|
On June 23 2011 15:51 exittlight wrote:
I've always found (in my case) that pirating helps sales. When ever I pirate a game, Portal 2 most recently, I tell all my friends about it. When I tell all my friends about how great it is, they then go out and buy it themselves. If I never pirated it, they would have never bought it in the first place.
Is this actually supposed to be some kind of justification?
"I've always found (in my case) that stealing helps people. When ever I steal from someone, my friend most recently, they learn a valuable lesson. If I never stole from them they wouldn't have never learned their lesson, so in actuality, I'm helping them." exittlight logic right here guys.
|
It's a sad thing when people bring up the "it's a company, they want to make money" card. I know this sounds naive, but it should be about making the best possible game and then getting profit out of it, not about making the biggest possible amount of money and getting away with as little good game as possible. You can tell if a developer genuinely wants to produce a good game and it doesnt. Starcraft 2 unfortunately is an example of the latter (not saying I dont like it at all, but you can tell from how its made). Early WoW and the blizzard games before that were examples of good games. This was always why I liked Blizzard: They said "hey wouldn't it be cool if we have that in the game?" and they added it disregarding the additional time, money and effort needed to complete a game. They made, in essence, games they wanted to play themselves and that is in my opinion what game development should be about.
There is a reason the best games come from indie studios. Do you think they sit down on a table and ponder "How can we make the biggest amount of money?". No, they make a good game and then sell it and try to get by and if the game is really good people will buy it, and then the sequel and they will tell all their friends how good it is and the friends will buy it too. They will then buy the sequels, spinoffs and expansions as long as the developers continue to deliver a good game.
I have bought SC2 and am not really satisfied. You wanna know the reason why I spent the 60€ on it? Cause I had pirated WC3 and liked it. I liked it so much I bought it, and then eventually WoW, Diablo2 and SC2. As long as a studio releases great games they will get money. Maybe they don't get the most possible out of it, but who cares? The shareholders? Fuck the shareholders! As soon as they dictate how a game has to be I sure as hell won't buy it.
The video of Gabe Newell posted earlier in the thread is very inspiring. It gives me confidence that we will still continue to have good games despite all that EA/Activision greedmachine. There is one thing that is for sure: I will buy DotA2 and most probably it will be the money that could have been HotS.
|
WoW has private cracked servers? It's not the same thing at all. One is a online game that uses a key+password to autenticate the login to the server, even if you crack it and circumvent the key you still get no real game as it's all online. In SC2 if you circumvent the key (don't need to crack the actual keycodes) you gain access to a full client with LAN enabled.
no, there is a piece auf hardware called "authenticator" which creates a new code every 10 (?) seconds you need to logi in. Its sold as an account security tool.
http://us.blizzard.com/support/article.xml?locale=en_US&articleId=24660&pageNumber=1&searchQuery=authenticator
and just FYI there are already cracked SC2 copies with lan enabled, even with an emulated kind of Bnet.
|
Is it just me, or did the guy argue against putting anything in games? He says putting LAN would increase piracy, so would putting in anything desirable to the public.
After all, a game gets pirated more than nothing. Maybe he should start selling copies of rubbish data, then all his piracy woes would disappear.
|
On June 23 2011 16:18 Olinim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 15:51 exittlight wrote:
I've always found (in my case) that pirating helps sales. When ever I pirate a game, Portal 2 most recently, I tell all my friends about it. When I tell all my friends about how great it is, they then go out and buy it themselves. If I never pirated it, they would have never bought it in the first place. Is this actually supposed to be some kind of justification? "I've always found (in my case) that stealing helps people. When ever I steal from someone, my friend most recently, they learn a valuable lesson. If I never stole from them they wouldn't have never learned their lesson, so in actuality, I'm helping them." exittlight logic right here guys.
you'd be suprised how piracy can help sales rather than hinder it
you know of the deus ex human revolution leak ?
most people were basically set on the fact that, that game would be complete shit.
after the leak almost every single person that played the leak came out and said "im totally buying this game, it's amazing"
|
I have no problem with no lan mode. Sucks for tournament organizes but who the hell doesn't have the internet these days? I mean I have the worst internet on earth and I can handle a few games going at the same time on the same connection. In fact adding lan would not increase my enjoyment of the game in any way.
