He has a point. I think this discussion is getting twisted around a bit due to a few unclear arguments.
Recap?
Recap.
Pirating isn't 'good' but it's hard to define just what sort of bad we should call it. Theft? Piracy? Intellectual Counterfeiting? None of them really fit. It's a vague crime, in that the initial harm is theoretical, but the long-term affects upon sequels and unique IP's have been felt before. The answer? taking advantage of the preexisting networks and infrastructures used for the distribution of cracked files via reverse engineering and creating a digital distribution platform which removes the overhead cost associated with retailers.
Does that just about cover it?
Not disagreeing with you. But you got all that from him hinting that he took a couple of Econ classes in college? As if that makes him an authority on the subject.
Everyone brings up valid points and says how they feel on the subject. But I just don't think personal insults and smugness are appropriate or do any good to anyone.
I think all aspect/part should be working on this.
even with the strictest law ever, there is always a loophole.
as well as device security system. ( so far only PS3, apple, and steam has the best balance satisfactory both customer and developer)
also moral education wont work that well IF the economy level is so low and/or getting it is as easy as slicing bread.
make entertainment government subsidized, and raise taxes? :P
i wonder if the 30% buy, 70% pirate figure is the norm.
in that puzzle tap game there was 70% freeloaders on the scoreboards, and in minecraft there's also 70% freeloaders.
if this figure holds true for the general population, that 70% of the population are pirates, then if you punished them, there would be 214 million people in jail.
The level of intellectual elitism and smugness in that post is staggering. (Just an observation)
I'm sorry man, but do you even have a point? Other than echoing what the status-quo is on this subject, and try to insult me in a backwards way?
And if you had bothered to read past page1, you'd see that someone already came up with that brilliant "joke", and I'll tell you what I told him. Yeah, go for it. If you really think that cheating in life and using someone else's portfolio will do you good, then yeah, go for it. Saving pictures from my website to your HD isn't a crime. But I wonder how long you will last on a job that you're not qualified for?
Maybe I should say it again, cause it seems like it needs to be said twice a page for people to get it. I'm not saying piracy is right. I'm not saying it's not a problem. I am saying we shouldn't treat our playerbase as criminals. Because of two reasons. First, they're potential customers. Second, considering everyone is innocent until proven guilty, I don't see a way to fight them without turning that around into guilty until proven innocent.
Lets say you steal someones money, it harms them. Same thing If someone steal a portfolio and the consequences are that they dont get the job it harms them.
(now i took the portfolio as an example because it was the only digital stuff i know you have published, i did not mean to personally attack or offend you and hope you can deal with it) It was to try to get you to understand what im trying to tell you. Yes its a lame example and gosh no i will not use your portfolio. (although its nice, nothing wrong with it)
You are saying that piracy is not a crime even though it can clearly harm people. If you are harming people then why should it not be criminal? My point and opinion is that piracy should be dealt with as any other crime and not get any special treatment.
How is it that if I go to a game store and buy a copy of a WoW expansion (for instance) it's $40, and yet when I go online to Blizzard's own website and buy it directly from them, no box, no shipping, no anything, it's still that same $40?
I'm not sure if anyone got to this already or not, but I'll explain why.
If you need them to sell your product, don't screw them over.
The brick and mortar stores don't like seeing their products undercut. Digital distribution hasn't taken off because customers still prefer buying products in stores. The stores are still needed to get the majority of sales.
Any publisher/developer who thinks they can cut a deal with a retail chain to carry their product, then screw them over by under cutting them will be left with a VERY tough time trying to get them to pick up additional contracts or future products.
Now its a two way street and retail chains with their used games policies are hurting their business partners so you do see a push to encourage people to go digital and its slowly taking hold as people warm up to the idea.
Personally if more companies got off their asses and followed steams example or if MS and Sony gave up on their abysmal storefronts and allowed steam on their consoles that change would happen a lot quicker. But with their current methods of sales through consoles its like they want to sabotage their own efforts.
Lets say you steal someones money, it harms them. Same thing If someone steal a portfolio and the consequences are that they dont get the job it harms them.
pirating games is more equivalent to sneaking into a movie theater without paying, or borrowing a movie or a game to a friend, than
taking someone's cash.
70% rate of pirating sounds awfully much, but thinking about it in real life terms, its equivalent to buying a movie, and then borrowing it to 2 of your friends.
thats a 2/3 revenue loss right there.
pirating games is more equivalent to sneaking into a movie theater without paying, or borrowing a movie or a game to a friend, than
taking someone's cash.
70% rate of pirating sounds awfully much, but thinking about it in real life terms, its equivalent to buying a movie, and then borrowing it to 2 of your friends.
thats a 2/3 revenue loss right there.
you realise that if you decide to take 30 minutes out from work, for... i dunno, just because you feel like you need a break or something. as long as that time is outside of your contracted break times, it's theft.
you're not physically taking anything, except you're being paid for working when you're actually not working, it's called time theft, and a lot of companies fire people over it.
also, the legal definition of theft:
A person is guilty of theft, if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it
by pirating software, you're dishonestly acquiring the property (physical, or virtual) of another, with the intention of permanently depriving them of the income gained from it. it even goes on to state there, that "property" may be intangible, as long as it's a "thing", it doesn't cover intangible "information". games/movies/music etc, are THINGS.
Lets say you steal someones money, it harms them. Same thing If someone steal a portfolio and the consequences are that they dont get the job it harms them.
(now i took the portfolio as an example because it was the only digital stuff i know you have published, i did not mean to personally attack or offend you and hope you can deal with it) It was to try to get you to understand what im trying to tell you. Yes its a lame example and gosh no i will not use your portfolio. (although its nice, nothing wrong with it)
You are saying that piracy is not a crime even though it can clearly harm people. If you are harming people then why should it not be criminal? My point and opinion is that piracy should be dealt with as any other crime and not get any special treatment.
