The "piracy as demo" fallacy

YAYitsAndrew

I agree with you that some DRM is out of line. My way to handle that situation is to simply not buy the game and not play it. Obviously I'm voting with my dollars, but I also don't give them artistic credibility by acknowledging that I enjoyed their game. I also won't have any reason to ever bring it up as a recommendation or to a friend. Imagine bumping into the designer one day and he says "Hey did you ever play my game?" I can just say "nope, didn't want to deal with the DRM." The conversations over. He can't be like oh, well did you enjoy the doohickeys and whatsitbobbles and muster up some personal achievement within himself. Or herself.

I'm pretty strict with myself on things like that. There are quite a few games that I have to wait on purchasing until I find out if I can flip the mouse buttons in the game (I'm a lefty). I've boycotted games for that reason before. I've even contacted the developer to let them know my concern and if there is any fix in the forseeable future. Of course not, no one cares about lefties

RSOblivion

Its quite amusing when they shout pirate at you yet then procede to attempt to steal private data off your machine while their program is in use (punkbuster, SF, BF2142 ads, etc...) or put it on your machine in the case of advertising ingame. Now I don't mind how Hellgate did it. They actually got real places and made ingame places look similar. BF2142 though with its updated ads (which nicely don't work if you block their ports) is the wrong way to do it. Microsoft see DRM as the future, yet they don't include the DRM stuff in Server 2008 (too many companies would complain). So if you don't want DRM use Server 2008 works better than Vista, faster, and more stable. Hmmm you think that all that shit we HAVE to agree to in the EULA (amusing since there is no written consent the company can't do much anyway ) would mean that they hold their end of the bargain, then you realise they don't have one. Its entirely one sided and therefore can never conceivably be considered a contract. If there is no contract then how can it be considered piracy. But hey there's gonna be the moral absolutist (Christian??) saying 'you know its morally wrong' well tbh I don't think so. If you have stolen something that disadvantages a man or woman that owns it then fine thats wrong (either financially or physically) but if its a profit hungry corporation thats whining about lost revenue and posting huge profits, do you really think anyone is gonna give a shit?


Sorry posted before your question. Its 2am here so I'll answer in the morning

BWX

I'm left handed and never had a problem with the mouse, it is the keyboard layout on some games that doesn't work.

Sometimes they make some keys so they cannot be changed. For instance I use the numpad and arrow keys- plus the right Ctrl, ins, home, page up/down, delete, end, 0/insert keys. Instead of the usual WASD space, etc..

I think the last game I did not buy because of that was battlefield 2012 or whatever the hell it was after 1942. Stupid EA wouldn't allow me to use the buttons I use for all 1st person shooters in the demo, so I did not buy it. I have the mouse on the left, but use the buttons as a righty would.. I only use my index finger - for all three buttons and wheel. I use left thumb for the left side button and disable the rest. It works out most of the time but is a disadvantage still.

I think it is all just part of a bigger problem, the lack of quality of PC games today, and the lack of time used to test them. Then after that, it is the lack of proper patches and support. In 1999 it seems most game companies cared about the games they made, supported them with patches if they needed them, etc. Now, MANY companies just spit out garbage game after garbage game and then stop supporting them 6 months after they are released. There are exceptions, but the overall quality of PC games is not what it used to be.

YAYitsAndrew

BWX: The biggest left handed offenders for me have been RTS games and other click to control games like freedom force. Those tend to have very distinct functions for the left and right mouse buttons and if you can't flip them the game becomes frustrating really fast.

Also here is something to think about. The "decline" in quality of games on PC should not be attributed solely to the developer. We demand top of the line graphics for everything, but the problem is the PC is a moving target. Your customers could have any kind of computer from the past six years. It's very hard to release something that will work on millions of PC configurations and it takes a LOT of money to test them. This is the allure of console systems where the hardware is stabilized.

I don't think you see a decline in gameplay, surely gameplay is evolving and getting more intuitive and engaging. It's the technical issues that have led to a decline in PC gaming. The need for DRM just adds another point of failure to technical issues. Maybe your game runs fine on a given system but the DRM doesn't. PC gaming is difficult!

