video game piracy: a question

[INF1NIT3 D00M]

If I have lost the product then I will pirate it. Because I've already paid for it.

If saaay, a game company... Not mentioning any names Mr. You Beesoft, royally screwed me over with some horrible DRM that has me take an exam before playing a game, I will probably crack the game.

If the game is too old to be making any sort of revenue, or has been scrapped altogether, I will probably pirate that.

But other than these, I will fuel the gaming industry with my hard earned coins.

In those cases, are you really a pirate, though? In case A, you bought the game, so you're entitled to a copy of it. It's the same in case B, since I don't count the crack itself as piracy. You bought the game, the DRM isn't supposed to stop you. If you choose to get rid of it, who could really blame you? In case C, the developer has moved on or gone under, so you couldn't pay even if you wanted to. On top of that, I'd commend you for keeping abandonware alive.

 

[Zenn3k]

Personally, I when I pirate a game, its because I want to see if its worth the purchase.

EVERY game I've pirated, if I enjoyed it, I went out and purchased it (usually because I want access to content patches), something I likely wouldn't have done otherwise.

If I don't like it, I don't purchase it, something I wouldn't have done anyway.

So as far as I'm concerned, piracy has INCREASED the number of games I buy.

I mentioned in one of my other posts that I've never come across anyone who pirates and then buys a game. I guess you are that person then. I'll take your word on it, and I'm glad to hear that some piracy is working for the better.

That brings up a question, though: If a game has a demo do you pirate it anyway, or do you use the demos when you can and only pirate if no demo is released?

Really depends on the demo.

Often I don't download demos, because most demos are so poorly constructed that they actually turn me off a product I was interested in buying.

The shooter demo that gives you 1 gun, on 1/2 of a level, really doesn't show nearly enough to make me excited the play the full game.

I usually look at it like this, if the demo is THAT weak, the full game must be fairly weak as well, or they wouldn't feel the need to hide so much of it from me. A demo should get you excited that the final product will be something worth purchasing, I've come across VERY few demos that accomplish that goal.

To answer your question: I'd likely pirate the game anyway, and use the full experience as a "full demo" that simply lacks support and patches.

Also worth noting, I don't pirate every game I have a thought about purchasing, a lot of them I just go out and buy, regretting the purchase a good 50% of the time. I primary pirate games I'm fairly unfamiliar with.

The most recent example I can give for all this is Civ 5. I had NEVER played a Civ game before 5. I had no idea what to really expect. So I downloaded a pirated copy. The game barely ran, had multiple issues, and was the original release of the title (there have been many patches since). I LOVED it. I played it constantly for nearly 2 weeks. I then decided, I wanted those patches, and additional leaders and to not have the bugs I dealt was dealing with, so I went on Steam and bought it. Still play it off and on to this day, absolutely zero regret in my purchase.

 

[INF1NIT3 D00M]

Snip!

It never really occurred to me to do that. When you put it like that I can't really say I blame you. I was asking purely out of curiosity, and I will consider what you said the next time a game I want is coming out. If I ever get around to buying Civ 5, I will hunt you down and perhaps we can play a round together.

I don't really have much to say, but it was interesting reading what you said and I wanted to let you know. To fill some extra space so I don't get a low content warning, I'll tell you that I played the Space Marine demo and it was actually pretty cool. I think I might go play it again. Oh, and I liked Crysis 2's demo, since it gave you access to a decent sized portion of multiplayer. Also in this category would be Lost Planet's demo. Just a few months ago myself and a few friends downloaded the multiplayer demo just to play a few rounds of deathmatch.

EDIT: I did not mean to imply that I have pirated Civ 5. I just haven't raised the cash for it yet. I'd rather clarify that now and have it seem patronizing than have it be misinterpreted by a mod...

 

[teisjm]

Well, the person who says "I wouldn't buy it anyway" is really just making an excuse.
Obviously, if you are putting in the work to pirate a game, you have some desire to play it, and you might as well support the developer by actually paying for the game.

Or maybe you're playing it for a few hours at a LAN party, getting it from someones harddisc and installing it making the "work" to pirate it sometimes less than just installing and registering it, if you had bought it.
I wouldn't lay down money for a game i'd only play for a few hours at a LAN party, playing it mainly cause that was what people where playing atm.
I've played many games like that at LAN parties, not touching them even once after the LAN was over, cause i only found them interresting, due to them beeing what was played atm at the LAN.
If i couldn't pirate them, i'd just settle for playing what i had instead, though that would make the LAN less fun.
If you're at a somewhat large LAN 10-15+ people, chances that everyone has the same games are relatively low, so beeing able to share the games makes it much easier, and enables everyone to play together, without having to lay down a lot of money for a game they wouldn't give a fuck about outside of the LAN. Buying them at that point might not even be an option, if you don't have an open game store nearby.