See, I respect that. A logical argument.
Where I would have to respectfully disagree with you is in degree. Yes, the phenomena of piracy in general can be thought of as a crime because it is harmful. But that's the phenomena in general, not the individual act. If we were to sue a person who downloads an MP3 from the web without paying for it, it would fly in the face of everything I believe in. Such as, innocent until proven guilty. If the reason piracy is a crime is because it lowers profit for the maker, if pirating a game would lower profit for that developer, then that needs to be proven in a court of law. We can't just label people "pirates" and slam them with jail time without proving the actual crime. That's guilty until proven innocent, completely backwards from my basic beliefs.
To me, that's the same as when we label terrorism as a whole as a crime, which it SURELY is, people die, it's serious stuff. But then we catch a guy who's involved in that scene and label him a terrorist, and all due process goes out the window. That person is now guilty until proven innocent. They're put in prisons without trial, and can be kidnapped and tortured and all that without proving their guilt. I know that's a far cry from slamming an alleged pirate with a multi-million dollar lawsuit. But it's the same basic problem in my eyes.
Our society is moving that way, and I don't like it one bit. It's like if someone actually walks into a physical store and literally steals, shoplifts, a game and gets caught. What could possibly be the punishment for that? Then compare that with the talk of piracy, how pirates should be put in prison or worse. I saw one estimate that says that because when participating in file-sharing you also share your pirated content, you're also guilty of distribution you should be punished as such. I'm sorry man, but that's just nuts.
Can you imagine if a family of someone who died in the middle-east due to our bombing and was "collateral damage" would then sue you personally? I mean after all, his death IS a crime. You did participate by subsidizing it. In a way, we are all responsible for what our government is causing in the middle-east right now. But it's obvious that we're good intentioned, and we shouldn't all be put in prison for our crimes. Some people maybe? Like a certain commander in chief that shall remain nameless, as to not bring politics into this thread.
by pirating software, you're dishonestly acquiring the property (physical, or virtual) of another, with the intention of permanently depriving them of the income gained from it. it even goes on to state there, that "property" may be intangible, as long as it's a "thing", it doesn't cover intangible "information". games/movies/music etc, are THINGS.
it is theft. simple as that.
This is going in circles, and I think I'll just retire from this thread after this because everything has already been said. And again, I do respect your opinion, don't get me wrong.
But when you sell something, you've transferred ownership to someone else. Since we're quoting dictionaries here:
Selling: to transfer (goods) to or render (services) for another in exchange for money; dispose of to a purchaser for a price: He sold the car to me for $1000.
Once the company has taken your money, the thing you paid for is yours. Not theirs. Software seems to be the only thing that for some reason this doesn't apply to. Which blows my mind personally.
If that thing is then yours, then you can do what you will with it. Everything, and anything. So if we're gonna quote dictionaries and be lawyers about this whole thing, technically, when you download something from the web, you're doing so from a person who legitimately paid for that thing, and is therefore his, not the original maker's.
And you can totally see where that logic fails too. Because everyone is okay with someone buying a game, and then selling that game as a used copy. Everyone recognizes that when that person bought the game, it's his to do with whatever he wants. He can burn it with fire, smash it with a hammer, sell it on ebay, do whatever and it's fine cause it's his. Everything that is, except put its content on the web.
And I get it, I really do, if he puts it on the web then that's potentially less people who will buy the real thing, and more people who will just download it from him for free. I understand it fully, trust me.
While I haven't read the 9 other pages, I have a little comment on the point that GarageBay makes with the following sentence:
"This is why I have a had time blaming UbiSoft for using StarForce, this is why infinity ward gave PC gamers a giant motherucking middle finger and neutered their star product"
My opinion is what Ubisoft did with Assassin's Creed 2(Network reliant DRM) and the giant crapball Modern Warfare 2 is compared to the first(note: I got a legit copy of both games) only gives me even bigger reasons to stop supporting that developer because their games for me were not the 60$ worth.
First there is the DRM that requires internet every second you play the game: I mean what the fuck was that? I ended up having to download a cracked exe file to my legit copy of the game in order to play it, and my internet is pretty goddamn stable, the DRM made the game unplayable for me. Also, the limited number of reinstalls and the episode with the DDOS attack on Ubisofts DRM server that made sure nobody could play the game. This is not only about pirates taking sales from a product, but also a developer killing the game them selves with counter measures that only hurts their costumers.
what Ubisoft did with Assassin's Creed 2(Network reliant DRM) and the giant crapball Modern Warfare 2 is compared to the first(note: I got a legit copy of both games) only gives me even bigger reasons to stop supporting that developer because their games for me were not the 60$ worth.
First there is the DRM that requires internet every second you play the game: I mean what the fuck was that? I ended up having to download a cracked exe file to my legit copy of the game in order to play it, and my internet is pretty goddamn stable, the DRM made the game unplayable for me. Also, the limited number of reinstalls and the episode with the DDOS attack on Ubisofts DRM server that made sure nobody could play the game. This is not only about pirates taking sales from a product, but also a developer killing the game them selves with counter measures that only hurts their costumers.
And this is why PC gamers, the ones that haven't completely switched to consoles, have almost all moved to pure DD, because you cant trust products released in stores anymore. And sense there's no returning PC games...
I still have my buy-without-question list(which includes Valve and Blizzard) that I almost always pre-order my games from no questions asked, this is because their tracklist has proven that their games are always up the quality I expect from a game that will set me back 60$. PC gaming is not dead, nor will it ever be, but when I hear Ubisoft and EA moaning about bad sales it shatters my heart that they are not able to take some of the responsibillity and start creating proper games that doesn't have any goddamn evil DRM that blocks me for playing MY game.
