirate it because it's better to get it for free than to pay, no matter how good the game is. So, since most pirates are very much motivated by "Free," by your own admission, that destroys the idea that your "try before you buy" pirates make up any sizable portion of the population.

Instead, you've got the unapologetic pirates (I steal it because I can), and you've got your auto-self-justifying pirates (Well, I would have paid if it was any good... but it never, ever is, so I don't. Tee hee!). Your Unicorn Pirate (I know I already have the game for free, but I enjoyed it so much I'd like to give $60 to someone anyway!) is nowhere near the top.

So, it didn't occur to you that I might be returning because you keep quoting me with what I consider to be hard-headed, woefully blind and one-sided comments?

I know you are, but what am I?

Seriously, though, you keep coming back because you give far more than two shits about the people you purport not to give two shits about. You want to enforce your own "modified" morality on them just as zealously as they want to enforce theirs on you.

This is multifaceted issue that I don't think either of us are able to gauge correctly. Everything you've said stems from only one facet, and ignores all the other factors and possibilities, simply because you don't believe they exist.

Wrong again. I believe they are a negligible minority. I've already clearly allowed their existence. You repeatedly respond to what you think my points are, based on what others have said, rather than reading. And you want to spew crap about hard-headed and one-sided?

If you read what I said, I said I don't care about pirates, not that I don't care about this conversation. If you want to be done, just tell me to shut up and leave you alone. Setting a verbal trap doesn't make you win the argument. You've basically stated that the only way for me to win is to not play, but then that leaves you with your comments as the last word, and as you can see by this post, I have more to say on those last words.

But this conversation is about pirates. Ergo, you care very much. So maybe if you walk away, I "win." What does that matter if those people truly are a lost cause anyway? What will I have "won?" If you're right, not a damned thing.

But, as with pirates, your actions display a reality that is completely at odds with your stated beliefs. It matters to you who wins, because the topic itself matters to you, and the topic is pirates. Every word you say drives another nail in the "I don't care" coffin. And before you fly any kind of flag on this sidebar, it has everything to do with the topic at hand.

That same blatant hypocrisy is also what we see from pirates: "Oh, I'd pay if the game were worth it," but then always making sure to represent every game as "not worth it." "Oh, I'd pay if they didn't have that stupid DRM," and then Witcher 2 happens. The stated belief is not demonstrated in reality, and is thus false.

You claim I'm saying "the only way to win is to not play," which again demonstrates how poorly you comprehend. You can easily get out of the "verbal trap" by simply admitting that you do, in fact, care -- and that your earlier "too cool" dismissal was so much empty rhetoric. Someone telling a lie that doesn't want to fix the lie? Yeah, their only option is to shut up. But someone telling a lie that doesn't want to shut up? They could consider dropping the lie...