When they first said there would be no lan I was pissed, but now that I have seen how it works I truly don't care. Instances like that fail MLG will stop happening because they now aware of the problem and it is fixable as we saw with the last MLG.
That said removing lan is certainly not something I'm happy about, its just that I no longer care whether it is there or not.
If Blizzard came up to me and said you can decide what we work on next, Lan or clan support, I woul go clan support.
|
On June 23 2011 16:22 Charon1979 wrote:Show nested quote +
WoW has private cracked servers? It's not the same thing at all. One is a online game that uses a key+password to autenticate the login to the server, even if you crack it and circumvent the key you still get no real game as it's all online. In SC2 if you circumvent the key (don't need to crack the actual keycodes) you gain access to a full client with LAN enabled.
no, there is a piece auf hardware called "authenticator" which creates a new code every 10 (?) seconds you need to logi in. Its sold as an account security tool. http://us.blizzard.com/support/article.xml?locale=en_US&articleId=24660&pageNumber=1&searchQuery=authenticatorand just FYI there are already cracked SC2 copies with lan enabled, even with an emulated kind of Bnet.
Yeah i own one. All my points still stand. I've heard of this lan-enabled client, it seems very shady and not available on most pirate sites.
|
On June 23 2011 16:27 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 16:18 Olinim wrote:On June 23 2011 15:51 exittlight wrote:
I've always found (in my case) that pirating helps sales. When ever I pirate a game, Portal 2 most recently, I tell all my friends about it. When I tell all my friends about how great it is, they then go out and buy it themselves. If I never pirated it, they would have never bought it in the first place. Is this actually supposed to be some kind of justification? "I've always found (in my case) that stealing helps people. When ever I steal from someone, my friend most recently, they learn a valuable lesson. If I never stole from them they wouldn't have never learned their lesson, so in actuality, I'm helping them." exittlight logic right here guys. you'd be suprised how piracy can help sales rather than hinder it you know of the deus ex human revolution leak ? most people were basically set on the fact that, that game would be complete shit. after the leak almost every single person that played the leak came out and said "im totally buying this game, it's amazing"
People would have read reviews and bought the game regardless if it was really that good, it's not like piracy is the only way to get information about a game or you blow 60 bucks, this isn't the NES era.
|
On June 23 2011 16:39 Olinim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 16:27 MavercK wrote:On June 23 2011 16:18 Olinim wrote:On June 23 2011 15:51 exittlight wrote:
I've always found (in my case) that pirating helps sales. When ever I pirate a game, Portal 2 most recently, I tell all my friends about it. When I tell all my friends about how great it is, they then go out and buy it themselves. If I never pirated it, they would have never bought it in the first place. Is this actually supposed to be some kind of justification? "I've always found (in my case) that stealing helps people. When ever I steal from someone, my friend most recently, they learn a valuable lesson. If I never stole from them they wouldn't have never learned their lesson, so in actuality, I'm helping them." exittlight logic right here guys. you'd be suprised how piracy can help sales rather than hinder it you know of the deus ex human revolution leak ? most people were basically set on the fact that, that game would be complete shit. after the leak almost every single person that played the leak came out and said "im totally buying this game, it's amazing" People would have read reviews and bought the game regardless if it was really that good, it's not like piracy is the only way to get information about a game or you blow 60 bucks, this isn't the NES era.
Yeah. Even /v/, the most negative gaming community in the world, were looking forward to the game even before the leak.
|
On June 23 2011 16:22 MaGariShun wrote:
It's a sad thing when people bring up the "it's a company, they want to make money" card. I know this sounds naive, but it should be about making the best possible game and then getting profit out of it, not about making the biggest possible amount of money and getting away with as little good game as possible. You can tell if a developer genuinely wants to produce a good game and it doesnt. Starcraft 2 unfortunately is an example of the latter (not saying I dont like it at all, but you can tell from how its made). Early WoW and the blizzard games before that were examples of good games. This was always why I liked Blizzard: They said "hey wouldn't it be cool if we have that in the game?" and they added it disregarding the additional time, money and effort needed to complete a game. They made, in essence, games they wanted to play themselves and that is in my opinion what game development should be about.
