|
On December 01 2011 02:17 semantics wrote:
Which is an absurd model, do you pay for movies after you've already enjoyed them? Do you pay for tickets to something after you've already done it? This is business money up front no bums
Actually, the way retail has been for decades now, outside of the entertainment industry has been that model. Most products now, electronics, furniture, vehicles, etc. are actually available to 'buy now, pay later' because that model works.
It's not absurd and I think that you're ignoring a massive part of business if you think that.
|
On December 01 2011 02:19 Fruscainte wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 02:17 semantics wrote:On December 01 2011 02:05 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 02:04 Requizen wrote:On December 01 2011 02:00 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 01:57 subzer0 wrote:
Anyone trying to justify or defend piracy is a scumbag. Its exactly the same as walking into a store and stealing music, movies, or videogames. It is fundamentally wrong, but more or less completely free from prosecution. This is exactly the form of complete ignorance of the situation and total misinformation provided that lets the shit that developers are trying to pull on their paying customers go unhindered. Want to know how to "combat piracy"? Provide good service. Provide a good service and people will buy your shit. That's just the fact of life. If you are releasing shit that only hurts those whom buy the game, people are going to "steal" them (even though comparing downloading a digital representation of something is laughable to compare to walking into a store and taking something tangible.) No, that's dumb. DRM and online-only were put in place BECAUSE people were pirating shit. And yet it doesn't stop it at all and only hurts the buyers, causing even MORE people to pirate the game because they dont' want to deal with intrusive programs. See how that works? You'll never remove piracy. However, DRM only hurts it more. Every game gets cracked, and pirates still continue to play. And when buyers are stuck between the choice of having intrusive programs on their computer that limit their ability to play and have fun, and a version that has none of that which they should be getting when they buy the game, they choose the latter. You see, that's the issue. Pirated versions of games get better service than bought versions of the game. THAT is the issue that causes piracy. It's not about "HOW DO WE BLOCK ALL THE TORRENT SITES EVER", it's about providing a good service. When the pirated version is a better service than the bought version, more people will pirate. It's that fucking simple, I don't know how this can't be grasped. It does and doesn't work the more work people have to do to pirate a game the less likely they will wait around for a good version that's easy for them to work with and thus more likely to go out and buy the game. You want to say it doesn't wok? look at sc2 there are pirated online servers but with only a few hundred people on at a given time becuase it took so long everyone who wanted to play multi-player bought the game. The point at game companies is that they spend say 2 mil developing a game maybe 5 mil(random number) once it comes to producing and adverting a game etc and they get to sell you a game once for 50-60 dollars and the game will only sell well for maybe a year, this isn't an iron that they developed and can sell for 10 years pretty much with little alteration and they can't adjust their price really because everyone sells games at the same price this is a very ruff business model very similar to movies. And talking to people i would say most pirate not to see if a game is worthy to buy but becuase they don't want to go out and buy the game. It's usually a combination of lazyness and paying for something, why pay for something when you can get it for free. Which brings up the moral argument why do some people claim it's a right to pirate to test out games, with that logic all people should be allowed to play the games for free and IF IF they feel like paying for it they can. Which is an absurd model, do you pay for movies after you've already enjoyed them? Do you pay for tickets to something after you've already done it? This is business money up front no bums You only reaffirmed my point. Blizzard provides an OUTSTANDING service to their community and their game, so people BUY their game. If Battle.net was the worst DRM ever, everyone would be playing on pirate servers (much like ICCUP was back in the day). A good service was provided and people, including me, bought it. And a very small number of people play the pirated version because well, they're douchebags. You literally helped my point even more.