I'm going to give a shit. Whether it's a person or a corporation, they are each a business entity and entitled to the money made selling their product. What's wrong with a big company making a lot of money? That's what happens when you sell something to millions of people. The company is not at fault for having a popular product. Do you hate all corporations that make lots of money or just the ones with products that are easy to steal? In other words, do you also hate Harry Potter's publisher for making millions of dollars off of selling a book? Do you feel like that entitles you to steal the book for free? What about when the latest blockbuster movie is making millions of dollars in the theater? Do you feel that it is okay to sneak in and watch it for free? Dell sure is making a lot of money selling those computers, they won't mind if I just take one. Designer jeans make a lot of money so stuffing a pair into your bag and walking out of the store is something they'll never notice.

If companies allowed that kind of thinking than the situation would quickly become "me too" because everyone feels that they're special and entitled to lots of free stuff. How do you decide who's worthy and who's not?

As you can see, all sorts of businesses make lots of money. I have no idea what makes software companies any different from the rest, other than they have no way to protect their goods as well as a tangible product.

I know it's popular to hate large corporations that make a lot of money (maybe everyone's just jealous) but let's stick to hating companies that are selling harmful products like cigarettes or companies that treat their talent unfairly like some recording companies. Game studios are just trying to provide us with a good time.

RSOblivion

Thanks for using the word hate so much seeing as I never mentioned it once. I don't hate corporations that make lots money at all. I dislike corporations that abuse their position through rushing products through before they are finished (EA springs to mind) and also include ridiculous protections on something that doesn't really need it. Strangely enough there are probably the same percentage of 'pirates' on console platforms as on PC, but the PC being the largest market its slightly more noticeable.

By the way have you noticed the difference between a corporation and a living being? A corporation is a legal fantasy created to operate in the current set of laws. It has no respect or thought or feeling for anything seeing as it is just a piece of paper. By the way you are correct a person is a business entity, but you believe that for the wrong reasons. The term person literally means, body politic or body corporate. It is not you or I. We are living beings. And I stand by what I said before. If it harms a living being financially or physically then its wrong. If its a corporation, well it doesn't really matter seeing as its only a piece of paper. I am not going to let pieces of paper dominate my life (including governmental bullshit) but then I have a slightly different view of the law than most. Amusingly its kinda proven that the law is mostly bullshit that is there for the corporations to make money and impoverish the public so the select few who made the laws can live their corrupt lifestyles.

I love the part where you say 'if companies allowed this thinking'. So now you want to give control of how people think to corporations? Ok you must love the Big Brother attitude that the UK has now then. All those lovely cameras (which mind you don't prevent crime but just help attribute blame. And then film can be doctored pretty easily too) and what about the laws, where now you can be arrested and detained indefinitely for being a 'suspected terrorist'. No evidence needed, just a tea towel on your head.

"Lets stick to hating companies that are selling harful products like cigarrettes" and games where people lose the ability to operate in the normal reality because they are addicted to WoW or some other MMO or whatever. Games are not anywhere near as bad as cigarrettes, but there are still a lot of negatives to them. People are encouraged not to think for themselves anymore, they are taught to look to the authorities first and then they will solve your problems for you. They have taken away the most inalienable right of all. That to think for yourself.


In answer to your question about what the revenue could be used for, I very much doubt the developers would see any of it. The majority would go into holding accounts for the publishers and they would then use it at their discretion. More than likely it would be wasted on another Madden title or resurrecting some other PoS from the companies past which shouldn't see the light of day again. With all the extra money it is very unlikely to get a gem from a developer into the limelight and out to the community. Especially seeing as its controlled by the publishers.

instago

With the additional revenue EA & friends would probably buy some more dildos to shove up our asses.

Al_Vampyre

It's a company's job to make money, it is the raison d'etre, if a company ceases to make money it will (and should) cease to exist. Anyone who thinks that a game company is trying to give us a good time and make some profit is sadly deluded. The profit element will always come first, if they stop making money then our enjoyment, or otherwise, becomes irrelevant. Thats why we have crappy games like The Sims or Madden, because they are solid money makers - so yes I too care if these guys lose money otherewise there will be nothing to play...

