So people might one day have 3D printers at their convenience (I think it's unlikely)...
On the contrary, people will have easy way to download schematics and just print figures or parts of certain designs without much cost, it's a constantly improving technology.
I mean, you could use the tech to print your own designs for things, but why should you? there are plenty of available designs out there already, I guess designers just have to find a new market strategy?
The thing is that it becomes a scenario on a level where I as a game-designer could have made the next "deus ex", but it wouldn't matter, because I'm not good at alternative marketing and bussiness strategies.
There's no longer any worth in what was originally the product, but just the things you sell around it.
Having worked for a company that was compromised by game piracy, my feelings are pretty much this:
If developers don't make money on a game to make more games, they stop making games. Pirate all you want, but don't complain when all you have left are console games that all play the same, take no risks, and are developed by one of three giant companies.
Thing is these sorts of people just blame the evil capitalist publisher then go back to spouting rhetoric on internet forums.
I also want to add that the great thing about doing it the way I described, is that you can give the game away for free, because you've already been paid for making the game. If you give it away, they will love you for it. People love free stuff. This way, your fans can distribute your work for you, saving you tons of money on shipping and servers. It also has the side benefit of promoting your business to new customers. It's basically viral marketing.
I'd love to see the day where people who want a game made, but don't have much money, can offer at least few bucks and feel good about enjoying the game. Then, when money isn't so tight, they can pitch in more and get extra perks for their beloved game. Now you've opened a segment of the market that was closed because those people couldn't afford the $50-$70, but they could afford $5,$10, or $20. And I'm sure there are lots of people that would go for that.
I also want to add that the great thing about doing it the way I described, is that you can give the game away for free, because you've already been paid for making the game. If you give it away, they will love you for it. People love free stuff. This way, your fans can distribute your work for you, saving you tons of money on shipping and servers. It also has the side benefit of promoting your business to new customers. It's basically viral marketing.
I'd love to see the day where people who want a game made, but don't have much money, can offer at least few bucks and feel good about enjoying the game. Then, when money isn't so tight, they can pitch in more and get extra perks for their beloved game. Now you've opened a segment of the market that was closed because those people couldn't afford the $50-$70, but they could afford $5,$10, or $20. And I'm sure there are lots of people that would go for that.
Where have you been? there are lots of projects out there that do this, but the main thing is, they made the choice to give it away free, there's no such thing as giving projects away for free if everything is free by law already.
On the contrary, people will have easy way to download schematics and just print figures or parts of certain designs without much cost, it's a constantly improving technology.
I mean, you could use the tech to print your own designs for things, but why should you? there are plenty of available designs out there already, I guess designers just have to find a new market strategy?
The thing is that it becomes a scenario on a level where I as a game-designer could have made the next "deus ex", but it wouldn't matter, because I'm not good at alternative marketing and bussiness strategies.
There's no longer any worth in what was originally the product, but just the things you sell around it.
You glossed over the rest of my statement on the 3D printers and argued with a straw man. The million+ poly objects you create can be kept in your exclusive possession for the purpose of selling 3D prints. People could copy the game res objects and print them out, but you'd have the exclusive ownership of the real McCoy. If people wanted to "pirate" your high res prints, they'd have to make their own version in 3D software, but that's not the same as just copying it. They'd have to do the work themselves.
Wrong. The example on the left would be larceny; the example on the right would be piracy... THEY ARE BOTH FORMS OF THEFT. Theft is the unlawful taking of another's property (whether intellectual, personal or real property) without the owner's consent. Saying, "piracy is not theft, it's piracy" is like saying, "murder is not homicide, it's murder."
I hear this argument all the time, and it really irritates me when people make ridiculous arguments based on weak semantics. They act as if they're defending high-minded principles, when they're really just justifying their own selfishness.
And by the way, I don't mean to come off as morally indignant. I don't look down on people who pirate movies, music, games, etc. I can't claim to have never broken the law, but I also don't fall over backwards trying to justify it. But I do tend to agree that on the moral spectrum, piracy is a pretty minor offence.
You glossed over the rest of my statement on the 3D printers and argued with a straw man. The million+ poly objects you create can be kept in your exclusive possession for the purpose of selling 3D prints. People could copy the game res objects and print them out, but you'd have the exclusive ownership of the real McCoy. If people wanted to "pirate" your high res prints, they'd have to make their own version in 3D software, but that's not the same as just copying it. They'd have to do the work themselves.
No, once one 3d print is out, all you have to do it scan it.
I'm not sure piracy is a crime. But I am sure that a lot of pirates do it because there are ZERO consequences to their actions.
How do you attach consequences to their actions?
Sadly because they ignore logic and the thoughtful debate hasn't gone well over the past 15 years, the industry had to kick it up a few notches and start enforcing their rights under the current set of laws. Now if pirates organized and got the laws changed then the law would actually be on their side. The best they can hope for right now is to dial back skimming operations so that it drops off the industries radar and then the consequences seam to disappear again.
If the industry had responded to piracy differentially with a reward system instead of a heavy handed punishment system then it might of gone differently. Like I've said before, people like electricity follow the path of least resistance, if you put barbwire down their tightrope they'll take the trapeze. If you're not making any money off the trapeze, putting barbwire down the tight rope was a stupid thing to do.
You have to remember when it all started.
Studios where being pinched and some even went under. In many cases it was life or death, thankfully consoles even as retarded as they are have given the industry a thin layer of protection, some breathing room and the cash they need to push forward. But neither side took the time to rethink their argument they just shelved it for later.
But you can't pin it all on the industry...
Even after the industry got the message out there:
'Hey this is hurting us and hindering our efforts to make good games, please buy if you play'
The pirates responded with:
"'fuck you DAD! You're not the boss of me! I hate you <door slam> /muffled yell I'm going to pirate the fuck out of everything you make!'
So, as long as there aren't any consequences to piracy and there are materials to pirate, people will continue to do it. Which is how the industry dealt with PC pirating, starve it out... switch to consoles.
Piracy in the US/EU probably isn't going to sink the industry at least not in its current state. But it could morph, adapt and raise its ugly head again so it can't be forgotten or ignored. Also if anyone wants to tap into the Chinese/Asian market, piracy needs to be taken seriously. Their pirates are no where near the level of the pirates in the US/EU, they are super pirates. Everything is pirated, its just how they get things done, its like breathing. Guilt and bad vibes won't be enough to make them kick the habit... especially how their society and culture has dealt with the issue so far.
No, once one 3d print is out, all you have to do it scan it.
Alright, point taken. That doesn't mean there aren't other options that haven't been thought of.
Crasong:
"Would people then shell out 3 bucks to play a game that should cost 60? I just don't see how micro-transactions work out for these types of games."
That's the thing, you're looking at is as a sale per copy scenario. I'm talking about collecting enough money to pay everybody who worked on it regardless of individual monetary contribution. If it will cost $5,000,000 to make the game, then every little bit that gets you there counts whether it's $5 or $500. Sure, the game might be priced at $60 at the stores, but those that can't afford $60 today can't buy it. So after all the $60 sales are made, why not add on $5,$10, or $20 sales too? You're not loosing money, you're gaining customers. People who couldn't afford to give money to the production of the game, now can.
greever: Yeah I suppose being paid 5 bucks for a copy is better than having it being pirated in the end. However the public can be greedy, and everyone would end up paying bare minimum, in this case 5 bucks. And with games having a shelf life and would only sell so many copies, wouldn't studios end up losing money in the end? Your suggestion may not necessarily remedy human greed.
One takes something away and limits a finite resource that costs money to replicate, the other does not. They are not the same thing expect for the one side of the scenario in which the law-breaker receives something for no payment. There is a distinction for a reason.
If you want to quibble over semantics, then sure, piracy isn't stealing, in the strictest sense of the word.
However, it is worth pointing out that piracy is probably WORSE than stealing.
If you steal a physical object without paying for it, you deprive one other person of the utility that object would provide. This is inconvenient for the store or individual that you stole it from. But in the long run it doesn't actually make any difference to the industry at large. The store is probably insured against too great a theft, and figures a certain amount of shoplifting into its accounting. The publisher has already been paid for the physical item you stole, and won't be concerned about it.
If you pirate the game, you are actively involving yourself with the wholesale reproduction and distribution of the intangible item in question. You are essentially placing yourself IN DIRECT COMPETITION with the industry in question. (whether it be music, movies, or video games) You are performing the same function that many of those publishers and distributors do, but you have the unfair advantage of NOT CHARGING for that service. You are witlessly eroding the commercial structure of an entire industry. The video this thread is referencing briefly touches on this concept.
What really tears me is that this isn't the only issue the game industry is currently contending with. They also have GameStop's monopolistic practices to deal with. (another major commercial force that is undermining the health of the game industry) Having to cope with both of these widespread challenges is more than this industry can handle.