 

[infinity_turtles]

I realize that, but if they wouldn't have bought the game, then why do they consider it worth pirating?
If they have little or no interest in a game, at least not enough to buy it, why bother at all?
Now they've got a game that they really didn't want in the first place.

Didn't particularly care to go through the thread to see if someone has said this already, but I'd like to have a crack at this.

First, the effort and time it takes to pirate something once you know how is basically nothing. Wanting enough to put almost no effort into it is very different than wanting it enough to pay, even on the cheap end of games, 20$. The question of whether you want something enough to pay x amount is not the same as if you want to spend two minutes clicking things and then go do something else for a bit while it downloads.

That reason pales in comparison to this one though. Uncertainty. Will, once I've bought the game, find it to be worth the cost? If I pay nothing, I can guarantee that most games I'll answer yes to this. If I pay 60$? The vast majority of games get a no. Why should I, when I have a viable alternative, decide to buy a game be based on the quality of the marketing instead of the quality of the game? Even if you want to throw in demos, demos are specifically chosen bits of gameplay to make you want more, not representative of the real experience of the game. They are part of marketing.

And hell, you could throw in voting with your wallet as a reason. A sequel to a game you loved has become a game you simply enjoy. They've changed things in way you don't want to reinforce with your purchase, but not enough that the few elements left from the old version aren't enjoyable. Sure, it might "mean" more if you actually suffer through boredom by not playing the game at all in your protest against these changes, but from the Developers side of things, it doesn't really change anything. A lost sale is a lost sale.

Now, I'm not saying these reasons are right or anything, but all of these are plausible beliefs a person can hold that would allow for having enough interest to play, but not be willing to buy a game.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

It's not that I don't empathize with the people who only have the option of piracy, it's just that I find it morally wrong.

Do you find it morally wrong to give free food to those who cannot procure it?

Careful, he's going to tell you that food is a necessity and videogames are a luxury, ignoring the fact that giving free food actually costs money, while making free videogames takes nothing but a little time.

which would be a good response. Food doesn't actually cost money any more than producing a video game.

Except,as I pointed out above, we're talking about a copy of a game that was made using resources not connected to the company, so that specific copy cost the company nothing, compared to food that somebody had to buy before it could be given away. This is also why copyright infringement is a different crime, and a much less serious offense, than theft.

and I'm saying that technically, the food didn't have to be bought, although yes, you can't copy a fruit. You are also correct, in that it is not theft, but it's still fairly serious, because of the nature of the societies we live in. In our societies, whether or not an industry can exist, is if it can make a profit on its own. Piracy and the whole copying problem puts a dent in not only the Game industry, but Music as well as Film, to the point that in the context of the world we live in, it is as bad as stealing a farmer's crop.

In that case, you need to take a look at my first post. Piracy is to digital goods as the Star Trek replicator is to physical goods. Just like how in Star Trek, society ultimately moved to a socialistic state because capitalism was completely obsolete, in real life, our capitalist companies are going to have to find a way to make a profit despite the fact that their main product can easily and freely be copied, or otherwise go out of business. I'll tell you, locking it down with EULAs and denigrating it as a physical product is the opposite of how they need to do that; nice little things like paper or cloth maps for RPGs, and all the other little <link=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Feelies>feelies that used to come with PC games is more like it. What they have to do is make their product a better product than the free one; if they can do that, people will buy it. Right now, however, the free product is significantly better than the paid product, and the only real reason to buy legally is out of the goodness of one's heart, or out of a fear of punishment. Piracy is just the better option for the consumer in far too many cases, and it really doesn't need to be that way.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

In that case, you need to take a look at my first post. Piracy is to digital goods as the Star Trek replicator is to physical goods.

Except that a Replicator converts matter from one state to a desired state, there's no input on a human level. Videogames have human developers, programmers, writers, coders, marketers, producers, publishers, artists etc. When a videogame can be produced as easily as a Replicator can materialise me a cup of Earl Grey then you'll have a point.