As someone pointed out earlier in this thread:
"Just because a game gets made, doesn't mean its worth the money"
I don't want to get into this, and pretty much everything I would want to say has been said.
I just wanted to say I agree with Bigjohn on pretty much everything. Its nice to see some forward thinking. Alot of what you have said reminded me of valves stance on piracy. I think it was Gabe that was quoted as stating that they "View pirates as undeserved customers".
It amazes me that so many people want to stay in the current business model when pretty much every company that has took a step away from it has profited hugely. Whether its Steam or Netflix.
I know some of the games I've worked on were sold at $60 and I was told we only get $30-$35 of that back after all is said and done. I don't see why were not putting a greater focus on digital distribution. I'm sure alot more people would pay $35 instead of $60.
Once the company has taken your money, the thing you paid for is yours. Not theirs. Software seems to be the only thing that for some reason this doesn't apply to. Which blows my mind personally.
I think the problem is that there's really no worth in the data itself, since these days you can sell people a key that would give them access to a streamed experience much the same, and everyone can copy the data.
In a sense it is a license, the question is whether that license can be resold or not.
I believe that everyone should have the right to sell their game licences on a private level, but not on a business level like gamestop and the likes, that stuff is just sad.
And I also believe that companies should be able to deny you support if they wish to on any license resold, but not deny you the right to that license.
I don't want to get into this, and pretty much everything I would want to say has been said.
I just wanted to say I agree with Bigjohn on pretty much everything. Its nice to see some forward thinking. Alot of what you have said reminded me of valves stance on piracy. I think it was Gabe that was quoted as stating that they "View pirates as undeserved customers".
It amazes me that so many people want to stay in the current business model when pretty much every company that has took a step away from it has profited hugely. Whether its Steam or Netflix.
I know some of the games I've worked on were sold at $60 and I was told we only get $30-$35 of that back after all is said and done. I don't see why were not putting a greater focus on digital distribution. I'm sure alot more people would pay $35 instead of $60.
Yep. This. Said exactly what I wanted to say, without being foggy and weak from chugging down too many Lemsips
by pirating software, you're dishonestly acquiring the property (physical, or virtual) of another, with the intention of permanently depriving them of the income gained from it. it even goes on to state there, that "property" may be intangible, as long as it's a "thing", it doesn't cover intangible "information". games/movies/music etc, are THINGS.
it is theft. simple as that.
by your definition of theft, borrowing a movie to a friend is theft, as it permanently deprives the company from the possible income gained from selling your friend an additional copy.
by your definition of theft, borrowing a movie to a friend is theft, as it permanently deprives the company from the possible income gained from selling your friend an additional copy.
how have you managed to confuse "borrow" and "steal"?
if you're borrowing a film from a friend, you're intending to return it to them. which means you don't have permanent posession of that film. you can definitely argue that you wanted to make a considdered descision to purchase or not.
if you had borrowed it, made a copy for yourself, and then given the film back, that's theft. if your friend made a copy for you, that's theft.
how have you managed to confuse "borrow" and "steal"?
if you're borrowing a film from a friend, you're intending to return it to them. which means you don't have permanent posession of that film. you can definitely argue that you wanted to make a considdered descision to purchase or not.
if you had borrowed it, made a copy for yourself, and then given the film back, that's theft. if your friend made a copy for you, that's theft.
thats not the point.
the point is,BY YOUR DEFINITION, the act of borrowing a movie to your friend, steals money from the company you bought the movie from. it is lost revenue, because your friend has already watched the movie, and isn't going to buy it himself now.
when everyone borrows 1 movie to their friend, thats 50% revenue lost for a company.
when everyone borrows 1 movie to 2 of their friends, thats 70% lost revenue for a company.
thats not the point.
the point is,BY YOUR DEFINITION, the act of borrowing a movie to your friend, steals money from the company you bought the movie from. it is lost revenue, because your friend has already watched the movie, and isn't going to buy it himself now.
when everyone borrows 1 movie to their friend, thats 50% revenue lost for a company.
when everyone borrows 1 movie to 2 of their friends, thats 70% lost revenue for a company.
I wouldn't lump lending a game to a friend on the same level as piracy, especially if the game is out of print, or outside the profit window. I look at games like I look at books, its perfectly acceptable to loan a book to a friend. Mostly because you loose the ability to read the book when its not in your immediate possession.
It is not ok to keep a copy of the game for yourself and continue to play at the same time your friend does, or continue to pass out copies to all your friends so everyone can play at the same time, that can lead to lost sales.
Whoever comes up with the digital version of book/game lending and does it in a way that doesn't punish for paying is probably going to do pretty well.
Whoever comes up with the digital version of book/game lending and does it in a way that doesn't punish for paying is probably going to do pretty well.
Well you could have a tiered resale model, where each time a license is resold its resale value drops but sale price stays the same (say $5 lower then 'new'). The difference then goes to the Dev. Make it location based so titles can only be resold to people within X miles of their location or theirs a 'shipping' fee attached. And of course either mandate or give the devs the option to put an embargo on resale from the time of purchase or release.
Well you could have a tiered resale model, where each time a license is resold its resale value drops but sale price stays the same (say $5 lower then 'new'). The difference then goes to the Dev. Make it location based so titles can only be resold to people within X miles of their location or theirs a 'shipping' fee attached. And of course either mandate or give the devs the option to put an embargo on resale from the time of purchase or release.
Am I rich yet?
The Supreme Court will jack that plan up nine ways to Sunday. It runs afoul of all kinds of case law, statute law, and common law in the United States...
Now, you might be able to get away with it in other places, but it wouldn't fly here.
But basically the horrible analogy I'm going to use, is:
If someone is horny and poor, they believe it's ok to rape a prostitute, because when they have money, they might go back and pay her for sex.