You will never convince a person who steals games to stop, so you guys are really talking to a wall at this point. All you can do is come up with easy ways to deliver content to the consumer like Steam and Apple AppStore.
Pirates will continue to pirate, they dont give a fuck about you or your jobs. I've worked with people in this industry who continue to pirate and they just dont give a flying fuck. It's sad but that's just how it goes.
So after all the $60 sales are made, why not add on $5,$10, or $20 sales too? You're not loosing money, you're gaining customers. People who couldn't afford to give money to the production of the game, now can.
Are you saying charge $60 for a game then on top of that charge $5-10-20 more for extra content? That sucks and it not many people go for the extras when they're offered.
Or are you saying after the first few weeks of people buying it at $60 drop the price? They do this already its called "greatest hits". It's not an immediate drop because that would only encourage people to wait.
Or are you saying that the base game would cost $5 and you can buy additional content? If the base game costs $40 of a $60 sale to make selling it for $5 wouldn't make much sense. You would have to increase the volume of sales higher than the number of consoles in the market to make up for that kind of a difference.
Or are you suggesting a donation system? Where the lost donation gets you a copy of the game. People rarely pay more than the lowest even with trinkets and bobbles tacked onto more expensive donations. People don't like the idea of paying and in 3-4 years playing a game. They like picking it up, and playing it.
Or are you suggesting that every day developers should pay to make games, and however much they contribute determines the percent they get back? No one would work for that. I'm not paying my employee to allow me to make games. I'd make games on my own and sell em... before I ever did that.
greever: Yeah I suppose being paid 5 bucks for a copy is better than having it being pirated in the end. However the public can be greedy, and everyone would end up paying bare minimum, in this case 5 bucks. And with games having a shelf life and would only sell so many copies, wouldn't studios end up losing money in the end? Your suggestion may not necessarily remedy human greed.
You're still looking at this from old perspectives. I'm not talking about selling copies. I'm talking about selling work, throw that other concept out. A contractor doesn't primarily sell the houses he builds, he sells his labor. It's not an issue of "he'd paid $5 bucks for a copy and this guy paid $50". It's more "this guy paid $5 toward the costs of making the game and this other guy paid $50". The trick here is giving people a reason to pay $50 or more as opposed to $5. Someone who pays $5 is a good thing, it's $5 you didn't have before, but the game itself probably won't be enough to motivate them to pay more if they can afford it. So, sell them things they would pay $50 or more for. Services, merchandise, perks all can entice people to pay more than the minimum or at least more than zero.
Edit: I had another idea. Sweepstakes giveaways. Every contribution of $10 gives you another chance to win some awesome prize(s).
You're still looking at this from old perspectives. I'm not talking about selling copies. I'm talking about selling work, throw that other concept out. A contractor doesn't primarily sell the houses he builds, he sells his labor. It's not an issue of "he'd paid $5 bucks for a copy and this guy paid $50". It's more "this guy paid $5 toward the costs of making the game and this other guy paid $50". The trick here is giving people a reason to pay $50 or more as opposed to $5. Someone who pays $5 is a good thing, it's $5 you didn't have before, but the game itself probably won't be enough to motivate them to pay more if they can afford it. So, sell them things they would pay $50 or more for. Services, merchandise, perks all can entice people to pay more than the minimum or at least more than zero.
Edit: I had another idea. Sweepstakes giveaways. Every contribution of $10 gives you another chance to win some awesome prize(s).
You're still looking at this from old perspectives. I'm not talking about selling copies. I'm talking about selling work, throw that other concept out. A contractor doesn't primarily sell the houses he builds, he sells his labor. It's not an issue of "he'd paid $5 bucks for a copy and this guy paid $50". It's more "this guy paid $5 toward the costs of making the game and this other guy paid $50". The trick here is giving people a reason to pay $50 or more as opposed to $5. Someone who pays $5 is a good thing, it's $5 you didn't have before, but the game itself probably won't be enough to motivate them to pay more if they can afford it. So, sell them things they would pay $50 or more for. Services, merchandise, perks all can entice people to pay more than the minimum or at least more than zero.
That probably wouldn't work either, though. The situation you're describing is a developer essentially holding their game in development for ransom. Pay us more money or this title is never coming out! With a little one or two man team, that might be able to fly. But we are talking about some tiny budgets, where there are almost no costs other than time and effort. A major studio could not possibly sustain itself on that type of business model.
I'm not going to argue that the current retail model of this industry is flawed. It is, and there are better ways to handle it. I do think that your attempts to explore alternative options are a positive, healthy development. It would be great if a lot more studios started seriously considering such options. But piracy isn't the answer.
" A contractor doesn't primarily sell the houses he builds, he sells his labor."
Contractor in this case is still the equivalent to a lead such-n-such that is part of the project that produces the final product which is the house.
Correct me if i'm mistaken, but you're implying that if consumers were to pay for the development process, all would be well? May as well call it a donation that gives you the promise of getting the game once its finished(if it's finished, tons of games don't make it for various reasons).
Sounds a bit too idealistic even for me. It would take a big upheaval and remodeling of how the workforce is like in the industry.
Though one things for sure, it would be nice if people could change.
" A contractor doesn't primarily sell the houses he builds, he sells his labor."
Contractor in this case is still the equivalent to a lead such-n-such that is part of the project that produces the final product which is the house.
Correct me if i'm mistaken, but you're implying that if consumers were to pay for the development process, all would be well? May as well call it a donation that gives you the promise of getting the game once its finished(if it's finished, tons of games don't make it for various reasons).
Sounds a bit too idealistic even for me. It would take a big upheaval and remodeling of how the workforce is like in the industry.
Though one things for sure, it would be nice if people could change.
Yes, the consumers pay for the production costs. There are some that will just give money and there are some that will need more. These are the people you need to work with to give them something that they feel is worth buying. Thus, I suggested merchandising and such. Take the profits from selling those goods and the money you get from supporters and use that to pay for the costs of the game production. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. The game doesn't get made, the developers don't get paid, and nobody gets a game. But if does work, the developers get paid, the game gets release, and everybody enjoys the game. The fans share it across the internet, which gets them more exposure and possible more customers. Then piracy is a non-issue because you're not relying on selling copies anymore. Each shared copy is free publicity for the developer. And after all is said and done, if a profit is made, it all goes to the people who worked on it and not the huge corporate publishers.
Edit:
To go further on the contractor/builder analogy: Imagine if you could give live tours of the houses you built, but you could do it with millions of people all at the same time. Wouldn't that be good for your business? Instead of showing a handful of people one house, then can see all of them simultaneously with many other people doing the same.
Yes, the consumers pay for the production costs. There are some that will just give money and there are some that will need more. These are the people you need to work with to give them something that they feel is worth buying. Thus, I suggested merchandising and such. Take the profits from selling those goods and the money you get from supporters and use that to pay for the costs of the game production. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. The game doesn't get made, the developers don't get paid, and nobody gets a game. But if does work, the developers get paid, the game gets release, and everybody enjoys the game. The fans share it across the internet, which gets them more exposure and possible more customers. Then piracy is a non-issue because you're not relying on selling copies anymore. Each shared copy is free publicity for the developer. And after all is said and done, if a profit is made, it all goes to the people who worked on it and not the huge corporate publishers.
But the problem is that most of us have jobs due to these "corporate publishers", there isn't the same kind of room for that in a hypothetical goodwill software future, I hope you are aware of that.
We couldn't have art-teams up in the multiple 10's anymore, that's where the majority of our jobs are.
dfacto: agreed.. but there's something wrong when people working in the industry still prefer to pirate game products, or perhaps people who make a decent amount of income.
Pirates aren't all struggling students and the impoverished.
~ I'm not promoting Piracy. I'm just gonna say raise your motherfucking hand if you own absolutely NO
Pirated Software,
Games,
Music,
Ebooks,
Tutorial Videos,
Movies,
or TV series.
Yes, the consumers pay for the production costs. There are some that will just give money and there are some that will need more. These are the people you need to work with to give them something that they feel is worth buying. Thus, I suggested merchandising and such. Take the profits from selling those goods and the money you get from supporters and use that to pay for the costs of the game production. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. The game doesn't get made, the developers don't get paid, and nobody gets a game. But if does work, the developers get paid, the game gets release, and everybody enjoys the game. The fans share it across the internet, which gets them more exposure and possible more customers. Then piracy is a non-issue because you're not relying on selling copies anymore. Each shared copy is free publicity for the developer. And after all is said and done, if a profit is made, it all goes to the people who worked on it and not the huge corporate publishers.
It hurts my head how on stupid this idea is. You honestly have no understanding of business in this industry or any industry actually works.