I'll tell you, locking it down with EULAs and denigrating it as a physical product is the opposite of how they need to do that; nice little things like paper or cloth maps for RPGs, and all the other little feelies that used to come with PC games is more like it.

This I can kind of agree on. Publishers do need to provide incentive for consumers to purchase their product instead of getting it for free. On the other hand they still have to protect against copyright infringement and IP theft, so treating it as a limited, physical product is a valid way of doing that. Treating it as an unlimited product removes (or at least drastically lowers) the value of the product.

What they have to do is make their product a better product than the free one; if they can do that, people will buy it. Right now, however, the free product is significantly better than the paid product, and the only real reason to buy legally is out of the goodness of one's heart, or out of a fear of punishment. Piracy is just the better option for the consumer in far too many cases, and it really doesn't need to be that way.

By definition the product you purchase is infinitely better in that you actually have the rights to it in all its glory. When you purchase your copy of Battleground 3: Modern Combat 12 you have the exclusive rights to use all of the features you paid for, such as multiplayer components and future patches and updates. If you download B3MC12 you first have to wait for a torrent to arrive, to have the DRM and security stamped out of it, for someone to host cracked servers. You might have to use a crack or workaround to patch the game too.

There are several complications to pirating that sometimes make it less than desireable. Sure there are perfect torrents out there, but they're usually of games that have been out for a month or two.

 

[akahitsuki]

for me it's all about the help the developers lose, if i wanted a game, i would buy it, if i didnt want it why would i waste my HDD space pirating it?

 

[Vault101]

Well, the person who says "I wouldn't buy it anyway" is really just making an excuse.
Obviously, if you are putting in the work to pirate a game, you have some desire to play it, and you might as well support the developer by actually paying for the game.

And what if a game costed half a persons salary?

I understand the outrage that certain people might have when they see someone getting something for free that they had to pay for but let's face facts here people, pirates are people who can't afford games. Be it some teenager whose parents don't want/can't afford to buy him/her games or just some student struggling to get through college, pirates are not all self entitled jerks like most people here seem to think. Hell, if it wasn't for piracy most of the people living here wouldn't be able to game because the prices are so outrageously high and the salaries are so outrageously low. Hell, if it wasn't for piracy I can outright say not only would I have not been introduced to gaming but I would have probably never bought any games at all.

Show some compassion people. It's not that hard.

Im not showing compassion for people who are the reason I get slapped in the face with DRM

there is NO reason to pirate if you can buy the games....full stop

and even if you cant...boo hoo they are hurting the industry and the legit gamers

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Then that person is shit out of luck. We have rules for a reason. And fuck the person who thinks that their case is special and they're above the law. They don't have money to pay for it? They don't get it, simple as that. Come back when you're less poor. If money is really an issue then they should be worrying about buying food not video games. It is self-entitled to think you should be able to get something for free. A poor person who thinks they deserve to game for free is just entitled as a rich person who games for free.

Yeah those fucking entitled poor people. How dare they get access to the same things us rich folk have. Just let them rot in their small homes and live from paycheck to paycheck, they deserve nothing because they're poor and don't have an amazing high paying job like the rest of us. I bet you're also against paying taxes because that would give poor people a pavement to walk on. Hell, what about that communist socialist medcare they've been talking about? I mean how dare they raise taxes so everyone can have access to free healthcare. It infringes on my rights to discriminate against poor people!

You can make the case for entertainment being just as necessary as food. I won't argue for or against it, and even assume that it is. Food being necessary doesn't entitle everyone to 5-star gourmet meals three times per day. A soup kitchen fulfills that need just as well. Much in the same way that entertainment is necessary but does not entitle everyone to AAA games, free games and other forms of entertainment fulfill that need just as well.

Sure, being entitled to food doesn't entitle you to a 5 star gourmet dinner. Then again, you can't buy a 5 star gourmet dinner, make a digital copy of it and download it whenever you feel like eating a fancy dinner. You'd have to actually steal the food whereas with piracy you buy a legitimate copy and make copies of it.

Im not showing compassion for people who are the reason I get slapped in the face with DRM

there is NO reason to pirate if you can buy the games....full stop

and even if you cant...boo hoo they are hurting the industry and the legit gamers

You actually think piracy is the reason such restrictive DRM is being introduced? You're quite naive if you do so. Also, how are they hurting the industry and the "legit gamer"? Lost sales could be anything from a person pirating the game to another person just buying a different game.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

Then that person is shit out of luck. We have rules for a reason. And fuck the person who thinks that their case is special and they're above the law. They don't have money to pay for it? They don't get it, simple as that. Come back when you're less poor. If money is really an issue then they should be worrying about buying food not video games. It is self-entitled to think you should be able to get something for free. A poor person who thinks they deserve to game for free is just entitled as a rich person who games for free.