Then other people are saying rape is wrong, and they should have to pay for sex like everyone else, or simply abstain.
And THEN someone mentions a rootkit thing, like... infect these prostitutes with AIDS, so whoever rapes them dies, unless they pay for it properly in which they will recieve the condom.
I really have nothing to add to this conversation that hasn't already been said.
That's an egregious comparison. Assault and rape are violent crimes that traumatize and scar a person and piracy is an economic problem that does not leave the victim in a state where they're terrified to even walk the streets.
Don't make such awful analogies just because you can. It never helps your case. Ever.
But basically the horrible analogy I'm going to use, is:
If someone is horny and poor, they believe it's ok to rape a prostitute, because when they have money, they might go back and pay her for sex.
Then other people are saying rape is wrong, and they should have to pay for sex like everyone else, or simply abstain.
And THEN someone mentions a rootkit thing, like... infect these prostitutes with AIDS, so whoever rapes them dies, unless they pay for it properly in which they will recieve the condom.
I really have nothing to add to this conversation that hasn't already been said.
But basically the horrible analogy I'm going to use, is:
If someone is horny and poor, they believe it's ok to rape a prostitute, because when they have money, they might go back and pay her for sex.
Then other people are saying rape is wrong, and they should have to pay for sex like everyone else, or simply abstain.
And THEN someone mentions a rootkit thing, like... infect these prostitutes with AIDS, so whoever rapes them dies, unless they pay for it properly in which they will recieve the condom.
I really have nothing to add to this conversation that hasn't already been said.
I laughed way more than what is suitable for any human being, I'm going to hell.
I am going to go out on a limb here and say this should be up to the devs. The cream always rises to the top, and great games rarely fail financially. You can pirate half-life 2, didn't stop it from selling like crazy. Not a lot of problems with wow making tons of money even though you can play it for free if you wanted to on open servers. Devs need to either make their game very hard to pirate, or stop making garbage no one wants to pay for. It's the same as the music industry I think, yeah sure the shitty bands and one hit wonders are going to eat shit and die, but the radio heads can literally give away their music and still make bank. The passionate, the talented, the real deal will be rewarded, correct me if I am wrong here, but the people I see complaining the most about piracy are the ones making half assed rushed games, or $60 tech demos in crysis's case.
I am not saying stealing is okay, and I pay for 100% of my games, and software, but if you look at it logically, if piracy was such a problem, you would not see companies that make great games doing as well as they are, your half lifes would be failing just as bad as your crysises. Epic switched up their game and moved to console development, great decision, valve created steam, blizzard made battle net. In my opinion it's these types of forward thinking devs that will make it, don't want people to take your shit? Lock your fucking doors, do something about it, stop complaining.
I might be way off here, please prove me wrong if I am.
I am going to go out on a limb here and say this should be up to the devs. The cream always rises to the top, and great games rarely fail financially. You can pirate half-life 2, didn't stop it from selling like crazy. Not a lot of problems with wow making tons of money even though you can play it for free if you wanted to on open servers. Devs need to either make their game very hard to pirate, or stop making garbage no one wants to pay for. It's the same as the music industry I think, yeah sure the shitty bands and one hit wonders are going to eat shit and die, but the radio heads can literally give away their music and still make bank. The passionate, the talented, the real deal will be rewarded, correct me if I am wrong here, but the people I see complaining the most about piracy are the ones making half assed rushed games, or $60 tech demos in crysis's case.
I am not saying stealing is okay, and I pay for 100% of my games, and software, but if you look at it logically, if piracy was such a problem, you would not see companies that make great games doing as well as they are, your half lifes would be failing just as bad as your crysises. Epic switched up their game and moved to console development, great decision, valve created steam, blizzard made battle net. In my opinion it's these types of forward thinking devs that will make it, don't want people to take your shit? Lock your fucking doors, do something about it, stop complaining.
I might be way off here, please prove me wrong if I am.
I agree, great companies make good games and rarely fail. My company sort of falls into the rushed game category we do 2 a year and we're only on the PC and piracy isn't a big problem for us. We have a loyal, rabid fan base that devour our games and 95% of them draw a direct link between them buying our games and our ability to make more. Our marketing dept (of 3) works tirelessly to connect with our fans and make them part of our games and they love it.
As much as I agree great companies make great games, I do have to throw up a red flag on some of your logic. With your examples its not only about the great games keeping those companies afloat they have set up other revenue streams that help keep the cash flowing in.
Valve has steam.
Epic has their engine and ran away to consoles.
Blizzard turned to subscriptions and allowed Activision to gnaw on their wallet.
My company (if I can be so bold as to call it successful) self publishes and self funds, and sells digitally so we're not stuck having to feed a hungry mega-corp. We're also really really tiny, which enables us to pay our team well. We also have the process down to a science so we can crank out a lot of content in a short amount of time.
If it was only about making a kick ass game and the money will follow, then there would be a lot more single player games that aren't relaying on pirate thwarting gimmicks or companies opening up extra streams of revenue. I point to studios like Iron Lore/Titian Quest, awesome art, great game, failed because there where a lot of people playing but no one paying.
Wasn't Titan Quest also plagued by a bad rep entirely caused by piracy?
IIRC the pirates hadn't fully cracked Titan Quest's DRM so apparently the cracked version of game crashed very often and was fairly unplayable. The pirates complained so much that reputation of being buggy tainted the actual retail version.
I don't know about other people but the retail version I bought had no issues or crashes whatsoever, granted it was from Steam and I think it had a patch or two by then.
Sadly I think my Steam purchase did nothing for Iron Lore, I wish I had been able to purchase it earlier to give my small bit of support to them.
Iron Lore did a pretty bad job at making it understood that "if you crack it it will crash!" - I learned that much later, so for the longest time I just ignored the game because I thought it's a crashy mess.