Is it a good service? my point is that it took very long for pirated servers to get up nearly half a year after release which has nothing to do with if battle.net was a good service, as both were not up during week of release so people didn't chose, now people chose to flock to the area with the most people which would be battle.net. People played iccup for better service, mostly to be playing with everyone with lat changer, yes, but that's 6-8 years after the game was release most people on iccup bought sc1 by then. The point of DRM and online only sort of deals is to prevent release week piracy, and weed out those pirates who pirate becuase they are too lazy to drive out and buy the game, or don't have little money so rather use it to spend on things they can't get for free.
|
Dont blame developers for DRM ... developers dont put drm on things its publishers that do that. Developers get paid for the work they did by the hour usually.
blizzards service is apalling from all my experiences much like steam. Yes their servers are up but thats pretty much a requirement not a bonus. If you have a technical problem you post on here or on another forum, NOT blizzard.
to all you people trying to make analogies with physical objects ... you are forgetting one thing ... games are DIGITAL there is no physical representation except the ordering of electrons. That seriously breaks ALL of your analogies beause the cost of reproduction is a big fat ZERO (and by cost i mean the mining of minerals,the time, their manufacter, the transportation of them the carious factories processing the products of other factories to get to the next step of the product that eventually ends up being the thing that is being 'stolen' in the analogy)
At least the film+music industry is esentially defending its capital locked up in distribution and production mechanisms as they bought their whole supply chain ... the games industry doesnt have that overhead (unless you are EA or equiv who bought pproduction facilities)
|
United States185 Posts
On December 01 2011 02:24 Fruscainte wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 02:22 HereAndNow wrote:On December 01 2011 02:19 dementrio wrote:I have a better analogy than stealing. + Show Spoiler +it's not hard to find one, because, well, piracy isn't stealing You live in San Diego and you just turned 21. You go party hard in Mexico, where a bottle of tequila costs $10. The same bottle in the US costs $20, because there is heavy tax on alcohol thanks to the liberal media. You drink a bottle and come back for the hangover. How much did you steal from the US government? That's not a good analogy, because you're still paying for the service. If I could find the same game in two places, but one charged me $20 dollars less, it's still a sale. A better analogy is this. You have a magic gun that lets you clone anything you shoot with it. You walk onto a car dealership. You shoot a Camaro. You drive off in a brand new Camaro that you didn't pay for, but the one you cloned is still there. Is this stealing a car? Yeah. Yeah it fucking is. Here's a BETTER analogy. You go into a car dealership with said magic gun. You have the choice of a shitty Camaro. One with torn seats, half the paint scratched off, the glass broken, and 100,000 miles. If you use the magic gun on said Camaro, you get a pristine, brand new Camaro. Which one would most people do? Now imagine if the car dealership (or "developers") did what Pirates want them to do. Provide a service better than the copied version. If the Camaro you can buy is significantly better in every way than the Pirated version. Would more people buy the car, or use the version to copy the significantly inferior version? I think the choice is clear, my friend. This thread isn't about the moral implications of piracy, stop implying it is. The thread is about how to combat piracy. Piracy will ALWAYS exist, however, there are ways to significantly reduce its implications and impact on the market. That is what is being discussed here, how to make more people stop pirating the games and start buying them. That starts from the bottom up with better service.
The game you buy is the exact same fucking thing as the one you pirate, unless you mod the hell out of it, which isn't fun anymore. If it's the service you're complaining about, it's more like cloning a manual transmission into an automatic because you're too impatient and cheap to learn how to use the clutch.
Combatting piracy has a lot to do with the moral obligations. As long as pirates see nothing morally wrong to them about pirating games, they're going to pirate them. If they honestly thought it was wrong and felt bad about it, they'd do it less. Which is why most pirates try to justify it with all the points that always come up (I'm just trying it! I wasn't going to buy it anyway! I'm sticking it to the man!). As long as you can justify pirating and feel ok about it, you're not going to stop.
