THQ Impressed by 3DS Anti-Piracy Tech

[Darth Brownie]

silly me who's been buying his DS games legally...

 

[ramox]

that is completely untrue.
something like 30%+ of the humble indie bundle were pirated....and you could pay WHATEVER you wanted for it...a penny even...and 30% + of people still piated it.

Well that's not representative of everything, if new games were released at £15.00 instead of £40.00 I'd guarantee that more people would be inclined to just buy them. A lot of people who currently pirate games and other media are students who don't have enough money to afford them, although there will always be some people who will do it regardless of the price because they're just bad people.

And again, why is it that we all have the right to play any game we want despite not being able to afford em?

 

[ethaninja]

3 months untill it is hacked... I called it! (not that I hope it will be, I'ts just that " sophisticated" doesn't mean shit to the "Crackers" or whatever)

Agreed. I give it 2.

 

[incrediblegeek]

Games aren't free to make, ya know. They don't just pop into existence on the whim of their designers. You pirates just keep taking money from the devs if you like, but remember that you are in fact taking money from people who have produced something you want. They may not produce it again if they don't make enough money from it.

 

[Galaxy613]

90% of American DS users have pirated games? Uhh... there are A LOT of DS's in the hands of preteens that would have no clue how to do something like. I would like to know how they came up with that statistic, because 10% sounds like a more likely stat.

Either way, all this sounds like is taunting, the glove has been thrown down. Hacker Pirates aren't gonna just go "Oh man, it's too hard. Lets not hack this one guys. " naaah the exact opposite, whoever person/team cracks it first will have all the glory.

Games aren't free to make, ya know. They don't just pop into existence on the whim of their designers. You pirates just keep taking money from the devs if you like, but remember that you are in fact taking money from people who have produced something you want. They may not produce it again if they don't make enough money from it.

Very true, a good length game that is polished, even a indie game, takes at LEAST one year. Some have been made in less but those are exceptions to the rule. Most games take 1-5 years to make, all that time and money spent to bring the game to market. There's a big disconnect between development and players that is really hard for people to grasp. Just because a game plays short, sweet, and polished, doesn't mean the development for that game was such!

 

[Kouen]

Call me nuts but

"it's very difficult to do so because it's so sophisticated"

reminds me of when the 360 was coming out didnt Microsoft say

"the new Xbox 360 will have new layers of protection the world has never seen"

yet 3 weeks after launch someone already got a pirate copy of PGR3 running on it.

Oh and if that impressed THQ... well yea enough said

Not to mention that's kinda throwing down the gauntlet to the Piracy Community just like another lot not so long ago *cough Ubisoft DRM cough* id say tops 3 months and it will be hacked

 

[DarkRyter]

"See, once it detects piracy through its use of forbidden alien technology from a lost civilization we ravaged in search of more sophisticated machinations, it immediate dispatches a drone to shoot mustard at your face for the rest of eternity."

 

[ramox]

Doh!
I give it 3 month maximun.Video games cost the double in my country , so piracy is justified.

This must be the worst justification for piracy i have ever heard...i and i've heard plenty.

I think it's one of the best. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for paying people for their creative property, but saying "it doesn't matter the cost, piracy is always wrong" is inviting businesses to just hike prices as high as they like. There's got to be a point when it's fair to steal. If a company is unfairly pricing something that I want, I will try to find a way around it. I'll pay £20 for a game, but not £50.

But, there is no such point. There is always the option to, you know, just not play the games. What many people seem to forget is that they have no god given right to own/play videogames. If you want a specific car, you have to shell out whatever the manufacturer wants for it. It's not in the slightest differnt for games. Pay it or leave it. Period.

It's not that simple. If the option exists to pirate something, a lot of people will take it. Piracy will always exist in some form or another; therefore, the only solution is to be reasonable with the public and reach a compromise. We don't live in a world where games companies can say "£50 or no game."

You see, by no means i am defending high prices. But you said it yourself, the reason people pirate is not because the stuff is too expensive. It's sinmply because they can.
If piracy wouldn't be technically so easy and the only way to get a copy of game XY would be to steal it from the Gamespot shelf no reasonable person would even think about doing so. We would suck it up and safe our money for the game we want to play or simply wouldn't play it.
You can argue prices as much as you want, but the sole reason for pirates is: "Because i can"

I said piracy will always exist, not "people do it because we can." The core of this discussion is basically unresolvable; I think that people are, deep-down, decent, reasonable folks, and thus I live in a world of bubblegum palaces and balloon parties. You, on the other hand, think that people will grab at whatever they can get. Therefore, we differ on our views of piracy.

So, how's the bubblegum over there? Can i has some?

 

[Aardvark Soup]

The 3D's anti-piracy measures will probably utilise the same technique as the 3D-effect: magic.

And with magic I mean the blood of torchered kittens, who are massively slaughtered in the hidden basement of Nintendo's Kyoto headquarters by brainwashed starving orphans.

 

[infinity_turtles]

that is completely untrue.
something like 30%+ of the humble indie bundle were pirated....and you could pay WHATEVER you wanted for it...a penny even...and 30% + of people still piated it.

Well that's not representative of everything, if new games were released at £15.00 instead of £40.00 I'd guarantee that more people would be inclined to just buy them. A lot of people who currently pirate games and other media are students who don't have enough money to afford them, although there will always be some people who will do it regardless of the price because they're just bad people.

And again, why is it that we all have the right to play any game we want despite not being able to afford em?