Yeah those fucking entitled poor people. How dare they get access to the same things us rich folk have. Just let them rot in their small homes and live from paycheck to paycheck, they deserve nothing because they're poor and don't have an amazing high paying job like the rest of us. I bet you're also against paying taxes because that would give poor people a pavement to walk on. Hell, what about that communist socialist medcare they've been talking about? I mean how dare they raise taxes so everyone can have access to free healthcare. It infringes on my rights to discriminate against poor people!

Whoah, whoah there, slow down man. That's just how it is, some people can barely support themselves, but how does that give them the right to claim for free what others work and pay for? They're giving up a luxury, it's not like he's saying they shouldn't have access to government funded/subsidised healthcare or things of that ilk. He's talking about a want not a need. It's a product that you can live without.

You can make the case for entertainment being just as necessary as food. I won't argue for or against it, and even assume that it is. Food being necessary doesn't entitle everyone to 5-star gourmet meals three times per day. A soup kitchen fulfills that need just as well. Much in the same way that entertainment is necessary but does not entitle everyone to AAA games, free games and other forms of entertainment fulfill that need just as well.

Sure, being entitled to food doesn't entitle you to a 5 star gourmet dinner. Then again, you can't buy a 5 star gourmet dinner, make a digital copy of it and download it whenever you feel like eating a fancy dinner. You'd have to actually steal the food whereas with piracy you buy a legitimate copy and make copies of it.

But piracy is Intellectual Property being illegally distributed/downloaded. It might not be stealing a physical item, but it's taking something you aren't entitled to much like taking that 5 star gourmet dinner. If you host a torrent of a game with a keygen/crack/isos then you're distributing something you have no right to distribute.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Whoah, whoah there, slow down man. That's just how it is, some people can barely support themselves, but how does that give them the right to claim for free what others work and pay for?

That depends. Would you willingly deny someone food because they don't have the money to pay for it?

They're giving up a luxury, it's not like he's saying they shouldn't have access to government funded/subsidised healthcare or things of that ilk. He's talking about a want not a need. It's a product that you can live without.

You know, that house/apartment you're living in is a luxury as well. Why not just abandon it and live in a cardboard box for the rest of your life and then tell me how luxuries are not necessary to live like a normal human being in the 21st century.

But piracy is Intellectual Property being illegally distributed/downloaded. It might not be stealing a physical item, but it's taking something you aren't entitled to much like taking that 5 star gourmet dinner.

Nope. Taking the gourmet dinner without paying for it is one thing, buying a gourmet dinner and then making thousands of copies that can be distributed online is another.

If you host a torrent of a game with a keygen/crack/isos then you're distributing something you have no right to distribute.

Why? Because publishers decided that instead of owning the game you purchased, you're simply "licensing it"? That's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. If I buy a pizza I'm sure as hell not "licensing the right to eat that pizza" and if I wanted to I could not only share it with whomever but at the same time I could make more pizza and even sell it on the street.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

You know, that house/apartment you're living in is a luxury as well. Why not just abandon it and live in a cardboard box for the rest of your life and then tell me how luxuries are not necessary to live like a normal human being in the 21st century.

Because a house is a luxury I can afford. But a cardboard box is not a safe, secure shelter and no human being should have to live in those conditions. Living without the latest Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto will not have a direct affect on you well being. As another poster has also stated, there are free games readily available to play for people who can't afford new ones. Freeware, browser games and free 2 play games. There's also books, movies, television etc.

Comparing not having videogames to not having a house is such a bad analogy my brain is melting from just thinking that a rational human being would even make it.

Nope. Taking the gourmet dinner without paying for it is one thing, buying a gourmet dinner and then making thousands of copies that can be distributed online is another.

Again with the horrible analogies. You cannot copy a gourmet dinner as if were a piece of software. You can do that with software, but not a physical product (at least not without a matter replicator).

Why? Because publishers decided that instead of owning the game you purchased, you're simply "licensing it"? That's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. If I buy a pizza I'm sure as hell not "licensing the right to eat that pizza" and if I wanted to I could not only share it with whomever but at the same time I could make more pizza and even sell it on the street.