Then again as you didn't know who on the Ironlore forums bought the game or not, how could you be sure that Ironlore weren't just saying "it's all okay!" if it isn't? Not the first time that a publisher claims their game is "ready".
And lastly I think a lot of people may have just pirated the game because "it's okay to pirate a game which crashes often" but buying something that crashes all the time?? (even though the bought version didn't).
Overall Ironlore managed to just create a LOT of confusion about the real state of their game.
One thing publishers can't keep doing is punishing the people who actually buy the game with DRM, firstly because people pirating the game can get around it anyway and secondly because it's fucking frustrating.
It's like when I buy a new BluRay movie I have to sit through 10 minutes of anti-piracy bullshit before I can even watch the movie. Whereas if I had of just pirated it I could have been watching it immediately. Ironic.
More companies need to take the route that Valve have taken and reward legit customers instead of punishing them. The cheap games on Steam and the frequent sales are enough to make pirating pointless to me.
Now I just wish we could get services like Netflix and Hulu in Australia.
This may seem like a superfluous statement coming from someone who's yet to have an industry position, but personally, I'd like for as many people as possible to play my game. I understand many people would not play certain titles if they couldn't play it for free. If someone chose to pirate one of my games, I truly would not hold it against them. Yep, it'd put me out a few dollars; maybe swipe the rent money from my wallet or snatch the food out of my mouth... But I'd still be happy they got to play what I made for them. Hopefully they enjoyed it. That IS what I'm doing all this for anyway, for people to enjoy themselves, not money.
Eh, maybe this is why I have such a hard time paying my rent.
Think of it from a consumer standpoint, as consumers we basically have zero rights. I have bought many PC games that were terrible ports and did not function or work Ive still got a few games that i cannot play due to bugs and lack of support from developers. You cannot return any game you can only exchange for the same thing. So sometimes i do pirate in order to see if the damn thing will run right, then go and buy it. Especially with lack of demos now a days as well.
Where is the protection from the consumer now a days? In Games non existant
I didn't read the thread, are we patting the OP on the back for writing a 500 word post about how piracy is bad before we all go back to using our pirated production software?
Well if you want go there, we can. However that's a different issue with a unique set of circumstances. The general unspoken rule around here, has always been, it happens, people do it but we're not going to talk about it and no one is going to promote it.
There is a big difference between a $20-60 piece of entertainment and a $3-6,000 piece of software used to create 3D content. If the big apps were as cheap as the most expensive piece of entertainment then there would be a lot more students using it.
If they're market was tinkers not making any money off their software they would adjust their price to fit that market like they have done with student versions. But they make the bulk of their money selling less seats to studios with bigger budgets.
Also you don't have to use the $3-6,000 software to make content, there are a lot of free and low cost apps that get the job done just as well, in some cases better, (Silo, Modo, 3DCoat, Blender).
If and when you decide to switch gears from learning and tinkering to making money, you need to make sure everything is on the up and up. If nothing more than to protect your clients and to protect yourself. So at some point you do purchase it, or a studio purchases it for you. Pirated games, no one ever goes to the store to buy a game they finished playing weeks ago.
Clerk: "here ya go, enjoy your game"
Customer: "Oh I already did, can I trade this in toward that game over there that I beat last week?"
One last point, and that is way more people have an interest in pirating games than pirating the software to make them.
So there you go, now we can go back to not talking about it...
Vig, I've been around here long enough to have heard every argument you just made many over from different people. I've heard better arguments too, such as how piracy is basically tolerated by Autodesk, Adobe, et al because it breeds new people for studios to hire and purchase seats for. These are certainly legitimate arguments.
But I mean you can only go so far with saying "piracy is different and unique when I do it but not when the people who I make my money off of do it" until a rational person has to hit the wall of cognitive dissonance.
Hmm, don't know many commercial games you can start a career path and/or make money with. I guess if someone contributed models to Valve without actually ever buying or even playing TF2... that'd be pretty clever. Or a ninja gamer who only trains in professional matches.
Piracy is mostly just an issue of respect weighed against addiction or need. If you need the software, or are a (broke) addict for new forms of entertainment, you might decide to pirate it. If you respect developers, you'll use what's free and cheap / play what you've got and work your way towards having the money to purchase what you want or need. The big production suites have student/learning versions, which is cool once you get to the point where you need to learn them for use in any given studio... if still a pretty hefty investment.
DRM and/or failed online transactions are kind of a wildcard. I've bought games online and never received a key, forcing me to crack it (the money being lost). Similarly, cracked editions of certain DRM-heavy titles may be necessary for the user to enjoy or even run their purchase. Intrusive DRM doesn't seem to addresses piracy in a healthy way at all.
Of course, for people with strong, constant internet connections, the DRM for a game like Assassin's Creed 2 is perfectly unintrusive and a welcome change. I wouldn't be able to play the game, personally, thanks to a spotty internet connection. So...!
But I mean you can only go so far with saying "piracy is different and unique when I do it but not when the people who I make my money off of do it" until a rational person has to hit the wall of cognitive dissonance.
Have you always been a narrow minded prick or did you go to school and get a masters? ha =P
First off I buy my software or its bought for me, I don't pirate. I went from learning on free versions "Maya PLE & GMax" to a full copy of Maya that I purchased, then to a studio bought copy of 3dsmax.
If you want to boil it down to "pirating in every form = bad" and ignore certain logic and reasoning then yea pirating on any form is bad. But honestly just like regular theft there are degrees to it, if there weren't, then burglary wouldn't have 3 separate levels ranging from 5 years to life. But by your logic taking a gummy bear from the bulk bin before you buy 1lb should land you life behind bars.
I'm not entirely convinced that piracy chased off all of the PC developers like other factors. It makes a good scape goat because it can't be qualified and if they can make a case against piracy its probably in their best interest to try and hurt it as much as they can because it might lead to more sales.