Why would the consumers pay for the production cost of a game that hasnt been made yet? They wouldnt. That is the reason for publishers. They are fronting the costs on the belife the product will come out and they will make a profit on it. They are gambling there money on the possibility of a return profit on there investment. Games cost Millions of dollars to make, you actually think consumers are going to front cash for a game that may or may not come out? For a game they could possibly know nothing about with a new IP? No, it wont happen ever.
Why would you have to "work with people to give them something they think is worth buying" that is exactly what the game is. It is what is worth buying, if someone dosnt feel its worth buying then they dont buy it. Simple as that.
Profits from merchandise? "Facepalm" Merchandise only works on extremely popular games such as Halo, WoW and Nintendo stuff like Mario. Most games dont have merchandise because there is no market for it. Creating a bunch of merchandise and having a lot of "free" promotion for it through all the piracy of a game isnt going to make people want to go and buy it. Which in turn wont net any kind of profit for the developer.
Video games are a form of entertainment. Entertainment is a luxury item that you dont need to have. If you cant afford said luxury items then you dont deserve to have them. You can still live your life fine without them.
Please greevar stop posting in these types of threads. Its clear you have no understanding of how this industry works, the costs associated with game development and the nature of people. If you actually think merchandise profits and money you get from supporters could cover the costs of games today it clearly shows how stupid you actually are.
But the problem is that most of us have jobs due to these "corporate publishers", there isn't the same kind of room for that in a hypothetical goodwill software future, I hope you are aware of that.
We can't have art-teams up in the multiple 10's anymore, that's where the majority of our jobs are.
Like I said before, I don't claim to have the magic bullet answer to all of the issues with the business. I have, however, taken the time to think about doing things differently and I believe that's a good thing. I'm just one guy sitting at a computer sharing what he's learned from other very smart people and I can't solve it all on my own. If you don't think this or that will work, then please try to find a way to make it work or find another option. It would be greatly appreciated, I'm sure. My overall message to you all is to be adaptive and find new ways to get paid for your art that doesn't make you and your fans enemies. Ideas are free, work is not.
~ I'm not promoting Piracy. I'm just gonna say raise your motherfucking hand if you own absolutely NO
Pirated Software,
Games,
Music,
Ebooks,
Tutorial Videos,
Movies,
or TV series.
Only that person(s) may speak on anti-piracy.
Only that person can stand on the moral high ground (and get hit in the head with a bottle). Everyone else can still talk about anti-piracy, they may walk a fine line and be called a hypocrite but honestly like the video said, there might be some torrent traffic that is actually justified. It comes down to "don't be a dick" if you're playing you should of paid for it.
Everyone should probably work to minimize that impact as much as possible. Pirates and Industry types alike.
Like I said before, I don't claim to have the magic bullet answer to all of the issues with the business. I have, however, taken the time to think about doing things differently and I believe that's a good thing. I'm just one guy sitting at a computer sharing what he's learned from other very smart people and I can't solve it all on my own. If you don't think this or that will work, then please try to find a way to make it work or find another option. It would be greatly appreciated, I'm sure. My overall message to you all is to be adaptive and find new ways to get paid for your art that doesn't make you and your fans enemies. Ideas are free, work is not.
You're the one pushing for the destruction of this part of the market as we know it, but we who are on the collapsing side are supposed to solve it?
Ideas are free, the execution of that idea is someone's work.
dfacto: agreed.. but there's something wrong when people working in the industry still prefer to pirate game products, or perhaps people who make a decent amount of income.
Pirates aren't all struggling students and the impoverished.
A lot of them are though. Most of us have pirated 2d/3d software because we couldn't reasonably afford the thousand dollar sticker prices. Similarly lots of people pirate games because they can't reasonably afford the $50 price. This is especially true in eastern Europe (although on the flipside you have internet cafes running with exclusively pirated games, which is fucked up.)
SC2 costs 120 leva here in Bulgaria, which is more than a month's worth of food for me. Do you honestly expect me, a student with no income other than to cover expenses, to starve for a month so I can play a game? I won't. Thank you piratebay.
Then you may ask why I can consider it acceptable to pirate something I can't afford. Because I literally haven't deprived anyone of their deserved money. The concept of piracy as copying rather than theft is disingenuous when it relates to people who actually have the available income to purchase a game rather than pirate it. For people like me it represents absolutely no loss to anyone, as I won't buy the game until I have income. No harm, no foul, no ethical issue.
If you disagree with me, feel free to give me money.
It hurts my head how on stupid this idea is. You honestly have no understanding of business in this industry or any industry actually works.
Why would the consumers pay for the production cost of a game that hasnt been made yet? They wouldnt. That is the reason for publishers. They are fronting the costs on the belife the product will come out and they will make a profit on it. They are gambling there money on the possibility of a return profit on there investment. Games cost Millions of dollars to make, you actually think consumers are going to front cash for a game that may or may not come out? For a game they could possibly know nothing about with a new IP? No, it wont happen ever.
Why would you have to "work with people to give them something they think is worth buying" that is exactly what the game is. It is what is worth buying, if someone dosnt feel its worth buying then they dont buy it. Simple as that.
Profits from merchandise? "Facepalm" Merchandise only works on extremely popular games such as Halo, WoW and Nintendo stuff like Mario. Most games dont have merchandise because there is no market for it. Creating a bunch of merchandise and having a lot of "free" promotion for it through all the piracy of a game isnt going to make people want to go and buy it. Which in turn wont net any kind of profit for the developer.
Video games are a form of entertainment. Entertainment is a luxury item that you dont need to have. If you cant afford said luxury items then you dont deserve to have them. You can still live your life fine without them.
Please greevar stop posting in these types of threads. Its clear you have no understanding of how this industry works, the costs associated with game development and the nature of people. If you actually think merchandise profits and money you get from supporters could cover the costs of games today it clearly shows how stupid you actually are.
Wow, I managed to get through this entire discussion without insulting anyone and the first words you direct at me are that my ideas are stupid? Perhaps I'm stupid too? How is that even constructive? I think you just don't like the ideas I'm offering and you want it to go away. I'm trying to think of other possibilities here. If you don't think it's applicable, that's fine. But telling me that I don't know anything about what I'm talking about is just a cheap way to win an argument that I wasn't participating in. Just because I don't support the continuation of the status quo doesn't mean that my thoughts are invalid or that I am ignorant. These aren't just ideas that I pulled out of thin air. These are ideas that come from the people of the very industries you claim I know nothing about. I learned it from them and those people do know the business.
"Why would the consumers pay for the production cost of a game that hasnt been made yet? They wouldnt."
Really? http://www.interstellarmarines.com/indie/
People are giving them money and they've only produced demo slices so far. They're not even selling physical merchandise and they're still getting money, from people that haven't yet received a finished game.
So I'm asking you to stop attacking my right to comment here. I have as much right to discuss my opinions here as you do and I'm keeping it civil. You want a flame war? Go somewhere else. I'm not going to play. Good day.
While it's true that many people pirated the Humble Indie Bundle, it was still a pretty big success. HIB 2 was an even bigger success.
The specifics of how people behave with something that is pay-what-you-want are pretty complicated, and it takes a lot of work to pull something like that off, but it can work.
I think a bigger problem for AAA companies is really that they are too big and bloated, because I don't think that many people are pirating games:
Why would the consumers pay for the production cost of a game that hasnt been made yet? They wouldnt.
Is this a serious post?
Have you not heard of a company called Blizzard, with a magical product called World of Warcraft? That thing has tens of millions of people doing just that. Paying $40 for an expansion, meaning a product, then on top of that pay $15 for stuff that hasn't been made yet. They pay $15 for the promise that one day Blizzard will release a patch with a dungeon in it that'll be freakin' awesome.
Oh, and part of that $15 goes towards developing the next expansion (once the last content-patch goes live in an expansion's lifecycle). Which, get this, means that people are paying willingly $15 a month for absolutely nothing. For the dubious privilege of getting to pay another $40 when said expansion releases.
Honestly, this is my problem with the piracy debate in our industry. The narrow-sightedness. I don't support piracy! It's bad. But it's also very much helpable. Our customers are telling us what they want, almost forcing us to give it to them. They pay us millions of dollars. But instead, we cling on to an outdated business model. You make a game, press it on a disc, sell it in a box in a physical shop for $60, and that's it.
Then we complain about piracy, when in fact I'd argue that used game sales hurt us much more.
And we can fix all of this, without the need to sue our fans. Let's not go Metallica on people.
While it's true that many people pirated the Humble Indie Bundle, it was still a pretty big success. HIB 2 was an even bigger success.
The specifics of how people behave with something that is pay-what-you-want are pretty complicated, and it takes a lot of work to pull something like that off, but it can work.
