U.K. Games Industry Starts Playing Hardball

[snuffler]

But if you're just going to make endless justifications for your cheap, greasy behaviour, save us both some time and don't bother.

Okay I don't download games, and I don't condone it

That wasn't directed at little ol' me now, was it? Skrapt and I both presented the idea of Ads in games to make them free to play to begin with which seems like a valid way to fight piracy, at least in my eyes.

 

[Arbre]

And now one of those people who thought "that's worth playing, but not at their price" gets to play it at somebody else's price.

$30 thou is awfully heavy for downloading a single game. On the other hand, if you don't want to risk punitive action, don't steal shit. On that point, at least, it seems pretty straightforward. I don't like it, I don't like the idea of zero-value downloaders being sued into oblivion because they're too cheap or stupid to buy a game; but like Anton, I'm also having a hard time working up much sympathy for the people getting hit with these suits. Regardless of how you look at it, punishing your customers into submission isn't a great way to do business.

But she wasn't a customer.

 

[odisious15]

A few ways to help quell the amount of game piracy going on would be to follow a model that Snuffler and Skrapt mentioned.

I would like to see changes to the anti piracy laws that make it nearly impossible to return a game; so long as you have a LEGITIMATE reason that can be proven, I don't think the consumer should be treated like shit because a PC or Console game doesn't work as intended.

At this point in time there should be no reason why someone can not rent a PC game. (Something along the lines of today's console games; it's entirely possible to start working towards a system were someone could just plop a disk into there optical drive and start a game up.)

There are plenty of other ways to go about implementing tactics to reduce piracy but I still think the most powerful weapon to curb this so called epidemic is for developers to put out quality and not quantity. If the statement "consumers speak with their money" holds any water to begin with then, consumers paying for cheap trash they never would have taken a second glance at had they known what the game was really like, then I think that shoots the whole point in that statement full of holes.

 

[Andy Chalk]

What makes you think it was directed at you? It was a blanket statement.

 

[snuffler]

Just makin sure ;P

 

[SimuLord]

And now one of those people who thought "that's worth playing, but not at their price" gets to play it at somebody else's price.

$30 thou is awfully heavy for downloading a single game. On the other hand, if you don't want to risk punitive action, don't steal shit. On that point, at least, it seems pretty straightforward. I don't like it, I don't like the idea of zero-value downloaders being sued into oblivion because they're too cheap or stupid to buy a game; but like Anton, I'm also having a hard time working up much sympathy for the people getting hit with these suits. Regardless of how you look at it, punishing your customers into submission isn't a great way to do business.

Disclaimer: I will not be drawn into conversations that follow topics including the right to try before you buy, the high price and/or low quality of most games, "downloading isn't stealing" or any other rationalizing bullshit that will inevitably flow in a discussion like this. Know a better way to fight piracy? Let's hear it. But if you're just going to make endless justifications for your cheap, greasy behaviour, save us both some time and don't bother.

I think the best way to fight piracy is the way Valve's doing it with Steam. Make the game phone home and authenticate, since it works overwhelmingly well and doesn't seem to irritate Valve's customer base any more than it absolutely has to. I'd say "make the player log in the way Blizzard does with battle.net every time they want to play", but that has the dual-edged problem of 1, what to do about people who aren't always connected to the Internet or whose connections go down and really, what's there to do when the Net's out but play games, and 2, what happens if the developer goes out of business and people are left with game media that is rendered worthless. I might even add a 3 in there---since I wouldn't put it past EA to stop supporting the customer login for a game like Sims 2 once Sims 3 comes out and write some weasel language into the EULA that "this game will self-destruct when we feel like forcing you to upgrade."

At the same time, I don't condone game theft and every game I own was purchased through some sort of legitimate distribution channel, even if that channel was "hey, I've got this game, you want it?" and taking possession of all game media that had been uninstalled from the seller's computer per the EULA.

 

[stompy]

I quite liked the idea pitched by Skrapt and Snuffler: it makes the game cheaper while not detracting from the overall experience. Nice work guys.

As for the actual article, we all know piracy is bad, but I don't think they're going about it that right way. Instead of suing the pants off of a single parent (who probably can't pay off the amount anyway), they should be targeting those such as uploaders.

 

[Arbre]

£~15,000 for downloading a crappy pinball game which could've probably been picked up for £10? I hope its not just me who thinks that is a bit much...

For downloading it, don't be so ridiculous, she should only have been made to cough up the amount it would cost to buy (and laywers fees, possibly). The people who upload the games in torrent form or similar should be the ones paying large amounts in compensation.

You mean in complete torrent form, right?

 

[DarkHyth]

£~15,000 for downloading a crappy pinball game which could've probably been picked up for £10? I hope its not just me who thinks that is a bit much...

For downloading it, don't be so ridiculous, she should only have been made to cough up the amount it would cost to buy (and laywers fees, possibly). The people who upload the games in torrent form or similar should be the ones paying large amounts in compensation.

You mean in complete torrent form, right?

Yes, I suppose so. Seeding a complete torrent should result in a heavier payment than just downloading and not seeding (which is sort of frowned upon but meh, big deal), as that way you are not furthering the distribution of the product for free.

I guess you could argue that while the game is being downloaded, you are partially hosting the parts you've already got... well just turn off the uploading =P I'm not sure what to do about that, it's the difference between "deliberately helping evil" and "unaware you were helping evil" which can't be proved either way.

 

[Arbre]

Hehe, you got it right, I was precisely thinking about the uploading part. You usually get lower transfers with minimal or no upload, but at least you're certainly not guilty of illegally sharing the illegal file.
...

 

[Captin Planet]

i love reading how all these ppl believe sharing is stealing. big business keeps telling you its stealing and you believe them. sharing is caring full stop. Im not saying i download games myself but im not going to start calling sharing - stealing either just because we have figured out how to share these types of things freeing up our monies for more important things in life like food, clothing and housing why let them take away our right to share so they can make more money on top of the piles of money these company's have most of the time already.

as long as no money changes hands i dont care what ppl share.

 

[Weaver]

Disclaimer: I will not be drawn into conversations that follow topics including the right to try before you buy, the high price and/or low quality of most games, "downloading isn't stealing" or any other rationalizing bullshit that will inevitably flow in a discussion like this. Know a better way to fight piracy? Let's hear it. But if you're just going to make endless justifications for your cheap, greasy behaviour, save us both some time and don't bother.

Price your games right, if that pinball game was around $5 where it should be then more people would have bought it. That wouldn't ELIMINATE piracy but it would curve it.

Vavle's summer sales ruined me, I got about 25 great games for $80 USD. If I can buy the full Ghostbusters game for $4, I'm not spending $30 on a pinball game (actually I'm never going to play a pinball game because I think they're boring).