If you're going to play games, pay for them.
If you're going to make money from 3D software pay for it.
If you can't afford a Lamborghini then buy a beater Toyota and save up.
The core argument is be a decent human and support people that support you.
Replies
Not disagreeing with you. But you got all that from him hinting that he took a couple of Econ classes in college? As if that makes him an authority on the subject.
Everyone brings up valid points and says how they feel on the subject. But I just don't think personal insults and smugness are appropriate or do any good to anyone.
Just the way that I see it.
even with the strictest law ever, there is always a loophole.
as well as device security system. ( so far only PS3, apple, and steam has the best balance satisfactory both customer and developer)
also moral education wont work that well IF the economy level is so low and/or getting it is as easy as slicing bread.
its not an instant progress .
Almost, the answer seems to be services where you get more worth when you connect to the service and verify your game.
sc2, minecraft etc.
http://demandprogress.org/blacklist/coica
Sigh. I think I'm becoming a gaming dinosaur.
i wonder if the 30% buy, 70% pirate figure is the norm.
in that puzzle tap game there was 70% freeloaders on the scoreboards, and in minecraft there's also 70% freeloaders.
if this figure holds true for the general population, that 70% of the population are pirates, then if you punished them, there would be 214 million people in jail.
Lets say you steal someones money, it harms them. Same thing If someone steal a portfolio and the consequences are that they dont get the job it harms them.
(now i took the portfolio as an example because it was the only digital stuff i know you have published, i did not mean to personally attack or offend you and hope you can deal with it) It was to try to get you to understand what im trying to tell you. Yes its a lame example and gosh no i will not use your portfolio. (although its nice, nothing wrong with it)
You are saying that piracy is not a crime even though it can clearly harm people. If you are harming people then why should it not be criminal? My point and opinion is that piracy should be dealt with as any other crime and not get any special treatment.
If you need them to sell your product, don't screw them over.
The brick and mortar stores don't like seeing their products undercut. Digital distribution hasn't taken off because customers still prefer buying products in stores. The stores are still needed to get the majority of sales.
Any publisher/developer who thinks they can cut a deal with a retail chain to carry their product, then screw them over by under cutting them will be left with a VERY tough time trying to get them to pick up additional contracts or future products.
Now its a two way street and retail chains with their used games policies are hurting their business partners so you do see a push to encourage people to go digital and its slowly taking hold as people warm up to the idea.
Personally if more companies got off their asses and followed steams example or if MS and Sony gave up on their abysmal storefronts and allowed steam on their consoles that change would happen a lot quicker. But with their current methods of sales through consoles its like they want to sabotage their own efforts.
pirating games is more equivalent to sneaking into a movie theater without paying, or borrowing a movie or a game to a friend, than
taking someone's cash.
70% rate of pirating sounds awfully much, but thinking about it in real life terms, its equivalent to buying a movie, and then borrowing it to 2 of your friends.
thats a 2/3 revenue loss right there.
you realise that if you decide to take 30 minutes out from work, for... i dunno, just because you feel like you need a break or something. as long as that time is outside of your contracted break times, it's theft.
you're not physically taking anything, except you're being paid for working when you're actually not working, it's called time theft, and a lot of companies fire people over it.
also, the legal definition of theft: source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft#Theft_in_English_law
by pirating software, you're dishonestly acquiring the property (physical, or virtual) of another, with the intention of permanently depriving them of the income gained from it. it even goes on to state there, that "property" may be intangible, as long as it's a "thing", it doesn't cover intangible "information". games/movies/music etc, are THINGS.
it is theft. simple as that.
See, I respect that. A logical argument.
Where I would have to respectfully disagree with you is in degree. Yes, the phenomena of piracy in general can be thought of as a crime because it is harmful. But that's the phenomena in general, not the individual act. If we were to sue a person who downloads an MP3 from the web without paying for it, it would fly in the face of everything I believe in. Such as, innocent until proven guilty. If the reason piracy is a crime is because it lowers profit for the maker, if pirating a game would lower profit for that developer, then that needs to be proven in a court of law. We can't just label people "pirates" and slam them with jail time without proving the actual crime. That's guilty until proven innocent, completely backwards from my basic beliefs.
To me, that's the same as when we label terrorism as a whole as a crime, which it SURELY is, people die, it's serious stuff. But then we catch a guy who's involved in that scene and label him a terrorist, and all due process goes out the window. That person is now guilty until proven innocent. They're put in prisons without trial, and can be kidnapped and tortured and all that without proving their guilt. I know that's a far cry from slamming an alleged pirate with a multi-million dollar lawsuit. But it's the same basic problem in my eyes.
Our society is moving that way, and I don't like it one bit. It's like if someone actually walks into a physical store and literally steals, shoplifts, a game and gets caught. What could possibly be the punishment for that? Then compare that with the talk of piracy, how pirates should be put in prison or worse. I saw one estimate that says that because when participating in file-sharing you also share your pirated content, you're also guilty of distribution you should be punished as such. I'm sorry man, but that's just nuts.
Can you imagine if a family of someone who died in the middle-east due to our bombing and was "collateral damage" would then sue you personally? I mean after all, his death IS a crime. You did participate by subsidizing it. In a way, we are all responsible for what our government is causing in the middle-east right now. But it's obvious that we're good intentioned, and we shouldn't all be put in prison for our crimes. Some people maybe? Like a certain commander in chief that shall remain nameless, as to not bring politics into this thread.
This is going in circles, and I think I'll just retire from this thread after this because everything has already been said. And again, I do respect your opinion, don't get me wrong.
But when you sell something, you've transferred ownership to someone else. Since we're quoting dictionaries here: Once the company has taken your money, the thing you paid for is yours. Not theirs. Software seems to be the only thing that for some reason this doesn't apply to. Which blows my mind personally.