I have bought SC2 and am not really satisfied. You wanna know the reason why I spent the 60€ on it? Cause I had pirated WC3 and liked it. I liked it so much I bought it, and then eventually WoW, Diablo2 and SC2. As long as a studio releases great games they will get money. Maybe they don't get the most possible out of it, but who cares? The shareholders? Fuck the shareholders! As soon as they dictate how a game has to be I sure as hell won't buy it.
The video of Gabe Newell posted earlier in the thread is very inspiring. It gives me confidence that we will still continue to have good games despite all that EA/Activision greedmachine. There is one thing that is for sure: I will buy DotA2 and most probably it will be the money that could have been HotS.
Pirates will always be pirates. Even if you bring the best game out there, people will still download it.
Quite frankly, you are naive. Companies make money, thats the way everything works. But just because a product has to make money doesnt mean it can't be fun or good, or Blizzard cant spend more time and effort in it. I'm sorry that you hate SC2 that much, but blizzard has done a tremendous job of making an awesome game, which they are very skilled at. Especially Blizzard is known for their innovation and care they put in their games.
Did Blizzard only do it for the money? No, if they would really be in it for the money they wouldnt make games, simple as that. There are other markets in the software-industry that are way more profitable, if all they ever wanted and did was make money they could just switch and make your next b2b application, turn into a company like IBM for example.
There is a reason the best games come from indie studios. Do you think they sit down on a table and ponder "How can we make the biggest amount of money?". No, they make a good game and then sell it and try to get by and if the game is really good people will buy it, and then the sequel and they will tell all their friends how good it is and the friends will buy it too. They will then buy the sequels, spinoffs and expansions as long as the developers continue to deliver a good game.
The best game comes from indie studios? Are you serious? Name one. Do you really honestly believe that a bunch of guys with a loan from the bank are just going to make something and hope for the best, instead of doing endless market research, trying to figure out what the people want and create that. Indie developers are fragile, they dont have the bankaccounts big developers have. They cant just create something they love, what if it becomes a huge flop? Blizzard could handle it if SC2 failed miserably, do you really think any indie developer can when they just spend 6 months of work in a project?
I wish everything you said was true, that if you just love what you do and put a hell lot of effort in it you become rich. But thats not the case, you actually have to get out of your chair and see if people would want to buy your game, do some market research and adjust your game design.
(If its worth anything, i work at an indie game development studio that creates games for mobile devices)
|
On June 23 2011 16:24 Seditary wrote:
Is it just me, or did the guy argue against putting anything in games? He says putting LAN would increase piracy, so would putting in anything desirable to the public.
After all, a game gets pirated more than nothing. Maybe he should start selling copies of rubbish data, then all his piracy woes would disappear.
No. Getting a better game increases sales, that should be obvious. It also increases piracy, but probably not the piracy percentage, which i would assume even lowers a bit. So as a result, you get more sales, and more pirated games at the same time. Implementing LAN on the other hand means that some people who want to play multiplayer pirate the game instead of buying it. So the percentage of pirates over buyers increases. While it will also probably attract next to no additional buyers, this means that if they implement it, they actually sell less games than if they had not.
There are basically 3 numbers here. Total amount of people who play the game, the subset of people who pirate the game, and the amount of people who buy the game. Gaming companies want to maximize the third group, while the other two should not matter to them at all. Making a better game increases groups 1, 2, and 3 all alike. As the company does not care for 1 and 2, but the size of three is important to them, that is a desired effect. Stuff that makes a game easier to pirate, or increases the quality of the pirated version of the game increases 1 and 2, but lowers 3. So if the expected result of a change makes group 3 smaller, there is no reason for a gaming company to implement it.
|
On June 23 2011 16:22 MaGariShun wrote:
It's a sad thing when people bring up the "it's a company, they want to make money" card. I know this sounds naive, but it should be about making the best possible game and then getting profit out of it, not about making the biggest possible amount of money and getting away with as little good game as possible. You can tell if a developer genuinely wants to produce a good game and it doesnt. Starcraft 2 unfortunately is an example of the latter (not saying I dont like it at all, but you can tell from how its made). Early WoW and the blizzard games before that were examples of good games. This was always why I liked Blizzard: They said "hey wouldn't it be cool if we have that in the game?" and they added it disregarding the additional time, money and effort needed to complete a game. They made, in essence, games they wanted to play themselves and that is in my opinion what game development should be about.