|
MrHoon
10183 Posts
i used to combat piracy, then i took an arrow to the knee
|
On December 01 2011 02:27 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 02:19 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 02:17 semantics wrote:On December 01 2011 02:05 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 02:04 Requizen wrote:On December 01 2011 02:00 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 01:57 subzer0 wrote:
Anyone trying to justify or defend piracy is a scumbag. Its exactly the same as walking into a store and stealing music, movies, or videogames. It is fundamentally wrong, but more or less completely free from prosecution. This is exactly the form of complete ignorance of the situation and total misinformation provided that lets the shit that developers are trying to pull on their paying customers go unhindered. Want to know how to "combat piracy"? Provide good service. Provide a good service and people will buy your shit. That's just the fact of life. If you are releasing shit that only hurts those whom buy the game, people are going to "steal" them (even though comparing downloading a digital representation of something is laughable to compare to walking into a store and taking something tangible.) No, that's dumb. DRM and online-only were put in place BECAUSE people were pirating shit. And yet it doesn't stop it at all and only hurts the buyers, causing even MORE people to pirate the game because they dont' want to deal with intrusive programs. See how that works? You'll never remove piracy. However, DRM only hurts it more. Every game gets cracked, and pirates still continue to play. And when buyers are stuck between the choice of having intrusive programs on their computer that limit their ability to play and have fun, and a version that has none of that which they should be getting when they buy the game, they choose the latter. You see, that's the issue. Pirated versions of games get better service than bought versions of the game. THAT is the issue that causes piracy. It's not about "HOW DO WE BLOCK ALL THE TORRENT SITES EVER", it's about providing a good service. When the pirated version is a better service than the bought version, more people will pirate. It's that fucking simple, I don't know how this can't be grasped. It does and doesn't work the more work people have to do to pirate a game the less likely they will wait around for a good version that's easy for them to work with and thus more likely to go out and buy the game. You want to say it doesn't wok? look at sc2 there are pirated online servers but with only a few hundred people on at a given time becuase it took so long everyone who wanted to play multi-player bought the game. The point at game companies is that they spend say 2 mil developing a game maybe 5 mil(random number) once it comes to producing and adverting a game etc and they get to sell you a game once for 50-60 dollars and the game will only sell well for maybe a year, this isn't an iron that they developed and can sell for 10 years pretty much with little alteration and they can't adjust their price really because everyone sells games at the same price this is a very ruff business model very similar to movies. And talking to people i would say most pirate not to see if a game is worthy to buy but becuase they don't want to go out and buy the game. It's usually a combination of lazyness and paying for something, why pay for something when you can get it for free. Which brings up the moral argument why do some people claim it's a right to pirate to test out games, with that logic all people should be allowed to play the games for free and IF IF they feel like paying for it they can. Which is an absurd model, do you pay for movies after you've already enjoyed them? Do you pay for tickets to something after you've already done it? This is business money up front no bums You only reaffirmed my point. Blizzard provides an OUTSTANDING service to their community and their game, so people BUY their game. If Battle.net was the worst DRM ever, everyone would be playing on pirate servers (much like ICCUP was back in the day). A good service was provided and people, including me, bought it. And a very small number of people play the pirated version because well, they're douchebags. You literally helped my point even more. Is it a good service? my point is that it took very long for pirated servers to get up nearly half a year after release which has nothing to do with if battle.net was a good service, as both were not up during week of release so people didn't chose, now people chose to flock to the area with the most people which would be battle.net. People played iccup for better service, mostly to be playing with everyone with lat changer, yes, but that's 6-8 years after the game was release most people on iccup bought sc1 by then. The point of DRM and online only sort of deals is to prevent release week piracy, and weed out those pirates who pirate becuase they are too lazy to drive out and buy the game, or don't have little money so rather use it to spend on things they can't get for free.
Fundamental proof that DRM does NOT EVER work: Assassins Creed: Revelations. Some of the most intrusive DRM I have ever seen, and the PC version was cracked ~3 1/2 weeks before it has been officially released on PC.
|
guys
you suck so much at analogies
take this then. You have a brain tumor. You need $1,000,000 to heal yourself at your local hospital. Instead you go to Norway where you get health care for free. How much did you steal from your local hospital?
