The_root_of_all_evil said:
theultimateend said:
And still to say Piracy causes a negative effect "no doubt about it" is no different than saying Drugs are evil "no doubt about it".
I think it'd be fair to say that Drugs cause a negative effect "no doubt about it" though. There might be some degree of difference, but I've gotta side with Daystar on that point.
The thing is that Piracy (or its brothers Resale, Captive Audience and Monopoly) are part of Capitalism that grows as Retail does. If you've set a price on a product that someone wants, and they can't get it - there will be thefts. Whether material (stealing) or immaterial(copying).
Some of these thefts may lead to increased sales afterwards, some may lead to lost sales - but it's never been a one-one ratio. Especially when there's no chance of refund for a broken/sub-standard product.
That line "set something people want at a price they can't afford" is basically the point I fall on.
There is a fallacy that a loss equates to the binary opposite of a sale.
1 Million pirated copies is not 1 Million lost sales.
Likewise there is no data to suggest that the advertising power of piracy doesn't work out to close the same as the actual people who would buy if piracy was negated (if such a group exists).
As a child I had no income so I pirated, if I made the mistake of listening to advertising or something else and used the little allowance I had I could be stuck with a terrible game for months. However if I pirated it first and saw if it was worth buying I netted a 1:1 ratio of good games to purchases.
Does everyone do this? I >highly< doubt it, but I similarly doubt that people would buy games if they couldn't pirate them. The nature of no-returns has made games a gamble that is not worth the price of admittance. Steam has circumvented this problem by making the price discounted enough to match the gamble.
As someone else said, it is a multifaceted problem that has no certainties in it. The only concerete observations are the ones that are made obviously. Piracy is not purchasing, or red is not blue, or anything like that. Otherwise the rest is circumstantial at best and rarely backed up with data.
Games are not food, people do not need them, as such making it impossible to steal them doesn't mean you'll bring in actual customers. I'm willing to accept the argument that if people can't afford a luxury item they should just not do it, albeit this ignore social injustices and the nature of class societies but taking a nice arbitrary hardcore stance on things is fun sometimes.
The only thing standing between developers and publishers and actual profits is themselves. The passing of blame is only done because it is easy and feels good.
As for drugs, I don't do them (not a moral thing, just not interested, I've got other hobbies that keep me busy), but most of the negative side effects are societal. The actual physical detriment is not much different than other everyday experiences. Fast food, car exhaust, pollution from coal plants or other sources. Drinking hot drinks from plastics, plastics, radiation. We are surrounded by a world that is doing some pretty negative stuff to us constantly, most of the worst examples of drug problems are caused almost in their entirety by society.
I'm not pro-piracy or pro-drug use, I just don't think either gets legitimately discussed in just about any place they are brought up. That sort of thing bothers me, which is why I pop up
.
Piracy is a fancy scape goat, but its not much more than that. (as far as I've been shown thus far)