RSOblivion

You are missing the point Al_Vampyre, the money they are complaining they lost was never lost. If it wasn't made in the first place how can it be lost revenue! They are crying about something they are claiming they should have got when they have no solid proof they would have got it. As for the pirates they more than likely would not have bought the game at all, so the revenue would still be non-existent. To rationalize they are losing huge amounts when its a very small minority is amusing to say the least and the money they get as profit is not all ploughed back into new releases, hell they cut the budgets if they can to make more profit. The problem is they are now so focused on profit they have forgotten that money is there to be spent rather than hoarded. If they spent some of their huge profits investing in their games properly then I think there would be less bitching about crap games as they would generally be of a higher level of quality and there would be less piracy of a quality game than a cheap big bux game. You look at the Fallout series for instance, those are still selling strong and they are about 10 years old, Warcraft 3 is another. They were quality games and they stand the test of time, whereas games like Daikatana should rot in hell with the mega corps for just existing.

I guess I'm one of those that would prefer 2 really good games in 10 years rather than 10 shit games in 3 years. Most games are so short now you can finish them in a day. Bring back the days of Jagged Alliance 2 where if it was your first time it could take weeks or even months to beat. Gameplay and storyline are all important rather than glitzy gfx and massive system reqs.

BlueMak

While I don't disagree with what you just siad RSOblivion, the so called HUGE PROFITS are not real. Very few releases earn huge profits and most publishers barely make a profit.

RSOblivion

Did you see EA's, Activision's, THQ's and Vivendi's profit stats for last year? They were staggering, enough to fund 30 games a piece and then some, plus make those games from scratch on a five year period and pay everyone involved above the average for the industry. And you say the profits weren't huge? There are a lot of smaller publishers but they are systematically being incorporated into the big 4 above. GTA IV was the fastest selling game of all time and that netted the developers 650000 sales in the first week of trading. That would cover the costs of production in one week (650,000 x $99 (AU) = $64,350,000 (AU)) plus the next two games in the series and give the dev team a few nice holidays in Hawaii at the same time.

I realise that the big bux aren't made by all releases but the profits in the industry have become billions rather than millions over the last few years (look at WoW for instance). It may not be the norm for most titles, but the Publishers always have a few very good titles to offset the bad (with the exception of Atari who keep going under through poor management).

Al_Vampyre

Ehhh...no I didn't, my response was in answer to your question about what they would use the additional revenue for (whether it was hypothetical or not - you didn't specify so neither did I). Which was kinda why I quoted that section of your previous post.

You may now carry on...

BlueMak

Hmm, I am sorry but it does sound like you are just jealous.

Also, as you said, those are just a couple of companies out of the hundrends out there. It's not like pirates only focus on games released by EA.

RSOblivion

Well I may sound jealous but that is not the case. If I was jealous I would desire what they have. That is something I definitely don't want.

I was using EA as an example, nothing more, nothing less. I wasn't intending to single them out. It was just the first name that came to mind. Vivendi I think are now technically larger than EA through WoW alone, though I can't be sure (shows how much I actually care about the publishers )

When it comes to small time dev teams who are actually in it for the game rather than just the paycheque I will quite happily pay for their work as they are putting their soul into making a quality product (some fall short but thats always the case). When its big business just out to make a buck, thats when I don't care. They are just as much thieves as the pirates themselves.

BlueMak

Unless you are talking about some gamers making their own games out of their one bedroom apartments, all developers that spend time developing any game that plan on selling, do it for the money. It is just that some are more successful than others in making profit.
EA, and others, don't steal your money. You don't have to play or like or buy their games. If people that disagreed with their games and their prices, stopped not only buying but also fueling the PR machine by playing pirated versions of their games, then the companies would get the message.
It's similar to how many people swear at MS and Windows and still run a pirated version of it. "You" are not helping anyone but your pocket/wallet and anything else is just cover.

RSOblivion

Lol interesting way of putting it. However I beg to disagree. There are developers who aren't just in it for the money, but are in it because they enjoy and love what they are doing. Without that you get games that are not fun, but end up being rehashes of something that was fun (NFS series for instance), but when their is some belief and emotive attachement to the game you get the gems (like Halo which was something else when it arrived, CoD 4, Far Cry etc...) which aren't a dime a dozen. The publishers on the other hand are just in it for the money. They are just bean counters and they push the price of games up beyond what is reasonable or fair. That is how they steal, its just less obvious than walking into EB and walking out with a copy under your coat.