geez
|
On December 01 2011 02:28 HereAndNow wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 02:24 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 02:22 HereAndNow wrote:On December 01 2011 02:19 dementrio wrote:I have a better analogy than stealing. + Show Spoiler +it's not hard to find one, because, well, piracy isn't stealing You live in San Diego and you just turned 21. You go party hard in Mexico, where a bottle of tequila costs $10. The same bottle in the US costs $20, because there is heavy tax on alcohol thanks to the liberal media. You drink a bottle and come back for the hangover. How much did you steal from the US government? That's not a good analogy, because you're still paying for the service. If I could find the same game in two places, but one charged me $20 dollars less, it's still a sale. A better analogy is this. You have a magic gun that lets you clone anything you shoot with it. You walk onto a car dealership. You shoot a Camaro. You drive off in a brand new Camaro that you didn't pay for, but the one you cloned is still there. Is this stealing a car? Yeah. Yeah it fucking is. Here's a BETTER analogy. You go into a car dealership with said magic gun. You have the choice of a shitty Camaro. One with torn seats, half the paint scratched off, the glass broken, and 100,000 miles. If you use the magic gun on said Camaro, you get a pristine, brand new Camaro. Which one would most people do? Now imagine if the car dealership (or "developers") did what Pirates want them to do. Provide a service better than the copied version. If the Camaro you can buy is significantly better in every way than the Pirated version. Would more people buy the car, or use the version to copy the significantly inferior version? I think the choice is clear, my friend. This thread isn't about the moral implications of piracy, stop implying it is. The thread is about how to combat piracy. Piracy will ALWAYS exist, however, there are ways to significantly reduce its implications and impact on the market. That is what is being discussed here, how to make more people stop pirating the games and start buying them. That starts from the bottom up with better service. The game you buy is the exact same fucking thing as the one you pirate,
Not when there is intrusive DRM that makes it so that you MUST be online at all times to get the same experience, can only install it twice on any computer (IE: Reinstalling OS makes you have to rebuy the game), or takes away from the general experience in any way.
|
On December 01 2011 02:28 HereAndNow wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 02:24 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 02:22 HereAndNow wrote:On December 01 2011 02:19 dementrio wrote:I have a better analogy than stealing. + Show Spoiler +it's not hard to find one, because, well, piracy isn't stealing You live in San Diego and you just turned 21. You go party hard in Mexico, where a bottle of tequila costs $10. The same bottle in the US costs $20, because there is heavy tax on alcohol thanks to the liberal media. You drink a bottle and come back for the hangover. How much did you steal from the US government? That's not a good analogy, because you're still paying for the service. If I could find the same game in two places, but one charged me $20 dollars less, it's still a sale. A better analogy is this. You have a magic gun that lets you clone anything you shoot with it. You walk onto a car dealership. You shoot a Camaro. You drive off in a brand new Camaro that you didn't pay for, but the one you cloned is still there. Is this stealing a car? Yeah. Yeah it fucking is. Here's a BETTER analogy. You go into a car dealership with said magic gun. You have the choice of a shitty Camaro. One with torn seats, half the paint scratched off, the glass broken, and 100,000 miles. If you use the magic gun on said Camaro, you get a pristine, brand new Camaro. Which one would most people do? Now imagine if the car dealership (or "developers") did what Pirates want them to do. Provide a service better than the copied version. If the Camaro you can buy is significantly better in every way than the Pirated version. Would more people buy the car, or use the version to copy the significantly inferior version? I think the choice is clear, my friend. This thread isn't about the moral implications of piracy, stop implying it is. The thread is about how to combat piracy. Piracy will ALWAYS exist, however, there are ways to significantly reduce its implications and impact on the market. That is what is being discussed here, how to make more people stop pirating the games and start buying them. That starts from the bottom up with better service. The game you buy is the exact same fucking thing as the one you pirate, unless you mod the hell out of it, which isn't fun anymore. If it's the service you're complaining about, it's more like cloning a manual transmission into an automatic because you're too impatient and cheap to learn how to use the clutch. Combatting piracy has a lot to do with the moral obligations. As long as pirates see nothing morally wrong to them about pirating games, they're going to pirate them. If they honestly thought it was wrong and felt bad about it, they'd do it less. Which is why most pirates try to justify it with all the points that always come up (I'm just trying it! I wasn't going to buy it anyway! I'm sticking it to the man!). As long as you can justify pirating and feel ok about it, you're not going to stop.