Yes, but the pizza you made would be your pizza. You have every right to sell the pizza that you, the creator of the pizza, made. You could also share your original pizza, but you're not creating whole copies of that pizza, you're simply giving away what you didn't eat. Much like you would give away an old game to a friend if you couldn't sell it and didn't want it anymore.

And think about it, when you purchase a game you are purchasing an unlimited license to use the software on the disc. If you sell that game you are passing on the license to someone else, meaning that you no longer have it. Copying that software, circumventing the on-disc protection and then distributing it is analogous to making your own copies of that game and giving them away to friends. It is illegal. You have not been given permission to copy and distribute that software as you only have one license, the one you purchased when you bought the game.

What isn't there to understand? When you buy a copy Windows 7 you are given a serial key to activate you copy, that serial is linked to your copy and yours alone. When you buy Warcraft III you enter the serial key upon installation to validate your copy, that serial key is then linked to your copy of Warcraft III.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Because a house is a luxury I can afford. But a cardboard box is not a safe, secure shelter and no human being should have to live in those conditions

Yes, but a house is still a luxury. What if you couldn't afford a house? Say by some miracle you lost all your money and job and you were forced to live on the street. Would you be content with that? How about losing every piece of entertainment? Would you be OK with that?

Living without the latest Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto will not have a direct affect on you well being.

Having no internet, books, games etc would have no impact on your well being also but can you honestly say you can live without them/ Entertainment isn't a luxury anymore, is it? It's part of who we are as human beings. It's what defines us. We've reached a point in our society where the only thing we crave is entertainment. To deny a person that is similar to denying them food or a house.

Again with the horrible analogies. You cannot copy a gourmet dinner as if were a piece of software. You can do that with software, but not a physical product (at least not without a matter replicator).

No, you can't. But you can do that with a piece of information. The original data is still there, what you're doing is making a copy of it. It's not akin to stealing because it isn't stealing, it's copying.

Yes, but the pizza you made would be your pizza. You have every right to sell the pizza that you, the creator of the pizza, made.

How so? I mean, the pizza I made is an exact copy of the one I bought. I'm using someone else's recipe to create that piece of food. Wouldn't that be stealing? By creating that pizza and selling it/giving it away am I also not depriving that restaurant of potential customers? What if I just bought the pizza and shared it with 3 other people? Am I not taking away 3 potential customers from the restaurant?

What if instead of copying the data "pirates" would create a copy of the game they bought using the exact same methods the developers used to create the game. Would that be OK with you?

And think about it, when you purchase a game you are purchasing an unlimited license to use the software on the disc. If you sell that game you are passing on the license to someone else, meaning that you no longer have it.

And that's just bullshit. What other medium sells licenses to people? When you buy a car, you don't purchase a license to drive the car around, you purchase the goddamn car and you can do whatever you feel like with it. If I wanted, I could build another car exactly like it and give it away or use magic to create thousands of copies of that car and give them to whomever I want. It's the same with piracy.

Copying that software, circumventing the on-disc protection and then distributing it is analogous to making your own copies of that game and giving them away to friends.

And why shouldn't I be able to do that? I bought the game, that piece of data belongs to me. I should be able to do whatever the fuck I want to do with it the same way I can do whatever the hell I want with anything else I bought. Companies should not have the right to dictate what customers can do with their products.

You have not been given permission to copy and distribute that software as you only have one license, the one you purchased when you bought the game.

Guess I should stop making pizza then. I've only licensed one and by making more I'm infringing on the restaurants rights.

What isn't there to understand? When you buy a copy Windows 7 you are given a serial key to activate you copy, that serial is linked to your copy and yours alone. When you buy Warcraft III you enter the serial key upon installation to validate your copy, that serial key is then linked to your copy of Warcraft III.

And that's what I have a problem with. The whole idea of licensing shit rather than being given the actual product is absolutely bullshit. It infringes on the customers rights. When you buy a product it should belong to you, not the company that you bought it from.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

*Entertainment Jazz*

And there's a point when someone becomes addicted to drugs that if they were taken away it would affect their body and mind, possibly driving them to suicide. Should narcotics be so readily available as entertainment? And like a poster before me has said, there are means of free entertainment already, especially if you already own the electronics capable of playing games on in the first place.

If you can afford a PC to run pirated games then what's stopping you from playing freeware or browser based games? Refrain from dragging this to a 'can you live without all luxuries, you can strawman all you like but I never said all. I'm specifying videogames here.