I think a bigger problem for AAA companies is really that they are too big and bloated, because I don't think that many people are pirating games:
It is a pretty unique thing though, the whole unusual aspect of "pay what you want" gave it more PR than anyone could ever wish for.
That and it pulled the right strings in peoples hearts for them to go "this I want to support"
It did also show that you can't pull heart-strings in people who don't have hearts, I saw alot of people who shamelessly just bought as many 1cent copies as they could to give out to another bunch of people who didn't want to go through the effort to even pay a dollar to get the bundle.
I don't think piracy destroys everything in its current half-limited state, but there's always alot of these scenarios where that last bunch of sales could've pushed the company over that line of surviving/not surviving.
A lot of them are though. Most of us have pirated 2d/3d software because we couldn't reasonably afford the thousand dollar sticker prices. Similarly lots of people pirate games because they can't reasonably afford the $50 price. This is especially true in eastern Europe (although on the flipside you have internet cafes running with exclusively pirated games, which is fucked up.)
SC2 costs 120 leva here in Bulgaria, which is more than a month's worth of food for me. Do you honestly expect me, a student with no income other than to cover expenses, to starve for a month so I can play a game? I won't. Thank you piratebay.
Then you may ask why I can consider it acceptable to pirate something I can't afford. Because I literally haven't deprived anyone of their deserved money. The concept of piracy as copying rather than theft is disingenuous when it relates to people who actually have the available income to purchase a game rather than pirate it. For people like me it represents absolutely no loss to anyone, as I won't buy the game until I have income. No harm, no foul, no ethical issue.
If you disagree with me, feel free to give me money.
I hope you dont misunderstand. I understand completely your situation. But pirates needn't come up with some kind of a moral/finance excuse for downloading games. You gotta do what you gotta do. It's comical when pirates try to find legitimate reasons for downloading games.
I don't lose sleep over software piracy, it just hits close to home when I see people who are perfectly capable of purchasing games without affecting their mealplan for the week. It's especially ironic when those very people work in the actual industry. It's most certainly a moral issue and while you may not be as sensitive to it, I am sure you are intelligent enough to understand my dissapointment.
I dont care how people manage their money but if you're a developer you are shooting yourself in the foot by pirating game software.
Musicians have tours, Film have boxoffice and dvd sales.. Video game developers don't have other legitimate sources of income outside of sales.
You're the one pushing for the destruction of this part of the market as we know it, but we who are on the collapsing side are supposed to solve it?
Ideas are free, the execution of that idea is someone's work.
Why shouldn't you try to solve it? It effects you too. It's not my job to solve it for you, but I do try to bring new possibilities that might help you solve it. You don't like the ideas I've shared? That's fine. Ignore everything I said then. I'm just trying to get people to think about other possibilities. So, you see what I shared as the end of the old way, but it doesn't need my help to end it. The inherent weaknesses in the model are doing that just fine on their own. The cracks in copyright and IP are starting to show. Let's just find a new way to do it before the whole thing collapses. If you don't like/want my input then you're no worse off.
"You say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
Why shouldn't you try to solve it? It effects you too. It's not my job to solve it for you, but I do try to bring new possibilities that might help you solve it. You don't like the ideas I've shared? That's fine. Ignore everything I said then. I'm just trying to get people to think about other possibilities. So, you see what I shared as the end of the old way, but it doesn't need my help to end it. The inherent weaknesses in the model are doing that just fine on their own. The cracks in copyright and IP are starting to show. Let's just find a new way to do it before the whole thing collapses. If you don't like/want my input then you're no worse off.
"You say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
Take a look at the opensource community, they share your ideals, but instead of forcing it upon others to adhere to it, they create their own stuff, all free, all open, ideas shared etc.
A lot of them are though. Most of us have pirated 2d/3d software because we couldn't reasonably afford the thousand dollar sticker prices.
That was once a defensible excuse. But you can no longer claim this. Why? Open-source software. If you are hurting for capable 2D/3D editing software, there are now viable options that are both free, and legal. You can't afford Photoshop? Download the GIMP. You can't afford 3D Studio Max? Download Blender. You can't afford Z-Brush? Try Sculptris. These are all well-documented options with more features than most developers actually need. Most of them probably aren't quite as good as their commercial counterparts, but all of them are available and 100% legitimate.
SC2 costs 120 leva here in Bulgaria, which is more than a month's worth of food for me. Do you honestly expect me, a student with no income other than to cover expenses, to starve for a month so I can play a game? I won't. Thank you piratebay.
I would refer you to the video in question. How did you afford a computer that can run StarCraft 2? Wouldn't that set you back an entire year's worth of food? I can't imagine acquiring a capable gaming rig for less than several times the cost of StarCraft 2.
Also, what makes you think that a student with little to no income should be playing a lot of games? Wouldn't your time be more productively spent studying and working on your assignments? What makes you feel that you are entitled to play games? It's common for student's to be young, stupid, and not in touch with the realities of the working world. A lot of us are coming at this subject from the perspective of people who have been behind a desk earning salaries for a few years. We're seeing our companies falling around our heads, and pink slips in our in-boxes. Not all of this is due to piracy, but it certainly doesn't help. I don't work in games at present, but I did get laid off from my last job because the company closed our branch office. I'm currently doing contract work from home. (and feeling quite lucky that I have that)
If you disagree with me, feel free to give me money.
Here's another alternative, also from the video in question. Play free games. There are plenty available. If you have a computer, than there are any number of legal alternatives for gaming enjoyment that won't cost you a dime. If you want to scratch your MMO itch, I believe Lord of the Rings is now free-to-play. (and actually benefiting from that business model) You could support free-to-play indie titles. You could make use of the numerous social games that don't charge. There are options these days that DON'T require piracy. Look into some of those before reaching for your torrent client.
Take a look at the opensource community, they share your ideals, but instead of forcing it upon others to adhere to it, they create their own stuff, all free, all open, ideas shared etc.
I'm not trying to force anybody to do anything. I'm just posting ideas that I think might help those that are afraid of getting caught in the collapse of the retail business model. We are here to help each other with our art aren't we? I think keeping it viable as an occupation is just as important. Whether or not I think retail should continue to exist in the entertainment industry is immaterial to the fact that it is beginning to show its flaws. If you think my exploration of alternatives and encouraging others to do the same is me threatening your way of life, then I'm sorry I can't alleviate your apprehensions. I just want to help put an end to this bad blood between those who create and those that enjoy it for free by offering another way.
I'm not trying to force anybody to do anything. I'm just posting ideas that I think might help those that are afraid of getting caught in the collapse of the retail business model. We are here to help each other with our art aren't we? I think keeping it viable as an occupation is just as important. Whether or not I think retail should continue to exist in the entertainment industry is immaterial to the fact that it is beginning to show its flaws. If you think my exploration of alternatives and encouraging others to do the same is me threatening your way of life, then I'm sorry I can't alleviate your apprehensions. I just want to help put an end to this bad blood between those who create and those that enjoy it for free by offering another way.
No I think your ideas are a quite valid and an interesting way to stay competitive in the new growing digital market, and the "pay for a game in development" has proven super popular with minecraft.
I'm just saying that the IP and copyright laws are here to stay, they're most likely not going anywhere, they're just too deeply rooted into everything today.
For people like me it represents absolutely no loss to anyone, as I won't buy the game until I have income. No harm, no foul, no ethical issue.
This way of thinking is a huge problem and why people constantly pirate things.
Why do you feel you deserve to play this game, watch this movie, listen to this music if you can't aford it? The awnser is you dont deserve it.
You have no need to play video games. They are a luxury. And if you cant afford luxury items you then you dont get the luxury of having that item. Simple as that. I cant afford a private jet so I dont get to have a private jet. You cant afford video games so you dont get to have them.
Obviously most everyone has pirated software at some point for various reasons and not being able to afford them is a big reason but that doesn't make it right or something you should continue to do.
@greevar. Yes I said your I idea was stupid. I think it is and laid out the reasons why I think it is stupid. Thats my opinion and I am free to express it as so. If you actually read what I wrote I didnt just say you have no clue what you are talking about to try and win my argument, I clearly stated how none of your points would realistically work. Sure it might work for a small little dev team on an indie game as those dont cost as much as Triple A titles. This just wont work for Triple A titles and even non Triple A titles as there are hundreds and hundreds of games produced each year and studios are generally not these small indie sized teams that can get away with make a game on the cheap.
Another problem with this is that I feel most gamers dont care to be involved with the creation of games. They are just looking for a fun game to play and once they are done playing it move on to play another fun game. They dont want to wait years supporting a game or multiple games to come out and then play them. They just want to play the cool games that interest them.