Better question, if someone pirates something they can't afford, who does it hurt? If they can't afford it, they could have never bought it, so it isn't a lost sale. It's not a physical product, so copying it doesn't make it so the developers can't sell that copy. So the only problem someone can have with someone pirating something they can't afford is that they haven't "earned" it. I think that's pretty selfish, especially if you consider higher prices and/or lower pay in certain areas making someone who's worked the same job just as hard in a different area having significantly less than you.

 

[Dana22]

instead of reality, which is "Right now we have a ridiculous amount of money pouring in, but it could be a money tsunami, and we feel that being billionaires just isn't enough"

You trying to justify the piracy with this ?

 

[Banana Phone Man]

If piracy is caused by people by putting up the game on the internet for download why don't the game companies flood the internet with fake unplayable versions of the game. So many that many people won't be able to, or find it very hard to find a real version.

The likelyhood of this happening is slim and would be more hassle than profitable but that is just a thought that runs through my head.

 

[ramox]

snip

Better question, if someone pirates something they can't afford, who does it hurt? If they can't afford it, they could have never bought it, so it isn't a lost sale. It's not a physical product, so copying it doesn't make it so the developers can't sell that copy. So the only problem someone can have with someone pirating something they can't afford is that they haven't "earned" it. I think that's pretty selfish, especially if you consider higher prices and/or lower pay in certain areas making someone who's worked the same job just as hard in a different area having significantly less than you.

While you are right that in said case no one is losing anything it doesn't make it anymore justified.

If piracy wouldn't be technically so easy and the only way to get a copy of game XY would be to steal it from the Gamespot shelf no reasonable person would even think about doing so. We would suck it up and safe our money for the game we want to play or simply wouldn't play it.
You can argue prices as much as you want, but the sole reason for pirates is: "Because i can"

Also, i don't know about other people, but if i can't afford something i will safe up for it or simply live without it.

 

[infinity_turtles]

snip

Better question, if someone pirates something they can't afford, who does it hurt? If they can't afford it, they could have never bought it, so it isn't a lost sale. It's not a physical product, so copying it doesn't make it so the developers can't sell that copy. So the only problem someone can have with someone pirating something they can't afford is that they haven't "earned" it. I think that's pretty selfish, especially if you consider higher prices and/or lower pay in certain areas making someone who's worked the same job just as hard in a different area having significantly less than you.

While you are right that in said case no one is losing anything it doesn't make it anymore justified.

I don't think anyone needs to justify actions that cause no harm. It's simply a neutral action. Neither right nor wrong.

 

[ramox]

snip

Better question, if someone pirates something they can't afford, who does it hurt? If they can't afford it, they could have never bought it, so it isn't a lost sale. It's not a physical product, so copying it doesn't make it so the developers can't sell that copy. So the only problem someone can have with someone pirating something they can't afford is that they haven't "earned" it. I think that's pretty selfish, especially if you consider higher prices and/or lower pay in certain areas making someone who's worked the same job just as hard in a different area having significantly less than you.

While you are right that in said case no one is losing anything it doesn't make it anymore justified.

I don't think anyone needs to justify actions that cause no harm. It's simply a neutral action. Neither right nor wrong.

Obtaining things you are obliged to pay money for by law and common sense for free, no matter if it does any harm...
No sorry, not neutral in my book.

 

[WilliamRLBaker]

that is completely untrue.
something like 30%+ of the humble indie bundle were pirated....and you could pay WHATEVER you wanted for it...a penny even...and 30% + of people still piated it.

Well that's not representative of everything, if new games were released at £15.00 instead of £40.00 I'd guarantee that more people would be inclined to just buy them. A lot of people who currently pirate games and other media are students who don't have enough money to afford them, although there will always be some people who will do it regardless of the price because they're just bad people.

except your mistaken again, that is representitive of every thing. if people are unwilling to play some very good indie games for a penny, they will likely be just as uninclind to pay for a retail release.

Since atleast with indie games you dont have the whole mentality they are a corporation they will be fine if I just pirate this game.
the whole reason piracy is so large on pc is because people dont want to pay the prices and often any price at all they feel entitled to the game, the same with the console and portable piracy.

 

[Carnagath]

Didn't Sony solve the piracy problem already? Why don't the others copy their solution, whatever it is?

 

[WilliamRLBaker]

Better question, if someone pirates something they can't afford, who does it hurt?

such concepts don't work for hobby,entertainment things.
food? water? if someone steals these because they are starving this is a justification in and of it self they are starving...
but if someone has a good life, a home...and wants to have some entertainment or optional activity but cant afford it, or cant afford all the parts of it...and they pirate it...or steal it then its unjustifiable...they don't need it to survive its a pass time, an activity there is no justification for stealing such a thing.

 

[infinity_turtles]

snip

Better question, if someone pirates something they can't afford, who does it hurt? If they can't afford it, they could have never bought it, so it isn't a lost sale. It's not a physical product, so copying it doesn't make it so the developers can't sell that copy. So the only problem someone can have with someone pirating something they can't afford is that they haven't "earned" it. I think that's pretty selfish, especially if you consider higher prices and/or lower pay in certain areas making someone who's worked the same job just as hard in a different area having significantly less than you.

While you are right that in said case no one is losing anything it doesn't make it anymore justified.

I don't think anyone needs to justify actions that cause no harm. It's simply a neutral action. Neither right nor wrong.

Obtaining things you are obliged to pay money for by law and common sense for free, no matter if it does any harm...
No sorry, not neutral in my book.

So you're using legality to define morality? Because, given the number of pirates out there, clearly it isn't a matter of common sense. I suppose we have to agree to disagree on this then, because the way I define morality is based entirely around whether something causes harm.