If that thing is then yours, then you can do what you will with it. Everything, and anything. So if we're gonna quote dictionaries and be lawyers about this whole thing, technically, when you download something from the web, you're doing so from a person who legitimately paid for that thing, and is therefore his, not the original maker's.
And you can totally see where that logic fails too. Because everyone is okay with someone buying a game, and then selling that game as a used copy. Everyone recognizes that when that person bought the game, it's his to do with whatever he wants. He can burn it with fire, smash it with a hammer, sell it on ebay, do whatever and it's fine cause it's his. Everything that is, except put its content on the web.
And I get it, I really do, if he puts it on the web then that's potentially less people who will buy the real thing, and more people who will just download it from him for free. I understand it fully, trust me.
"This is why I have a had time blaming UbiSoft for using StarForce, this is why infinity ward gave PC gamers a giant motherucking middle finger and neutered their star product"
My opinion is what Ubisoft did with Assassin's Creed 2(Network reliant DRM) and the giant crapball Modern Warfare 2 is compared to the first(note: I got a legit copy of both games) only gives me even bigger reasons to stop supporting that developer because their games for me were not the 60$ worth.
First there is the DRM that requires internet every second you play the game: I mean what the fuck was that? I ended up having to download a cracked exe file to my legit copy of the game in order to play it, and my internet is pretty goddamn stable, the DRM made the game unplayable for me. Also, the limited number of reinstalls and the episode with the DDOS attack on Ubisofts DRM server that made sure nobody could play the game. This is not only about pirates taking sales from a product, but also a developer killing the game them selves with counter measures that only hurts their costumers.
And this is why PC gamers, the ones that haven't completely switched to consoles, have almost all moved to pure DD, because you cant trust products released in stores anymore. And sense there's no returning PC games...
As someone pointed out earlier in this thread:
"Just because a game gets made, doesn't mean its worth the money"
I just wanted to say I agree with Bigjohn on pretty much everything. Its nice to see some forward thinking. Alot of what you have said reminded me of valves stance on piracy. I think it was Gabe that was quoted as stating that they "View pirates as undeserved customers".
It amazes me that so many people want to stay in the current business model when pretty much every company that has took a step away from it has profited hugely. Whether its Steam or Netflix.
I know some of the games I've worked on were sold at $60 and I was told we only get $30-$35 of that back after all is said and done. I don't see why were not putting a greater focus on digital distribution. I'm sure alot more people would pay $35 instead of $60.
I think the problem is that there's really no worth in the data itself, since these days you can sell people a key that would give them access to a streamed experience much the same, and everyone can copy the data.
In a sense it is a license, the question is whether that license can be resold or not.
I believe that everyone should have the right to sell their game licences on a private level, but not on a business level like gamestop and the likes, that stuff is just sad.
And I also believe that companies should be able to deny you support if they wish to on any license resold, but not deny you the right to that license.
Yep. This. Said exactly what I wanted to say, without being foggy and weak from chugging down too many Lemsips
by your definition of theft, borrowing a movie to a friend is theft, as it permanently deprives the company from the possible income gained from selling your friend an additional copy.
how have you managed to confuse "borrow" and "steal"?
if you're borrowing a film from a friend, you're intending to return it to them. which means you don't have permanent posession of that film. you can definitely argue that you wanted to make a considdered descision to purchase or not.
if you had borrowed it, made a copy for yourself, and then given the film back, that's theft. if your friend made a copy for you, that's theft.
thats not the point.
the point is,BY YOUR DEFINITION, the act of borrowing a movie to your friend, steals money from the company you bought the movie from. it is lost revenue, because your friend has already watched the movie, and isn't going to buy it himself now.
when everyone borrows 1 movie to their friend, thats 50% revenue lost for a company.
when everyone borrows 1 movie to 2 of their friends, thats 70% lost revenue for a company.
It is not ok to keep a copy of the game for yourself and continue to play at the same time your friend does, or continue to pass out copies to all your friends so everyone can play at the same time, that can lead to lost sales.
Whoever comes up with the digital version of book/game lending and does it in a way that doesn't punish for paying is probably going to do pretty well.
Well you could have a tiered resale model, where each time a license is resold its resale value drops but sale price stays the same (say $5 lower then 'new'). The difference then goes to the Dev. Make it location based so titles can only be resold to people within X miles of their location or theirs a 'shipping' fee attached. And of course either mandate or give the devs the option to put an embargo on resale from the time of purchase or release.
Am I rich yet?
The Supreme Court will jack that plan up nine ways to Sunday. It runs afoul of all kinds of case law, statute law, and common law in the United States...
Now, you might be able to get away with it in other places, but it wouldn't fly here.
But basically the horrible analogy I'm going to use, is:
If someone is horny and poor, they believe it's ok to rape a prostitute, because when they have money, they might go back and pay her for sex.
Then other people are saying rape is wrong, and they should have to pay for sex like everyone else, or simply abstain.
And THEN someone mentions a rootkit thing, like... infect these prostitutes with AIDS, so whoever rapes them dies, unless they pay for it properly in which they will recieve the condom.
I really have nothing to add to this conversation that hasn't already been said.
Don't make such awful analogies just because you can. It never helps your case. Ever.
Wow.... No. Nothing like this.
I laughed way more than what is suitable for any human being, I'm going to hell.
I am not saying stealing is okay, and I pay for 100% of my games, and software, but if you look at it logically, if piracy was such a problem, you would not see companies that make great games doing as well as they are, your half lifes would be failing just as bad as your crysises. Epic switched up their game and moved to console development, great decision, valve created steam, blizzard made battle net. In my opinion it's these types of forward thinking devs that will make it, don't want people to take your shit? Lock your fucking doors, do something about it, stop complaining.