Another flaw with the "hey get everyone involved" idea of game dev is a lot of peoples ideas are just not very good and if the developers listened to everyones ideas of what they want in the game chances are it would take forever to create, not everyone would be happy, it would probably wouldn't be very fun as your average joe gamer isnt a game designer.
Another problem with this is millions and millions of games are purchased as gifts from people like parents who have no clue about these games at all. They just buy games they think there kids will like. Why do you think movie tie in games make some crazy bank when there generally decent games? These people are a HUGE profit margin for the games industry.
I am not trying to start a flame war with you but so far every debate you have been in you have derailed the conversation and convoluted the argument by forcing it going off track. This started out as a piracy thread about why or why not piracy is wrong and much like the Dominance War thread you derailed it. You have changed the topic into why the industry should change there business model. The only tie your argument has to the original topic is that it would make the free distribution of games ok, and pirates distribute games for free.
That was once a defensible excuse. But you can no longer claim this. Why? Open-source software. If you are hurting for capable 2D/3D editing software, there are now viable options that are both free, and legal. You can't afford Photoshop? Download the GIMP. You can't afford 3D Studio Max? Download Blender. You can't afford Z-Brush? Try Sculptris. These are all well-documented options with more features than most developers actually need. Most of them probably aren't quite as good as their commercial counterparts, but all of them are available and 100% legitimate.
I would refer you to the video in question. How did you afford a computer that can run StarCraft 2? Wouldn't that set you back an entire year's worth of food? I can't imagine acquiring a capable gaming rig for less than several times the cost of StarCraft 2.
Also, what makes you think that a student with little to no income should be playing a lot of games? Wouldn't your time be more productively spent studying and working on your assignments? What makes you feel that you are entitled to play games? It's common for student's to be young, stupid, and not in touch with the realities of the working world. A lot of us are coming at this subject from the perspective of people who have been behind a desk earning salaries for a few years. We're seeing our companies falling around our heads, and pink slips in our in-boxes. Not all of this is due to piracy, but it certainly doesn't help. I don't work in games at present, but I did get laid off from my last job because the company closed our branch office. I'm currently doing contract work from home. (and feeling quite lucky that I have that)
Here's another alternative, also from the video in question. Play free games. There are plenty available. If you have a computer, than there are any number of legal alternatives for gaming enjoyment that won't cost you a dime. If you want to scratch your MMO itch, I believe Lord of the Rings is now free-to-play. (and actually benefiting from that business model) You could support free-to-play indie titles. You could make use of the numerous social games that don't charge. There are options these days that DON'T require piracy. Look into some of those before reaching for your torrent client.
In the realm of professional 3D/2D software (all professional software for that matter), piracy actually helps the developers of those tools. By taking those tools for the purpose of learning, it creates a new generation of people who know how to use them and gives studios reason to continue to invest in those tools. It's good to learn from, as long as you don't try to sell the work. Once you learn the ropes and want to go freelance, get an alternative like Blender, Sculptris or Gimp. Then you can go make some money.
I'm not trying to force anybody to do anything. I'm just posting ideas that I think might help those that are afraid of getting caught in the collapse of the retail business model. We are here to help each other with our art aren't we? I think keeping it viable as an occupation is just as important. Whether or not I think retail should continue to exist in the entertainment industry is immaterial to the fact that it is beginning to show its flaws. If you think my exploration of alternatives and encouraging others to do the same is me threatening your way of life, then I'm sorry I can't alleviate your apprehensions. I just want to help put an end to this bad blood between those who create and those that enjoy it for free by offering another way.
Your ideas would only appeal to something along the lines of an indie development team who does not necessarily have anything to lose.
But they also need to grow up eventually, Mojang is a perfect and recent example of this.
Have you not heard of a company called Blizzard, with a magical product called World of Warcraft? That thing has tens of millions of people doing just that. Paying $40 for an expansion, meaning a product, then on top of that pay $15 for stuff that hasn't been made yet. They pay $15 for the promise that one day Blizzard will release a patch with a dungeon in it that'll be freakin' awesome.
Oh, and part of that $15 goes towards developing the next expansion (once the last content-patch goes live in an expansion's lifecycle). Which, get this, means that people are paying willingly $15 a month for absolutely nothing. For the dubious privilege of getting to pay another $40 when said expansion releases
What? You are totally wrong here. Blizzard has never promissed they would release content after you buy there expansions in content updates. They just do it because they are awesome. They never say, hey we promise to give more content you dont have to pay for. When you pay the 40 bucks for an expansion you are paying for just that. All other content they give out is free.
No the 15 dollars a month you pay is the cost to play the game. They are not paying 15 dollars a month for absolutly nothing, they are paying 15 bucks to have the right to play the game. If you dont pay the monthly sub you cannot play the game. Its not you playing for them to develop more content, its you paying for the ability to play the game.
This way of thinking is a huge problem and why people constantly pirate things.
Why do you feel you deserve to play this game, watch this movie, listen to this music if you can't aford it? The awnser is you dont deserve it.
You have no need to play video games. They are a luxury. And if you cant afford luxury items you then you dont get the luxury of having that item. Simple as that. I cant afford a private jet so I dont get to have a private jet. You cant afford video games so you dont get to have them.
Totally agree with this.
I agree with what the video said about rewarding costumers. Clearly the punishing route it's not working very well.
What? You are totally wrong here. Blizzard has never promissed they would release content after you buy there expansions in content updates. They just do it because they are awesome. They never say, hey we promise to give more content you dont have to pay for. When you pay the 40 bucks for an expansion you are paying for just that. All other content they give out is free.
No the 15 dollars a month you pay is the cost to play the game. They are not paying 15 dollars a month for absolutly nothing, they are paying 15 bucks to have the right to play the game. If you dont pay the monthly sub you cannot play the game. Its not you playing for them to develop more content, its you paying for the ability to play the game.
You may be absolutely right about this, I don't know to be honest.
But, you can't tell me that none of that $15 a month x10million goes into development (meaning, salaries for Blizzard devs). Probably not even exclusively WoW. There's no way those $15 are purely for server cost. They're profit, and people are fine with that.
Second, you're right, Blizzard doesn't actually promise they'll release patches. But it goes to show how much that thought is prevalent, that I just assumed so. Thinking about it further, I don't believe there's a promise there. But everyone accepts it as such. When I first started playing MMOs (WoW was my first), the person who got me into it described it just like that. You pay $15, and they release new stuff over time. I never heard an MMO-dev deny it either. It goes with the territory of what an MMO is.
I mean, an xbox game costs roughly the same, and there's no monthly, and you play it online. So it's pretty obvious, even if not stated, that the monthly subscription goes into them further developing it, keeping the game fresh.
In the realm of professional 3D/2D software (all professional software for that matter), piracy actually helps the developers of those tools. By taking those tools for the purpose of learning, it creates a new generation of people who know how to use them and gives studios reason to continue to invest in those tools. It's good to learn from, as long as you don't try to sell the work. Once you learn the ropes and want to go freelance, get an alternative like Blender, Sculptris or Gimp. Then you can go make some money.
This is not true. Why? Because most major software developers now offer trial and/or educational versions of their major packages. It doesn't even matter if these versions are feature-complete. The sheer depth of this software makes an educational version more than adequate for learning purposes. And these educational versions are even distributed free of charge.
What justification can there be for pirating the full version of a software package when the company that produces the software has gone out of its way to provide us with a free version for learning purposes? These companies have already done the legwork as far as education is concerned. (at their own expense) Piracy doesn't help them at all. If anything, it is just an ungrateful waste of the effort they go to in providing educational versions of their software.
Unity now has a free-to-use version, even for commercial projects. Epic has released the UDK, which is completely free for hobbyists, and has very reasonable licencing for indies. Open source software is becoming more and more capable and comprehensive all the time. There is no longer any practical excuse for piracy. Those bases are covered.
Why do you feel you deserve to play this game, watch this movie, listen to this music if you can't aford it? The awnser is you dont deserve it.
Nope, the answer is because you can do it safely without any punishment. Whether someone "deserves" or is "entitled" to something is completely irrelevant, the actual key is the punishment or at least the fear of that punishment (or their morality, but for people who do pirate everything then that is already out of the question).
All it would take is a anti-robin hood, or a group of them. Or just 1 per company, unofficially of course.
Your ideas would only appeal to something along the lines of an indie development team who does not necessarily have anything to lose.
But they also need to grow up eventually, Mojang is a perfect and recent example of this.
Well, it probably wouldn't appeal to a larger game company like EA, because they make far more money being a publisher than a studio. That isn't to say it wouldn't work. To say it can't work because they're too big isn't really proof that it won't. If some of the AAA developers went solo and tried that, I think their reputation would carry them enough that they could do it. I would agree that the likes of EA and Activision might not be able to pull it off, because they don't make games, they distribute and sell them.