Even more amusing is the Windows line. I paid for a copy of Windows once (when I was younger and still new to computers) and ended up with the worst edition they ever made (Windows ME upgrade edition ). I then had to buy a legit copy of XP for my business too. Again pointless. The pirated copies work better, and when they charge extortionate amounts for different labelling on the OS's (Vista, Server etc...) its amounts to nothing more than theft of the consumers money. The biggest scam being the CAL's for Server. Hmm you have to pay for the priviledge of using the OS, then you have to pay to allow other computers (which you have already had to pay for the OS's on too) access it. What a load of bollocks. Hell I run Server 2008 on my machine cos Vista is not stable and has DRM built in. Server doesn't and is stable and runs perfectly. So two fingers to MS for trying to screw everyone but thanks for giving us free OS's (btw Server 2008 can be used free for 240 days legit before I hear the calls of Pirate)

BlueMak

If they are in it for anything else in addition to money, it doesn't matter, it is just extra.

What I find amusing is how none of these have anything to do with the fact you are breaking the law and no amount of excuses, plans or plain old trolling will stop it.
As for your problems with OSes, that's a joke, right?

YAYitsAndrew

I think people need to be more careful with their expensive purchases? We've all made ones we regret, it's called buyer's remorse. If you don't have the money to make a purchase then you have to make do without it, that's the hard truth. This makes perfect sense with any tangible object like food, cars, or electronics. Why is it different with software again? That's another question I'd like to hear answered.

As for windows bashing, if windows licenses are so expensive why do you need the new versions? The old ones still work just fine. Windows XP, Vista Business, and Leopard are all similarly priced, so I don't see how windows can be considered expensive. Operating systems are expensive pieces of software. There are free ones (*nix) but with those you tend to get what you pay for. Linux is free if your time is worth nothing.

RSOblivion

The buyer beware rule wear's thin for me. I am tbh fed up with people saying that its the buyers right to be taken for a ride. With cars you take them for a test drive at the dealership, or when looking at a second hand car. If you can't drive it first you are a fool to buy it. Food is a little bit harder, but if you go to a good restaurant you don't expect to regurgitate your meal before you go home. If you do chances are you'll get a refund anyway. With all purchases under the current legal system in UK, US and Australia you have a 30 day unlimited liability refund. Some places ask you to waive that right (EB/GAME etc...) but you are under no obligation to do so. SO how may I ask is testing a full game before you buy it wrong then? Most of the time now you are paying for a CD-Key rather than the game as that is what unlocks the legitimate online/levels/whatever.

As for Microsoft OS's I can give you a tool that can change XP from Home edition to Pro to Server and back again. There are some slightly different additional components in Server but not many and all are freely downloadable from MS anyway. To say they are not the same OS is pretty naive. Server is the fastest and most stable version. XP Pro x64 is literally a renamed Server 2003 x64. Even uses the same service pack. Server 2008 is almost identical to Vista except it went through Q&A properly resulting in less errors. Vista now has less errors since SP1 was released but it still has the pesky DRM and other shit messing it up. In Server 2008 no such problem.

As for paying for it well the only one I would be willing to shell out for is server, but then only at the price of XP Pro as its a rip off at that anyway. However that ain't gonna happen, so I am gonna be happy for free anyway. Linux is ok, but again its a hardcore OS you need to learn to use. I cbf learning that at the moment so I'll stick with Server 2008. I used to use Server 2003 in place of XP for the last 4 years. Only reinstalled once. Ran smoothly the whole time with only Photoshop CS3 giving me gip for installation (oh and the really amusing no SLI issue which turned out to be just a registry switch! Thanks for nothing nVidia).

Hmm I seem to have strayed off on tangents from the original topic of the fallacy of piracy in the gaming industry. Ah well the points were valid though. Oh and by the way if you want piracy have a look at the banking industry before calling on the gaming industry. Why when they are showing record profits and assets do they feel the need to raise interest rate for instance? Oh and that sub-prime mortgage malarky well that has an amusing dark side too. How many of the mortgages are actually legal? Well now come to think of it probably less than 5%. Mainly because the banks are removing their liablility so much they are no longer a party to the contract. But thats a whole different discussion

BlueMak

Come to ask me for money and I will give with with 20% interest.

If I had any money that is.

Interesting your posts seem to resemble more communist propaganda than any valid arguments about game piracy.

YAYitsAndrew

If you trade me a book I'll give you some toilet paper and bread.