I might be way off here, please prove me wrong if I am.
As much as I agree great companies make great games, I do have to throw up a red flag on some of your logic. With your examples its not only about the great games keeping those companies afloat they have set up other revenue streams that help keep the cash flowing in.
Valve has steam.
Epic has their engine and ran away to consoles.
Blizzard turned to subscriptions and allowed Activision to gnaw on their wallet.
My company (if I can be so bold as to call it successful) self publishes and self funds, and sells digitally so we're not stuck having to feed a hungry mega-corp. We're also really really tiny, which enables us to pay our team well. We also have the process down to a science so we can crank out a lot of content in a short amount of time.
If it was only about making a kick ass game and the money will follow, then there would be a lot more single player games that aren't relaying on pirate thwarting gimmicks or companies opening up extra streams of revenue. I point to studios like Iron Lore/Titian Quest, awesome art, great game, failed because there where a lot of people playing but no one paying.
IIRC the pirates hadn't fully cracked Titan Quest's DRM so apparently the cracked version of game crashed very often and was fairly unplayable. The pirates complained so much that reputation of being buggy tainted the actual retail version.
I don't know about other people but the retail version I bought had no issues or crashes whatsoever, granted it was from Steam and I think it had a patch or two by then.
Sadly I think my Steam purchase did nothing for Iron Lore, I wish I had been able to purchase it earlier to give my small bit of support to them.
Then again as you didn't know who on the Ironlore forums bought the game or not, how could you be sure that Ironlore weren't just saying "it's all okay!" if it isn't? Not the first time that a publisher claims their game is "ready".
And lastly I think a lot of people may have just pirated the game because "it's okay to pirate a game which crashes often" but buying something that crashes all the time?? (even though the bought version didn't).
Overall Ironlore managed to just create a LOT of confusion about the real state of their game.
It's like when I buy a new BluRay movie I have to sit through 10 minutes of anti-piracy bullshit before I can even watch the movie. Whereas if I had of just pirated it I could have been watching it immediately. Ironic.
More companies need to take the route that Valve have taken and reward legit customers instead of punishing them. The cheap games on Steam and the frequent sales are enough to make pirating pointless to me.
Now I just wish we could get services like Netflix and Hulu in Australia.
Also relevant pic
The ESA claims that 82% of all game sales are 'E' for everyone.
http://www.theesa.com/facts/index.asp
Which is why games like High School Musical and Scooby Doo outsold 'God of War' 2 to 1.
Eh, maybe this is why I have such a hard time paying my rent.
its hard being a socialist in a capitalist country.
Where is the protection from the consumer now a days? In Games non existant
http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?t=62617&highlight=piracy
..yeah fuck you game pirates how ~dare~ you
There is a big difference between a $20-60 piece of entertainment and a $3-6,000 piece of software used to create 3D content. If the big apps were as cheap as the most expensive piece of entertainment then there would be a lot more students using it.
If they're market was tinkers not making any money off their software they would adjust their price to fit that market like they have done with student versions. But they make the bulk of their money selling less seats to studios with bigger budgets.
Also you don't have to use the $3-6,000 software to make content, there are a lot of free and low cost apps that get the job done just as well, in some cases better, (Silo, Modo, 3DCoat, Blender).
If and when you decide to switch gears from learning and tinkering to making money, you need to make sure everything is on the up and up. If nothing more than to protect your clients and to protect yourself. So at some point you do purchase it, or a studio purchases it for you. Pirated games, no one ever goes to the store to buy a game they finished playing weeks ago.
Clerk: "here ya go, enjoy your game"
Customer: "Oh I already did, can I trade this in toward that game over there that I beat last week?"
One last point, and that is way more people have an interest in pirating games than pirating the software to make them.
So there you go, now we can go back to not talking about it...
But I mean you can only go so far with saying "piracy is different and unique when I do it but not when the people who I make my money off of do it" until a rational person has to hit the wall of cognitive dissonance.
Piracy is mostly just an issue of respect weighed against addiction or need. If you need the software, or are a (broke) addict for new forms of entertainment, you might decide to pirate it. If you respect developers, you'll use what's free and cheap / play what you've got and work your way towards having the money to purchase what you want or need. The big production suites have student/learning versions, which is cool once you get to the point where you need to learn them for use in any given studio... if still a pretty hefty investment.
DRM and/or failed online transactions are kind of a wildcard. I've bought games online and never received a key, forcing me to crack it (the money being lost). Similarly, cracked editions of certain DRM-heavy titles may be necessary for the user to enjoy or even run their purchase. Intrusive DRM doesn't seem to addresses piracy in a healthy way at all.
Of course, for people with strong, constant internet connections, the DRM for a game like Assassin's Creed 2 is perfectly unintrusive and a welcome change. I wouldn't be able to play the game, personally, thanks to a spotty internet connection. So...!
First off I buy my software or its bought for me, I don't pirate. I went from learning on free versions "Maya PLE & GMax" to a full copy of Maya that I purchased, then to a studio bought copy of 3dsmax.
If you want to boil it down to "pirating in every form = bad" and ignore certain logic and reasoning then yea pirating on any form is bad. But honestly just like regular theft there are degrees to it, if there weren't, then burglary wouldn't have 3 separate levels ranging from 5 years to life. But by your logic taking a gummy bear from the bulk bin before you buy 1lb should land you life behind bars.
I'm not entirely convinced that piracy chased off all of the PC developers like other factors. It makes a good scape goat because it can't be qualified and if they can make a case against piracy its probably in their best interest to try and hurt it as much as they can because it might lead to more sales.
If you're going to play games, pay for them.
If you're going to make money from 3D software pay for it.
If you can't afford a Lamborghini then buy a beater Toyota and save up.
The core argument is be a decent human and support people that support you.