I think these analogies are getting a bit out of hand and starting to lose any meaning whatsoever.
|
On December 01 2011 02:31 jtype wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 02:28 HereAndNow wrote:On December 01 2011 02:24 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 02:22 HereAndNow wrote:On December 01 2011 02:19 dementrio wrote:I have a better analogy than stealing. + Show Spoiler +it's not hard to find one, because, well, piracy isn't stealing You live in San Diego and you just turned 21. You go party hard in Mexico, where a bottle of tequila costs $10. The same bottle in the US costs $20, because there is heavy tax on alcohol thanks to the liberal media. You drink a bottle and come back for the hangover. How much did you steal from the US government? That's not a good analogy, because you're still paying for the service. If I could find the same game in two places, but one charged me $20 dollars less, it's still a sale. A better analogy is this. You have a magic gun that lets you clone anything you shoot with it. You walk onto a car dealership. You shoot a Camaro. You drive off in a brand new Camaro that you didn't pay for, but the one you cloned is still there. Is this stealing a car? Yeah. Yeah it fucking is. Here's a BETTER analogy. You go into a car dealership with said magic gun. You have the choice of a shitty Camaro. One with torn seats, half the paint scratched off, the glass broken, and 100,000 miles. If you use the magic gun on said Camaro, you get a pristine, brand new Camaro. Which one would most people do? Now imagine if the car dealership (or "developers") did what Pirates want them to do. Provide a service better than the copied version. If the Camaro you can buy is significantly better in every way than the Pirated version. Would more people buy the car, or use the version to copy the significantly inferior version? I think the choice is clear, my friend. This thread isn't about the moral implications of piracy, stop implying it is. The thread is about how to combat piracy. Piracy will ALWAYS exist, however, there are ways to significantly reduce its implications and impact on the market. That is what is being discussed here, how to make more people stop pirating the games and start buying them. That starts from the bottom up with better service. The game you buy is the exact same fucking thing as the one you pirate, unless you mod the hell out of it, which isn't fun anymore. If it's the service you're complaining about, it's more like cloning a manual transmission into an automatic because you're too impatient and cheap to learn how to use the clutch. Combatting piracy has a lot to do with the moral obligations. As long as pirates see nothing morally wrong to them about pirating games, they're going to pirate them. If they honestly thought it was wrong and felt bad about it, they'd do it less. Which is why most pirates try to justify it with all the points that always come up (I'm just trying it! I wasn't going to buy it anyway! I'm sticking it to the man!). As long as you can justify pirating and feel ok about it, you're not going to stop. I think these analogies are getting a bit out of hand and starting to lose any meaning whatsoever.
There's no point of analogies in this subject. Piracy should be addressed as piracy, not as buying a car. They are completely separate things.
This thread isn't even on the moral implications of piracy. It's about how to cut down on piracy. The answer to that is clear.
Hint: It isn't DRM.
|
On December 01 2011 02:30 dementrio wrote:
guys
you suck so much at analogies
take this then. You have a brain tumor. You need $1,000,000 to heal yourself at your local hospital. Instead you go to Norway where you get health care for free. How much did you steal from your local hospital?
geez
Die of tumor or die of destitution are the best choices because Norway is morally reprehensible. Now do I get a prize?
|
United States185 Posts
On December 01 2011 02:25 Nikon wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 02:22 HereAndNow wrote:On December 01 2011 02:19 dementrio wrote:I have a better analogy than stealing. + Show Spoiler +it's not hard to find one, because, well, piracy isn't stealing You live in San Diego and you just turned 21. You go party hard in Mexico, where a bottle of tequila costs $10. The same bottle in the US costs $20, because there is heavy tax on alcohol thanks to the liberal media. You drink a bottle and come back for the hangover. How much did you steal from the US government? That's not a good analogy, because you're still paying for the service. If I could find the same game in two places, but one charged me $20 dollars less, it's still a sale. A better analogy is this. You have a magic gun that lets you clone anything you shoot with it. You walk onto a car dealership. You shoot a Camaro. You drive off in a brand new Camaro that you didn't pay for, but the one you cloned is still there. Is this stealing a car? Yeah. Yeah it fucking is. No, it's not. The owner of the original car still has it. You took a car that wasn't created and/or paid for by him in any capacity. #1 bad analogy.
Alright, now what's to prevent 1000 people from walking on to the lot and doing the same thing? The going price of the 2011 Camaro is ~$35k. That's $35,000,000 worth of car that's driving out without being paid for.
Oh look, the Camaro isn't being made anymore!
But why? I still want a new Camaro even if I don't pay for it!
Well you see, you fucking need to pay people for a service, or they're not going to keep making products because there's no revenue in it.