Replies
On the contrary, people will have easy way to download schematics and just print figures or parts of certain designs without much cost, it's a constantly improving technology.
I mean, you could use the tech to print your own designs for things, but why should you? there are plenty of available designs out there already, I guess designers just have to find a new market strategy?
The thing is that it becomes a scenario on a level where I as a game-designer could have made the next "deus ex", but it wouldn't matter, because I'm not good at alternative marketing and bussiness strategies.
There's no longer any worth in what was originally the product, but just the things you sell around it.
Thing is these sorts of people just blame the evil capitalist publisher then go back to spouting rhetoric on internet forums.
I'd love to see the day where people who want a game made, but don't have much money, can offer at least few bucks and feel good about enjoying the game. Then, when money isn't so tight, they can pitch in more and get extra perks for their beloved game. Now you've opened a segment of the market that was closed because those people couldn't afford the $50-$70, but they could afford $5,$10, or $20. And I'm sure there are lots of people that would go for that.
Where have you been? there are lots of projects out there that do this, but the main thing is, they made the choice to give it away free, there's no such thing as giving projects away for free if everything is free by law already.
You glossed over the rest of my statement on the 3D printers and argued with a straw man. The million+ poly objects you create can be kept in your exclusive possession for the purpose of selling 3D prints. People could copy the game res objects and print them out, but you'd have the exclusive ownership of the real McCoy. If people wanted to "pirate" your high res prints, they'd have to make their own version in 3D software, but that's not the same as just copying it. They'd have to do the work themselves.
Wrong. The example on the left would be larceny; the example on the right would be piracy... THEY ARE BOTH FORMS OF THEFT. Theft is the unlawful taking of another's property (whether intellectual, personal or real property) without the owner's consent. Saying, "piracy is not theft, it's piracy" is like saying, "murder is not homicide, it's murder."
I hear this argument all the time, and it really irritates me when people make ridiculous arguments based on weak semantics. They act as if they're defending high-minded principles, when they're really just justifying their own selfishness.
And by the way, I don't mean to come off as morally indignant. I don't look down on people who pirate movies, music, games, etc. I can't claim to have never broken the law, but I also don't fall over backwards trying to justify it. But I do tend to agree that on the moral spectrum, piracy is a pretty minor offence.
No, once one 3d print is out, all you have to do it scan it.
http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/05/Saving-a-penny----pirating-the-Humble-Indie-Bundle
Would people then shell out 3 bucks to play a game that should cost 60? I just don't see how micro-transactions work out for these types of games.
edit: I also believe that eld is talking about something like this. http://reprap.org/wiki/Main_Page
How do you attach consequences to their actions?
Sadly because they ignore logic and the thoughtful debate hasn't gone well over the past 15 years, the industry had to kick it up a few notches and start enforcing their rights under the current set of laws. Now if pirates organized and got the laws changed then the law would actually be on their side. The best they can hope for right now is to dial back skimming operations so that it drops off the industries radar and then the consequences seam to disappear again.
If the industry had responded to piracy differentially with a reward system instead of a heavy handed punishment system then it might of gone differently. Like I've said before, people like electricity follow the path of least resistance, if you put barbwire down their tightrope they'll take the trapeze. If you're not making any money off the trapeze, putting barbwire down the tight rope was a stupid thing to do.
You have to remember when it all started.
Studios where being pinched and some even went under. In many cases it was life or death, thankfully consoles even as retarded as they are have given the industry a thin layer of protection, some breathing room and the cash they need to push forward. But neither side took the time to rethink their argument they just shelved it for later.
But you can't pin it all on the industry...
Even after the industry got the message out there:
'Hey this is hurting us and hindering our efforts to make good games, please buy if you play'
The pirates responded with:
"'fuck you DAD! You're not the boss of me! I hate you <door slam> /muffled yell I'm going to pirate the fuck out of everything you make!'
So, as long as there aren't any consequences to piracy and there are materials to pirate, people will continue to do it. Which is how the industry dealt with PC pirating, starve it out... switch to consoles.
Piracy in the US/EU probably isn't going to sink the industry at least not in its current state. But it could morph, adapt and raise its ugly head again so it can't be forgotten or ignored. Also if anyone wants to tap into the Chinese/Asian market, piracy needs to be taken seriously. Their pirates are no where near the level of the pirates in the US/EU, they are super pirates. Everything is pirated, its just how they get things done, its like breathing. Guilt and bad vibes won't be enough to make them kick the habit... especially how their society and culture has dealt with the issue so far.
Alright, point taken. That doesn't mean there aren't other options that haven't been thought of.
Crasong:
"Would people then shell out 3 bucks to play a game that should cost 60? I just don't see how micro-transactions work out for these types of games."
That's the thing, you're looking at is as a sale per copy scenario. I'm talking about collecting enough money to pay everybody who worked on it regardless of individual monetary contribution. If it will cost $5,000,000 to make the game, then every little bit that gets you there counts whether it's $5 or $500. Sure, the game might be priced at $60 at the stores, but those that can't afford $60 today can't buy it. So after all the $60 sales are made, why not add on $5,$10, or $20 sales too? You're not loosing money, you're gaining customers. People who couldn't afford to give money to the production of the game, now can.
If you want to quibble over semantics, then sure, piracy isn't stealing, in the strictest sense of the word.
However, it is worth pointing out that piracy is probably WORSE than stealing.
If you steal a physical object without paying for it, you deprive one other person of the utility that object would provide. This is inconvenient for the store or individual that you stole it from. But in the long run it doesn't actually make any difference to the industry at large. The store is probably insured against too great a theft, and figures a certain amount of shoplifting into its accounting. The publisher has already been paid for the physical item you stole, and won't be concerned about it.
If you pirate the game, you are actively involving yourself with the wholesale reproduction and distribution of the intangible item in question. You are essentially placing yourself IN DIRECT COMPETITION with the industry in question. (whether it be music, movies, or video games) You are performing the same function that many of those publishers and distributors do, but you have the unfair advantage of NOT CHARGING for that service. You are witlessly eroding the commercial structure of an entire industry. The video this thread is referencing briefly touches on this concept.
What really tears me is that this isn't the only issue the game industry is currently contending with. They also have GameStop's monopolistic practices to deal with. (another major commercial force that is undermining the health of the game industry) Having to cope with both of these widespread challenges is more than this industry can handle.
Pirates will continue to pirate, they dont give a fuck about you or your jobs. I've worked with people in this industry who continue to pirate and they just dont give a flying fuck. It's sad but that's just how it goes.
Or are you saying after the first few weeks of people buying it at $60 drop the price? They do this already its called "greatest hits". It's not an immediate drop because that would only encourage people to wait.
Or are you saying that the base game would cost $5 and you can buy additional content? If the base game costs $40 of a $60 sale to make selling it for $5 wouldn't make much sense. You would have to increase the volume of sales higher than the number of consoles in the market to make up for that kind of a difference.
Or are you suggesting a donation system? Where the lost donation gets you a copy of the game. People rarely pay more than the lowest even with trinkets and bobbles tacked onto more expensive donations. People don't like the idea of paying and in 3-4 years playing a game. They like picking it up, and playing it.
Or are you suggesting that every day developers should pay to make games, and however much they contribute determines the percent they get back? No one would work for that. I'm not paying my employee to allow me to make games. I'd make games on my own and sell em... before I ever did that.
You're still looking at this from old perspectives. I'm not talking about selling copies. I'm talking about selling work, throw that other concept out. A contractor doesn't primarily sell the houses he builds, he sells his labor. It's not an issue of "he'd paid $5 bucks for a copy and this guy paid $50". It's more "this guy paid $5 toward the costs of making the game and this other guy paid $50". The trick here is giving people a reason to pay $50 or more as opposed to $5. Someone who pays $5 is a good thing, it's $5 you didn't have before, but the game itself probably won't be enough to motivate them to pay more if they can afford it. So, sell them things they would pay $50 or more for. Services, merchandise, perks all can entice people to pay more than the minimum or at least more than zero.
Edit: I had another idea. Sweepstakes giveaways. Every contribution of $10 gives you another chance to win some awesome prize(s).
Take a look at what these guys are doing: http://www.interstellarmarines.com/indie/
It's pretty cool that chose to do this.
Note: choice, their IP.
That probably wouldn't work either, though. The situation you're describing is a developer essentially holding their game in development for ransom. Pay us more money or this title is never coming out! With a little one or two man team, that might be able to fly. But we are talking about some tiny budgets, where there are almost no costs other than time and effort. A major studio could not possibly sustain itself on that type of business model.