To make an apt analogy, it's the difference between recieving free health care from the state and paying to attend a private practice. It's a choice.

No, you can't. But you can do that with a piece of information. The original data is still there, what you're doing is making a copy of it. It's not akin to stealing because it isn't stealing, it's copying.

But again, you're saying like from the perspective of the uploader. To pirate a game you'd be the one downloading it and that is illegal. Said uploader will have purchased his game, which entitles him to play it and copy the files should he see fit. By downloading it you are gaining a full copy of the game without having purchased it. You are taking intellectual property that was created with the intent of being sold. But more on this later.

*Pizza nonsense*

Just as I am free read the ingredients list on any food item in my house and then create my own version to sell as my own, however if I were to brand it as coming from the original owner but with myself in reciept of the profits then I'd be infringing on their copyright.

What you don't seem to be able to grasp is that Intellectual Property has its own laws seperate from those of physical property. In this case if you could perfectly replicate the recipie, ingredients and method to create an identical copy each time then you'd essentially have the source code to a piece of software. Source code is intellectual property owned by a corporate entity or a person, usually protected by a license to prevent people from messing with it.

What if instead of copying the data "pirates" would create a copy of the game they bought using the exact same methods the developers used to create the game. Would that be OK with you?

Then nothing, they'd have just created a copy of the game using the same method. It still doesn't have the stamp of approval from the owner of the IP and is therefore not official and is bootleg software. You are direly missing the point here: It's not HOW it's created, it's by whom. The items necessary for someone to produce an 'original' copy of the game would all be protected by copyright, using them without the owners consent would be a violation of copyright laws.

*Another broken analogy*

Except each detail of those cars are patented. If you bought a car from a manufacturer, chances are they or the company they purchase their parts from has a patent on everything from the design of the engine to the pedals. For each new car you built you'd have to buy the components to make the cars, so the money owed would be paid in full by the time you'd built the cars. And no, you don't purchase a license because a car is not software. It's a physical product. You can't compare the two, it just doesn't work.

But you certainly can't just up and drive that car. You have to pay road tax, registration fees as well as the cost of your initial permit. Every medium that distributes somethign digitally, be it a DVD or a CD or a videogame is selling you a license for you to legally use the official copies on your CD.

*Opinions and ignorance*

Regardless of your opinion on licensed software, you do not own that data. That data belongs to the company that created it as it is intellectual property and not physical property. Ignorance to the law doesn't give you the right to disregard it. You own a license to use a companies software. You can disagree with it and ignore it all you like, it's a fact and it is the law.

Once again, because you disagree with it doesn't mean you get to disobey it. If you own a piece of land you are not entitled to everything in that land. People may pick freely from wild flora and hunt fauna and there's nothing you can say about that, because you own the land and now what's on it, unless you specifically planted it.

And that's what I have a problem with. The whole idea of licensing shit rather than being given the actual product is absolutely bullshit. It infringes on the customers rights. When you buy a product it should belong to you, not the company that you bought it from.

And it infringes on the companies rights to do anything with their software that they created for the sole purpose of licensing out to individuals such as you and I. Like I said above, feel free to dislike the laws, but that's what they are. Not liking it doesn't make them null and void.

Every one of your points relies on your own ignorance to accept that the law is the law. A piece of software is not a physical product and can be produce infinitely with ease, as such there has to be a method of limiting and preserving the product to maintain value. Otherwise the market would see mass inflation and would eventually collapse under it's own weight.

A developer makes games because they want to get paid for their creativity, on a corporate level. Yes they want to share their vision with the world and make people happy, like all artists, but they can't do that without resources. To strip intellectual property such as video game software of its right to license users will ultimately devalue the software. And like I said, if it's infinite why should anyone pay for it, if no-one pays for it then developers don't get paid, if developers don't get paid then we don't get new games.

It's simple.

 

[ultimateownage]

'I wouldn't buy it' is just an excuse.
'I can't afford it' Well, if you really wanted to play it you would find the money. This is just an excuse for 90% of the time.
'I cannot get it' - This is the only semi-reasonable excuse, if there is literally no legal way of you getting it in your country.

ok so i have to ask two questions first, what if there is a game that is not your type so you have no intention of buying but somone offers it to you for free as they dont want it anymore you just have to get it out of the car (like just clicking a link) would you take it?
second what if you have no money none all gone to bills for things like food and phone payments you have zero cash or simply not enough to buy the game either way the industry wont be getting money from you so you pirate the game, my questions is this: WHAT DO THEY LOSE? you will be giving them no money anyway your not taking an item off a shelf that they could sell to somone else they were never getting your money and now they still wont WHAT DO THEY LOSE?