How many pirates do you think are out there?
|
People pirated the software because they are expensive. For example, microsoft office 2010 cost around $130-350 US. Generally, the method of pirating a software is easy. You just click download, then done.
|
On December 01 2011 02:29 Fruscainte wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 02:27 semantics wrote:On December 01 2011 02:19 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 02:17 semantics wrote:On December 01 2011 02:05 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 02:04 Requizen wrote:On December 01 2011 02:00 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 01:57 subzer0 wrote:
Anyone trying to justify or defend piracy is a scumbag. Its exactly the same as walking into a store and stealing music, movies, or videogames. It is fundamentally wrong, but more or less completely free from prosecution. This is exactly the form of complete ignorance of the situation and total misinformation provided that lets the shit that developers are trying to pull on their paying customers go unhindered. Want to know how to "combat piracy"? Provide good service. Provide a good service and people will buy your shit. That's just the fact of life. If you are releasing shit that only hurts those whom buy the game, people are going to "steal" them (even though comparing downloading a digital representation of something is laughable to compare to walking into a store and taking something tangible.) No, that's dumb. DRM and online-only were put in place BECAUSE people were pirating shit. And yet it doesn't stop it at all and only hurts the buyers, causing even MORE people to pirate the game because they dont' want to deal with intrusive programs. See how that works? You'll never remove piracy. However, DRM only hurts it more. Every game gets cracked, and pirates still continue to play. And when buyers are stuck between the choice of having intrusive programs on their computer that limit their ability to play and have fun, and a version that has none of that which they should be getting when they buy the game, they choose the latter. You see, that's the issue. Pirated versions of games get better service than bought versions of the game. THAT is the issue that causes piracy. It's not about "HOW DO WE BLOCK ALL THE TORRENT SITES EVER", it's about providing a good service. When the pirated version is a better service than the bought version, more people will pirate. It's that fucking simple, I don't know how this can't be grasped. It does and doesn't work the more work people have to do to pirate a game the less likely they will wait around for a good version that's easy for them to work with and thus more likely to go out and buy the game. You want to say it doesn't wok? look at sc2 there are pirated online servers but with only a few hundred people on at a given time becuase it took so long everyone who wanted to play multi-player bought the game. The point at game companies is that they spend say 2 mil developing a game maybe 5 mil(random number) once it comes to producing and adverting a game etc and they get to sell you a game once for 50-60 dollars and the game will only sell well for maybe a year, this isn't an iron that they developed and can sell for 10 years pretty much with little alteration and they can't adjust their price really because everyone sells games at the same price this is a very ruff business model very similar to movies. And talking to people i would say most pirate not to see if a game is worthy to buy but becuase they don't want to go out and buy the game. It's usually a combination of lazyness and paying for something, why pay for something when you can get it for free. Which brings up the moral argument why do some people claim it's a right to pirate to test out games, with that logic all people should be allowed to play the games for free and IF IF they feel like paying for it they can. Which is an absurd model, do you pay for movies after you've already enjoyed them? Do you pay for tickets to something after you've already done it? This is business money up front no bums You only reaffirmed my point. Blizzard provides an OUTSTANDING service to their community and their game, so people BUY their game. If Battle.net was the worst DRM ever, everyone would be playing on pirate servers (much like ICCUP was back in the day). A good service was provided and people, including me, bought it. And a very small number of people play the pirated version because well, they're douchebags. You literally helped my point even more. Is it a good service? my point is that it took very long for pirated servers to get up nearly half a year after release which has nothing to do with if battle.net was a good service, as both were not up during week of release so people didn't chose, now people chose to flock to the area with the most people which would be battle.net. People played iccup for better service, mostly to be playing with everyone with lat changer, yes, but that's 6-8 years after the game was release most people on iccup bought sc1 by then. The point of DRM and online only sort of deals is to prevent release week piracy, and weed out those pirates who pirate becuase they are too lazy to drive out and buy the game, or don't have little money so rather use it to spend on things they can't get for free. Fundamental proof that DRM does NOT EVER work: Assassins Creed: Revelations. Some of the most intrusive DRM I have ever seen, and the PC version was cracked ~3 1/2 weeks before it has been officially released on PC.
? How i that not working, it told you the point is to prevent week of release piracy, the longer a game is out the more likely people will buy the game instead of pirate it, when their only choice is to buy the game. To which some drm does just fine.