I'm not going to argue that the current retail model of this industry is flawed. It is, and there are better ways to handle it. I do think that your attempts to explore alternative options are a positive, healthy development. It would be great if a lot more studios started seriously considering such options. But piracy isn't the answer.
Contractor in this case is still the equivalent to a lead such-n-such that is part of the project that produces the final product which is the house.
Correct me if i'm mistaken, but you're implying that if consumers were to pay for the development process, all would be well? May as well call it a donation that gives you the promise of getting the game once its finished(if it's finished, tons of games don't make it for various reasons).
Sounds a bit too idealistic even for me. It would take a big upheaval and remodeling of how the workforce is like in the industry.
Though one things for sure, it would be nice if people could change.
Yes, the consumers pay for the production costs. There are some that will just give money and there are some that will need more. These are the people you need to work with to give them something that they feel is worth buying. Thus, I suggested merchandising and such. Take the profits from selling those goods and the money you get from supporters and use that to pay for the costs of the game production. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. The game doesn't get made, the developers don't get paid, and nobody gets a game. But if does work, the developers get paid, the game gets release, and everybody enjoys the game. The fans share it across the internet, which gets them more exposure and possible more customers. Then piracy is a non-issue because you're not relying on selling copies anymore. Each shared copy is free publicity for the developer. And after all is said and done, if a profit is made, it all goes to the people who worked on it and not the huge corporate publishers.
Edit:
To go further on the contractor/builder analogy: Imagine if you could give live tours of the houses you built, but you could do it with millions of people all at the same time. Wouldn't that be good for your business? Instead of showing a handful of people one house, then can see all of them simultaneously with many other people doing the same.
I'd say there are exceptions to the rule, even if they aren't legal in nature.
But the problem is that most of us have jobs due to these "corporate publishers", there isn't the same kind of room for that in a hypothetical goodwill software future, I hope you are aware of that.
We couldn't have art-teams up in the multiple 10's anymore, that's where the majority of our jobs are.
Pirates aren't all struggling students and the impoverished.
Pirated Software,
Games,
Music,
Ebooks,
Tutorial Videos,
Movies,
or TV series.
Only that person(s) may speak on anti-piracy.
It hurts my head how on stupid this idea is. You honestly have no understanding of business in this industry or any industry actually works.
Why would the consumers pay for the production cost of a game that hasnt been made yet? They wouldnt. That is the reason for publishers. They are fronting the costs on the belife the product will come out and they will make a profit on it. They are gambling there money on the possibility of a return profit on there investment. Games cost Millions of dollars to make, you actually think consumers are going to front cash for a game that may or may not come out? For a game they could possibly know nothing about with a new IP? No, it wont happen ever.
Why would you have to "work with people to give them something they think is worth buying" that is exactly what the game is. It is what is worth buying, if someone dosnt feel its worth buying then they dont buy it. Simple as that.
Profits from merchandise? "Facepalm" Merchandise only works on extremely popular games such as Halo, WoW and Nintendo stuff like Mario. Most games dont have merchandise because there is no market for it. Creating a bunch of merchandise and having a lot of "free" promotion for it through all the piracy of a game isnt going to make people want to go and buy it. Which in turn wont net any kind of profit for the developer.
Video games are a form of entertainment. Entertainment is a luxury item that you dont need to have. If you cant afford said luxury items then you dont deserve to have them. You can still live your life fine without them.
Please greevar stop posting in these types of threads. Its clear you have no understanding of how this industry works, the costs associated with game development and the nature of people. If you actually think merchandise profits and money you get from supporters could cover the costs of games today it clearly shows how stupid you actually are.
Like I said before, I don't claim to have the magic bullet answer to all of the issues with the business. I have, however, taken the time to think about doing things differently and I believe that's a good thing. I'm just one guy sitting at a computer sharing what he's learned from other very smart people and I can't solve it all on my own. If you don't think this or that will work, then please try to find a way to make it work or find another option. It would be greatly appreciated, I'm sure. My overall message to you all is to be adaptive and find new ways to get paid for your art that doesn't make you and your fans enemies. Ideas are free, work is not.
Everyone should probably work to minimize that impact as much as possible. Pirates and Industry types alike.
You're the one pushing for the destruction of this part of the market as we know it, but we who are on the collapsing side are supposed to solve it?
Ideas are free, the execution of that idea is someone's work.
A lot of them are though. Most of us have pirated 2d/3d software because we couldn't reasonably afford the thousand dollar sticker prices. Similarly lots of people pirate games because they can't reasonably afford the $50 price. This is especially true in eastern Europe (although on the flipside you have internet cafes running with exclusively pirated games, which is fucked up.)
SC2 costs 120 leva here in Bulgaria, which is more than a month's worth of food for me. Do you honestly expect me, a student with no income other than to cover expenses, to starve for a month so I can play a game? I won't. Thank you piratebay.
Then you may ask why I can consider it acceptable to pirate something I can't afford. Because I literally haven't deprived anyone of their deserved money. The concept of piracy as copying rather than theft is disingenuous when it relates to people who actually have the available income to purchase a game rather than pirate it. For people like me it represents absolutely no loss to anyone, as I won't buy the game until I have income. No harm, no foul, no ethical issue.
If you disagree with me, feel free to give me money.
Wow, I managed to get through this entire discussion without insulting anyone and the first words you direct at me are that my ideas are stupid? Perhaps I'm stupid too? How is that even constructive? I think you just don't like the ideas I'm offering and you want it to go away. I'm trying to think of other possibilities here. If you don't think it's applicable, that's fine. But telling me that I don't know anything about what I'm talking about is just a cheap way to win an argument that I wasn't participating in. Just because I don't support the continuation of the status quo doesn't mean that my thoughts are invalid or that I am ignorant. These aren't just ideas that I pulled out of thin air. These are ideas that come from the people of the very industries you claim I know nothing about. I learned it from them and those people do know the business.
"Why would the consumers pay for the production cost of a game that hasnt been made yet? They wouldnt."
Really?
http://www.interstellarmarines.com/indie/
People are giving them money and they've only produced demo slices so far. They're not even selling physical merchandise and they're still getting money, from people that haven't yet received a finished game.
So I'm asking you to stop attacking my right to comment here. I have as much right to discuss my opinions here as you do and I'm keeping it civil. You want a flame war? Go somewhere else. I'm not going to play. Good day.
The specifics of how people behave with something that is pay-what-you-want are pretty complicated, and it takes a lot of work to pull something like that off, but it can work.
I think a bigger problem for AAA companies is really that they are too big and bloated, because I don't think that many people are pirating games:
http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/05/Another-view-of-game-piracy
Is this a serious post?
Have you not heard of a company called Blizzard, with a magical product called World of Warcraft? That thing has tens of millions of people doing just that. Paying $40 for an expansion, meaning a product, then on top of that pay $15 for stuff that hasn't been made yet. They pay $15 for the promise that one day Blizzard will release a patch with a dungeon in it that'll be freakin' awesome.
Oh, and part of that $15 goes towards developing the next expansion (once the last content-patch goes live in an expansion's lifecycle). Which, get this, means that people are paying willingly $15 a month for absolutely nothing. For the dubious privilege of getting to pay another $40 when said expansion releases.
Honestly, this is my problem with the piracy debate in our industry. The narrow-sightedness. I don't support piracy! It's bad. But it's also very much helpable. Our customers are telling us what they want, almost forcing us to give it to them. They pay us millions of dollars. But instead, we cling on to an outdated business model. You make a game, press it on a disc, sell it in a box in a physical shop for $60, and that's it.
Then we complain about piracy, when in fact I'd argue that used game sales hurt us much more.
And we can fix all of this, without the need to sue our fans. Let's not go Metallica on people.
It is a pretty unique thing though, the whole unusual aspect of "pay what you want" gave it more PR than anyone could ever wish for.
That and it pulled the right strings in peoples hearts for them to go "this I want to support"
It did also show that you can't pull heart-strings in people who don't have hearts, I saw alot of people who shamelessly just bought as many 1cent copies as they could to give out to another bunch of people who didn't want to go through the effort to even pay a dollar to get the bundle.
I don't think piracy destroys everything in its current half-limited state, but there's always alot of these scenarios where that last bunch of sales could've pushed the company over that line of surviving/not surviving.
I hope you dont misunderstand. I understand completely your situation. But pirates needn't come up with some kind of a moral/finance excuse for downloading games. You gotta do what you gotta do. It's comical when pirates try to find legitimate reasons for downloading games.
I don't lose sleep over software piracy, it just hits close to home when I see people who are perfectly capable of purchasing games without affecting their mealplan for the week. It's especially ironic when those very people work in the actual industry. It's most certainly a moral issue and while you may not be as sensitive to it, I am sure you are intelligent enough to understand my dissapointment.