The first is a terrible example, taking a legally purchased copy from a friend is nothing like the friend giving you a fucking link to Piratebay. As for the second, you won't be penniless forever. You will always get some disposable income eventually, and if you don't then you really need a change of careers. If it's a game you want, you would just pay for it when you could afford it. Downloading it illegally while just repeating to yourself that it's totally okay does not actually MAKE it okay.
If you're looking for excuses that desperately, then there is no way what you're doing is fine. That seems to be the case with you, looking up the page.

By the way, your post was a pain to read with how unstructured it was.

*EDIT*

If I have lost the product then I will pirate it. Because I've already paid for it.

If saaay, a game company... Not mentioning any names Mr. You Beesoft, royally screwed me over with some horrible DRM that has me take an exam before playing a game, I will probably crack the game.

If the game is too old to be making any sort of revenue, or has been scrapped altogether, I will probably pirate that.

But other than these, I will fuel the gaming industry with my hard earned coins.

I wouldn't even consider any of those piracy, as emulating old games does not lose the developers money and downloading a copy of a game you've bought anyway is pretty legal.

 

[Laxman9292]

Then that person is shit out of luck. We have rules for a reason. And fuck the person who thinks that their case is special and they're above the law. They don't have money to pay for it? They don't get it, simple as that. Come back when you're less poor. If money is really an issue then they should be worrying about buying food not video games. It is self-entitled to think you should be able to get something for free. A poor person who thinks they deserve to game for free is just entitled as a rich person who games for free.

Yeah those fucking entitled poor people. How dare they get access to the same things us rich folk have. Just let them rot in their small homes and live from paycheck to paycheck, they deserve nothing because they're poor and don't have an amazing high paying job like the rest of us. I bet you're also against paying taxes because that would give poor people a pavement to walk on. Hell, what about that communist socialist medcare they've been talking about? I mean how dare they raise taxes so everyone can have access to free healthcare. It infringes on my rights to discriminate against poor people!

You can make the case for entertainment being just as necessary as food. I won't argue for or against it, and even assume that it is. Food being necessary doesn't entitle everyone to 5-star gourmet meals three times per day. A soup kitchen fulfills that need just as well. Much in the same way that entertainment is necessary but does not entitle everyone to AAA games, free games and other forms of entertainment fulfill that need just as well.

Sure, being entitled to food doesn't entitle you to a 5 star gourmet dinner. Then again, you can't buy a 5 star gourmet dinner, make a digital copy of it and download it whenever you feel like eating a fancy dinner. You'd have to actually steal the food whereas with piracy you buy a legitimate copy and make copies of it.

Im not showing compassion for people who are the reason I get slapped in the face with DRM

there is NO reason to pirate if you can buy the games....full stop

and even if you cant...boo hoo they are hurting the industry and the legit gamers

You actually think piracy is the reason such restrictive DRM is being introduced? You're quite naive if you do so. Also, how are they hurting the industry and the "legit gamer"? Lost sales could be anything from a person pirating the game to another person just buying a different game.

Nice straw man buddy, did you just learn about that in Philosophy 101? No fuck poor people for feeling entitled to get entertainment (an item definitely not essential to survival) for free. I never said anything about health care, public works or living paycheck to paycheck and find it laughable that you can't address my points on an intellectual level and instead try to degrade my points into a shadow of what they were. That way you don't have to address my points anymore!
Anyways If you are too poor to buy a game then your priorities should be buying food, not pirating games. If you live from paycheck to paycheck then you have bigger worries than games. I'm just saying that you can't use poverty as an excuse to break the law. Or at least you can but don't try to say you are justified, especially not for videogames. I hate that the "steal bread to feed your family" moral dilemma is now "steal games because you can't pay for them legally". You are just a weak-willed poor person who isn't above stealing and don't pretend otherwise.

And in your lost sales case at least the person who buys another game gives his money to ensure the production of other games that they would like to buy. Rather than basically saying to the developers that "fuck your hard work, I deserve this shit for free".

Say you want to make a music album to get money. You spend years writing songs, deciding what instruments you want doing what, pay for recording time, record, re-record, master the tracks and put untold hours into it. And then have it show up on the Pirate Bay and all of a sudden your 3-year project only bring in enough money to keep you from breaking even. Now you don't have the money or the will to make quality albums anymore because 1. the money gained isn't enough to sustain your album-making and 2. you know that people will just take it for free and essentially say that your music isn't worth money and I'll only get it for free.