Yes look at it fail to bring in revenue
http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/uk-charts-modern-warfare-3-resists-new-release-rivals/087444
Ubisoft’s Assassin’s Creed: Revelations was the strongest newcomer, debuting at No.2. Its week one numbers better those of predecessor Brotherhood by four per cent in unit terms and eight per cent in revenue, making it the best performing title both in the series and in Ubisoft’s history to date.
On December 01 2011 02:27 jtype wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 02:17 semantics wrote:
Which is an absurd model, do you pay for movies after you've already enjoyed them? Do you pay for tickets to something after you've already done it? This is business money up front no bums Actually, the way retail has been for decades now, outside of the entertainment industry has been that model. Most products now, electronics, furniture, vehicles, etc. are actually available to 'buy now, pay later' because that model works. It's not absurd and I think that you're ignoring a massive part of business if you think that.
Except you are putting money down and paying interest, go out and buy for no money down a car or couch. Guess what you have to pay for it else you lose it, and unlike entertainment which usually is only played/viewed once and people are content, you kind of need a couch to sit on all the time. You seem to not understand why the entertainment industry doesn't work on that model and why it's pushing to a subscription model like cable(which btw is the most profitable of all entertainment industry outside of gambling, video games and i think it's... i forget video games at near the bottom(not the actual bottom though) in terms of profit margins though, doesn't mean they make money just means their profits are thin)
|
If you want to combat piracy you need to create a game with compelling online multiplayer that makes people have to buy the game to access. Like our beloved SC2.
Another thing I can think of is to release games on console and delay the PC release so that the people who really want the game will get it on console first instead of waiting for a PC version to pirate. This can help a little bit I think as not as many people have modded consoles and will lead to a little less pirating.
That's all I can think of for now really.
|
Piracy these days on PC is probably less problematic than second-hand sales on the Xbox,” commented Fable III lead combat designer Mike West. He added, “”I’ve been working on PC games for many years and piracy is always a problem. There are a lot of honest people out there as well, and if they like your game they’ll buy it.
I am the person he described. If you decide to call me a criminal that's fine. I am. I also don't give a shit what you think of me and others opinions on how I demo games will not affect my choices.
I'm sorry you think it's such a big deal that bad game developers are not paid for games found to be not worth purchasing. I buy many games. If I can't afford them I don't buy them. But if I'm on the fence about EAs new formulaic game- I'll pirate it and test it out. And 9/10 times it was not worth purchasing.
The video games industry is so massive that refusing to buy a bad product does not change it from being successful. People will buy it anyway. You can't force EA/Activision/et cetera to strive for better games through not purchasing.
So what's the problem with piracy? Tell you what, I'll meet you half way. How about they stop using DLC as a way to milk the consumer even further, releasing 7/10ths of a game and selling the extra 3 parts for half of the game price in total and I'll start buying their games!
|
On December 01 2011 02:29 Fruscainte wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 02:27 semantics wrote:On December 01 2011 02:19 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 02:17 semantics wrote:On December 01 2011 02:05 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 02:04 Requizen wrote:On December 01 2011 02:00 Fruscainte wrote:On December 01 2011 01:57 subzer0 wrote:
Anyone trying to justify or defend piracy is a scumbag. Its exactly the same as walking into a store and stealing music, movies, or videogames. It is fundamentally wrong, but more or less completely free from prosecution. This is exactly the form of complete ignorance of the situation and total misinformation provided that lets the shit that developers are trying to pull on their paying customers go unhindered. Want to know how to "combat piracy"? Provide good service. Provide a good service and people will buy your shit. That's just the fact of life. If you are releasing shit that only hurts those whom buy the game, people are going to "steal" them (even though comparing downloading a digital representation of something is laughable to compare to walking into a store and taking something tangible.) No, that's dumb. DRM and online-only were put in place BECAUSE people were pirating shit. And yet it doesn't stop it at all and only hurts the buyers, causing even MORE people to pirate the game because they dont' want to deal with intrusive programs. See how that works? Every one of your posts reeks of self-entitlement. Not unexpected I suppose, it's a common trait among people who support stealing. You know that you don't get to have something for free just because it doesn't meet your supposed standards