I dont care how people manage their money but if you're a developer you are shooting yourself in the foot by pirating game software.
Musicians have tours, Film have boxoffice and dvd sales.. Video game developers don't have other legitimate sources of income outside of sales.
Why shouldn't you try to solve it? It effects you too. It's not my job to solve it for you, but I do try to bring new possibilities that might help you solve it. You don't like the ideas I've shared? That's fine. Ignore everything I said then. I'm just trying to get people to think about other possibilities. So, you see what I shared as the end of the old way, but it doesn't need my help to end it. The inherent weaknesses in the model are doing that just fine on their own. The cracks in copyright and IP are starting to show. Let's just find a new way to do it before the whole thing collapses. If you don't like/want my input then you're no worse off.
"You say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
Take a look at the opensource community, they share your ideals, but instead of forcing it upon others to adhere to it, they create their own stuff, all free, all open, ideas shared etc.
There is only one Dreamer! And he starts his posts with a pink tilde ~
I would refer you to the video in question. How did you afford a computer that can run StarCraft 2? Wouldn't that set you back an entire year's worth of food? I can't imagine acquiring a capable gaming rig for less than several times the cost of StarCraft 2.
Also, what makes you think that a student with little to no income should be playing a lot of games? Wouldn't your time be more productively spent studying and working on your assignments? What makes you feel that you are entitled to play games? It's common for student's to be young, stupid, and not in touch with the realities of the working world. A lot of us are coming at this subject from the perspective of people who have been behind a desk earning salaries for a few years. We're seeing our companies falling around our heads, and pink slips in our in-boxes. Not all of this is due to piracy, but it certainly doesn't help. I don't work in games at present, but I did get laid off from my last job because the company closed our branch office. I'm currently doing contract work from home. (and feeling quite lucky that I have that)
Here's another alternative, also from the video in question. Play free games. There are plenty available. If you have a computer, than there are any number of legal alternatives for gaming enjoyment that won't cost you a dime. If you want to scratch your MMO itch, I believe Lord of the Rings is now free-to-play. (and actually benefiting from that business model) You could support free-to-play indie titles. You could make use of the numerous social games that don't charge. There are options these days that DON'T require piracy. Look into some of those before reaching for your torrent client.
I'm not trying to force anybody to do anything. I'm just posting ideas that I think might help those that are afraid of getting caught in the collapse of the retail business model. We are here to help each other with our art aren't we? I think keeping it viable as an occupation is just as important. Whether or not I think retail should continue to exist in the entertainment industry is immaterial to the fact that it is beginning to show its flaws. If you think my exploration of alternatives and encouraging others to do the same is me threatening your way of life, then I'm sorry I can't alleviate your apprehensions. I just want to help put an end to this bad blood between those who create and those that enjoy it for free by offering another way.
No I think your ideas are a quite valid and an interesting way to stay competitive in the new growing digital market, and the "pay for a game in development" has proven super popular with minecraft.
I'm just saying that the IP and copyright laws are here to stay, they're most likely not going anywhere, they're just too deeply rooted into everything today.
This way of thinking is a huge problem and why people constantly pirate things.
Why do you feel you deserve to play this game, watch this movie, listen to this music if you can't aford it? The awnser is you dont deserve it.
You have no need to play video games. They are a luxury. And if you cant afford luxury items you then you dont get the luxury of having that item. Simple as that. I cant afford a private jet so I dont get to have a private jet. You cant afford video games so you dont get to have them.
Obviously most everyone has pirated software at some point for various reasons and not being able to afford them is a big reason but that doesn't make it right or something you should continue to do.
@greevar. Yes I said your I idea was stupid. I think it is and laid out the reasons why I think it is stupid. Thats my opinion and I am free to express it as so. If you actually read what I wrote I didnt just say you have no clue what you are talking about to try and win my argument, I clearly stated how none of your points would realistically work. Sure it might work for a small little dev team on an indie game as those dont cost as much as Triple A titles. This just wont work for Triple A titles and even non Triple A titles as there are hundreds and hundreds of games produced each year and studios are generally not these small indie sized teams that can get away with make a game on the cheap.
Another problem with this is that I feel most gamers dont care to be involved with the creation of games. They are just looking for a fun game to play and once they are done playing it move on to play another fun game. They dont want to wait years supporting a game or multiple games to come out and then play them. They just want to play the cool games that interest them.
Another flaw with the "hey get everyone involved" idea of game dev is a lot of peoples ideas are just not very good and if the developers listened to everyones ideas of what they want in the game chances are it would take forever to create, not everyone would be happy, it would probably wouldn't be very fun as your average joe gamer isnt a game designer.
Another problem with this is millions and millions of games are purchased as gifts from people like parents who have no clue about these games at all. They just buy games they think there kids will like. Why do you think movie tie in games make some crazy bank when there generally decent games? These people are a HUGE profit margin for the games industry.
I am not trying to start a flame war with you but so far every debate you have been in you have derailed the conversation and convoluted the argument by forcing it going off track. This started out as a piracy thread about why or why not piracy is wrong and much like the Dominance War thread you derailed it. You have changed the topic into why the industry should change there business model. The only tie your argument has to the original topic is that it would make the free distribution of games ok, and pirates distribute games for free.
In the realm of professional 3D/2D software (all professional software for that matter), piracy actually helps the developers of those tools. By taking those tools for the purpose of learning, it creates a new generation of people who know how to use them and gives studios reason to continue to invest in those tools. It's good to learn from, as long as you don't try to sell the work. Once you learn the ropes and want to go freelance, get an alternative like Blender, Sculptris or Gimp. Then you can go make some money.
Your ideas would only appeal to something along the lines of an indie development team who does not necessarily have anything to lose.
But they also need to grow up eventually, Mojang is a perfect and recent example of this.
What? You are totally wrong here. Blizzard has never promissed they would release content after you buy there expansions in content updates. They just do it because they are awesome. They never say, hey we promise to give more content you dont have to pay for. When you pay the 40 bucks for an expansion you are paying for just that. All other content they give out is free.
No the 15 dollars a month you pay is the cost to play the game. They are not paying 15 dollars a month for absolutly nothing, they are paying 15 bucks to have the right to play the game. If you dont pay the monthly sub you cannot play the game. Its not you playing for them to develop more content, its you paying for the ability to play the game.
Totally agree with this.
I agree with what the video said about rewarding costumers. Clearly the punishing route it's not working very well.
You may be absolutely right about this, I don't know to be honest.
But, you can't tell me that none of that $15 a month x10million goes into development (meaning, salaries for Blizzard devs). Probably not even exclusively WoW. There's no way those $15 are purely for server cost. They're profit, and people are fine with that.
Second, you're right, Blizzard doesn't actually promise they'll release patches. But it goes to show how much that thought is prevalent, that I just assumed so. Thinking about it further, I don't believe there's a promise there. But everyone accepts it as such. When I first started playing MMOs (WoW was my first), the person who got me into it described it just like that. You pay $15, and they release new stuff over time. I never heard an MMO-dev deny it either. It goes with the territory of what an MMO is.
I mean, an xbox game costs roughly the same, and there's no monthly, and you play it online. So it's pretty obvious, even if not stated, that the monthly subscription goes into them further developing it, keeping the game fresh.
This is not true. Why? Because most major software developers now offer trial and/or educational versions of their major packages. It doesn't even matter if these versions are feature-complete. The sheer depth of this software makes an educational version more than adequate for learning purposes. And these educational versions are even distributed free of charge.
What justification can there be for pirating the full version of a software package when the company that produces the software has gone out of its way to provide us with a free version for learning purposes? These companies have already done the legwork as far as education is concerned. (at their own expense) Piracy doesn't help them at all. If anything, it is just an ungrateful waste of the effort they go to in providing educational versions of their software.
Unity now has a free-to-use version, even for commercial projects. Epic has released the UDK, which is completely free for hobbyists, and has very reasonable licencing for indies. Open source software is becoming more and more capable and comprehensive all the time. There is no longer any practical excuse for piracy. Those bases are covered.
Nope, the answer is because you can do it safely without any punishment. Whether someone "deserves" or is "entitled" to something is completely irrelevant, the actual key is the punishment or at least the fear of that punishment (or their morality, but for people who do pirate everything then that is already out of the question).
All it would take is a anti-robin hood, or a group of them. Or just 1 per company, unofficially of course.
Well, it probably wouldn't appeal to a larger game company like EA, because they make far more money being a publisher than a studio. That isn't to say it wouldn't work. To say it can't work because they're too big isn't really proof that it won't. If some of the AAA developers went solo and tried that, I think their reputation would carry them enough that they could do it. I would agree that the likes of EA and Activision might not be able to pull it off, because they don't make games, they distribute and sell them.