 

[Laxman9292]

If you host a torrent of a game with a keygen/crack/isos then you're distributing something you have no right to distribute.

Why? Because publishers decided that instead of owning the game you purchased, you're simply "licensing it"? That's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. If I buy a pizza I'm sure as hell not "licensing the right to eat that pizza" and if I wanted to I could not only share it with whomever but at the same time I could make more pizza and even sell it on the street.

No, you are licensing it. Who owns the property? They do. Who agrees to let you buy the rights to use it? They do. If you have a problem with that on an intellectual basis then don't buy it. But stick to you guns people! Don't cry about how slighted we are and then just use that as a front to rationalize piracy. That just degrades out image as entitled brats. You aren't being smart and sticking it to the man. You're just complaining and then using it to get what you want, essentially a (slightly) less sophomoric temper tantrum.

 

[Laxman9292]

If I have lost the product then I will pirate it. Because I've already paid for it.

If saaay, a game company... Not mentioning any names Mr. You Beesoft, royally screwed me over with some horrible DRM that has me take an exam before playing a game, I will probably crack the game.

If the game is too old to be making any sort of revenue, or has been scrapped altogether, I will probably pirate that.

But other than these, I will fuel the gaming industry with my hard earned coins.

Good for you, these are honestly the only reasons I can think of for where piracy is fine, except the DRM is a slippery slope.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

In that case, you need to take a look at my first post. Piracy is to digital goods as the Star Trek replicator is to physical goods.

Except that a Replicator converts matter from one state to a desired state, there's no input on a human level. Videogames have human developers, programmers, writers, coders, marketers, producers, publishers, artists etc. When a videogame can be produced as easily as a Replicator can materialise me a cup of Earl Grey then you'll have a point.

I'll tell you, locking it down with EULAs and denigrating it as a physical product is the opposite of how they need to do that; nice little things like paper or cloth maps for RPGs, and all the other little feelies that used to come with PC games is more like it.

This I can kind of agree on. Publishers do need to provide incentive for consumers to purchase their product instead of getting it for free. On the other hand they still have to protect against copyright infringement and IP theft, so treating it as a limited, physical product is a valid way of doing that. Treating it as an unlimited product removes (or at least drastically lowers) the value of the product.

What they have to do is make their product a better product than the free one; if they can do that, people will buy it. Right now, however, the free product is significantly better than the paid product, and the only real reason to buy legally is out of the goodness of one's heart, or out of a fear of punishment. Piracy is just the better option for the consumer in far too many cases, and it really doesn't need to be that way.

By definition the product you purchase is infinitely better in that you actually have the rights to it in all its glory. When you purchase your copy of Battleground 3: Modern Combat 12 you have the exclusive rights to use all of the features you paid for, such as multiplayer components and future patches and updates. If you download B3MC12 you first have to wait for a torrent to arrive, to have the DRM and security stamped out of it, for someone to host cracked servers. You might have to use a crack or workaround to patch the game too.

There are several complications to pirating that sometimes make it less than desireable. Sure there are perfect torrents out there, but they're usually of games that have been out for a month or two.

Just have to ask, how much Star Trek have you watched? Because food was only a small part of what the replicators made. They made physical goods with them all the time -- everything from clothes, to watches, to parts for the ship. Somebody had to design those things, and the cost in doing so would not have been trivial; the comparison stands.

As for having legal rights to a game making that copy better than the pirated version -- no, it just makes it less legally risky. Most games are fully cracked on day one, with a few cracked before release, and the very rare game taking a month or more. There have only been two games in modern history that took that long to fully crack: Arkham Asylum, and Assassin's Creed 2. In AA's case, it was because it wasn't obvious that it wasn't fully cracked until fairly late in the game. In AC2's case, it was because of the always on DRM -- however, that was designed in such a way that, once cracked for one game, it was cracked for all games that used it. Game companies have been sowing tainted seeds for a while now by denigrating games as a physical product and loading them up with DRM; right now they're reaping what they've sown. If they aren't happy about it, they need to make their next crop one that treats the customer right.

Edit: Oh, also, the pirated version often has features the paid version lacks -- like dedicated servers in Modern Warfare 2, and LAN support in Starcraft 2. Like I said, the pirated version is more often than not an outright better product than the paid version.