right? I love seeing the same people who torrent games explain to me that they want to become game developers or software engineers. Gives me a hearty chuckle of irony. You'll never remove piracy. However, DRM only hurts it more. Every game gets cracked, and pirates still continue to play. And when buyers are stuck between the choice of having intrusive programs on their computer that limit their ability to play and have fun, and a version that has none of that which they should be getting when they buy the game, they choose the latter. You see, that's the issue. Pirated versions of games get better service than bought versions of the game. THAT is the issue that causes piracy. It's not about "HOW DO WE BLOCK ALL THE TORRENT SITES EVER", it's about providing a good service. When the pirated version is a better service than the bought version, more people will pirate. It's that fucking simple, I don't know how this can't be grasped. It does and doesn't work the more work people have to do to pirate a game the less likely they will wait around for a good version that's easy for them to work with and thus more likely to go out and buy the game. You want to say it doesn't wok? look at sc2 there are pirated online servers but with only a few hundred people on at a given time becuase it took so long everyone who wanted to play multi-player bought the game. The point at game companies is that they spend say 2 mil developing a game maybe 5 mil(random number) once it comes to producing and adverting a game etc and they get to sell you a game once for 50-60 dollars and the game will only sell well for maybe a year, this isn't an iron that they developed and can sell for 10 years pretty much with little alteration and they can't adjust their price really because everyone sells games at the same price this is a very ruff business model very similar to movies. And talking to people i would say most pirate not to see if a game is worthy to buy but becuase they don't want to go out and buy the game. It's usually a combination of lazyness and paying for something, why pay for something when you can get it for free. Which brings up the moral argument why do some people claim it's a right to pirate to test out games, with that logic all people should be allowed to play the games for free and IF IF they feel like paying for it they can. Which is an absurd model, do you pay for movies after you've already enjoyed them? Do you pay for tickets to something after you've already done it? This is business money up front no bums You only reaffirmed my point. Blizzard provides an OUTSTANDING service to their community and their game, so people BUY their game. If Battle.net was the worst DRM ever, everyone would be playing on pirate servers (much like ICCUP was back in the day). A good service was provided and people, including me, bought it. And a very small number of people play the pirated version because well, they're douchebags. You literally helped my point even more. Is it a good service? my point is that it took very long for pirated servers to get up nearly half a year after release which has nothing to do with if battle.net was a good service, as both were not up during week of release so people didn't chose, now people chose to flock to the area with the most people which would be battle.net. People played iccup for better service, mostly to be playing with everyone with lat changer, yes, but that's 6-8 years after the game was release most people on iccup bought sc1 by then. The point of DRM and online only sort of deals is to prevent release week piracy, and weed out those pirates who pirate becuase they are too lazy to drive out and buy the game, or don't have little money so rather use it to spend on things they can't get for free. Fundamental proof that DRM does NOT EVER work: Assassins Creed: Revelations. Some of the most intrusive DRM I have ever seen, and the PC version was cracked ~3 1/2 weeks before it has been officially released on PC.
Every one of your posts reeks of self-entitlement. Not unexpected I suppose, it's a common trait among people who support stealing. You know that you don't get to have something for free just because it doesn't meet your supposed standards right?
|
United States185 Posts
On December 01 2011 02:30 dementrio wrote:
guys
you suck so much at analogies
take this then. You have a brain tumor. You need $1,000,000 to heal yourself at your local hospital. Instead you go to Norway where you get health care for free. How much did you steal from your local hospital?
geez
And then the local hospital closes down or starts charging exorbitant fees for simple procedures.
But why did their service get so shitty? You ask.
Because you didn't pay them.
People have no idea of the worth of money now. You just want what you want and don't want to pay for it, you act like children who don't realize that the people you're not paying are suffering from it.
|
On November 30 2011 22:33 Yuljan wrote:
I pirate games to see if theyd run on my computer. I bet there are alot of guys like me. Witcher 2 was unplayable for example.
You could have just read the system requirements.
|
On December 01 2011 02:28 MrHoon wrote:
i used to combat piracy, then i took an arrow to the knee Hahaha. Also your cousin gets to pirate all he wants, yet all you get to do is sit here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