There is a reason the best games come from indie studios. Do you think they sit down on a table and ponder "How can we make the biggest amount of money?". No, they make a good game and then sell it and try to get by and if the game is really good people will buy it, and then the sequel and they will tell all their friends how good it is and the friends will buy it too. They will then buy the sequels, spinoffs and expansions as long as the developers continue to deliver a good game.
I have bought SC2 and am not really satisfied. You wanna know the reason why I spent the 60€ on it? Cause I had pirated WC3 and liked it. I liked it so much I bought it, and then eventually WoW, Diablo2 and SC2. As long as a studio releases great games they will get money. Maybe they don't get the most possible out of it, but who cares? The shareholders? Fuck the shareholders! As soon as they dictate how a game has to be I sure as hell won't buy it.
The video of Gabe Newell posted earlier in the thread is very inspiring. It gives me confidence that we will still continue to have good games despite all that EA/Activision greedmachine. There is one thing that is for sure: I will buy DotA2 and most probably it will be the money that could have been HotS.
Such a naive view on games and the industry. Valve are doing good yet they ruined TF2 with purchasable bullshit that turned the game into a trade simulator more than a team-based FPS.
|
On June 23 2011 16:18 Olinim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 15:51 exittlight wrote:
I've always found (in my case) that pirating helps sales. When ever I pirate a game, Portal 2 most recently, I tell all my friends about it. When I tell all my friends about how great it is, they then go out and buy it themselves. If I never pirated it, they would have never bought it in the first place. Is this actually supposed to be some kind of justification? "I've always found (in my case) that stealing helps people. When ever I steal from someone, my friend most recently, they learn a valuable lesson. If I never stole from them they wouldn't have never learned their lesson, so in actuality, I'm helping them." exittlight logic right here guys.
That is such a terrible analogy that attempts to skew the argument. If the entire discussion is built on the idea of sales, it's an ends-based discussion about sales, and if the above statement is true/demonstrates that pirating helps sales, then 1+1=2: it's a proper justification.
If you weren't too busy trying to insult people to make arguments, it seems your counter would be that the act of stealing itself is unethical. First, that's a means-based judgment that has no application to an ends-based discussion. Second, it doesn't make sense either because the reason that "stealing" is bad is the fact that it harms someone - pirating simply duplicates the copy, so there's no property loss/harm to the company. You might claim that that stealing does result in lost sales, thus creating that harm, which brings us back to his point and things like actually making substantive arguments.
|
imo they should just offer companies like MLG a special client that has lan but not for pub
|
On June 23 2011 16:39 Olinim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 16:27 MavercK wrote:On June 23 2011 16:18 Olinim wrote:On June 23 2011 15:51 exittlight wrote:
I've always found (in my case) that pirating helps sales. When ever I pirate a game, Portal 2 most recently, I tell all my friends about it. When I tell all my friends about how great it is, they then go out and buy it themselves. If I never pirated it, they would have never bought it in the first place. Is this actually supposed to be some kind of justification? "I've always found (in my case) that stealing helps people. When ever I steal from someone, my friend most recently, they learn a valuable lesson. If I never stole from them they wouldn't have never learned their lesson, so in actuality, I'm helping them." exittlight logic right here guys. you'd be suprised how piracy can help sales rather than hinder it you know of the deus ex human revolution leak ? most people were basically set on the fact that, that game would be complete shit. after the leak almost every single person that played the leak came out and said "im totally buying this game, it's amazing" People would have read reviews and bought the game regardless if it was really that good, it's not like piracy is the only way to get information about a game or you blow 60 bucks, this isn't the NES era.
i've never trusted reviewers.
apart from getting paid they get shunned if they give games bad reviews
it really only happens with large corporations like EA or activision.
yes yes, tinfoil hat, conspiracy blah blah bullshit.
but the shunned thing is true
reviewers are given early access to games to do reviews. if that reviewer does a bad review for one of their games they wont send them any more early access games.
or worse
you remember APB initial release?
review embargo for a week after launch? because they knew the game was awful but were trying to sell it anyway before anyone knew?
|
Fail i think we should be allowed to have a damn LAN there is no reason we cannot... Starcraft 2 is already pirated literally so if the so called new era of games have no LAN that harms the good people more than the pirates... and all the pirates get is LAN and single player which honestly who gives a shit....the good folks who want to play these games with LAN parties are unable to because it requires internet access for all who want to be in the same game... which of course requires some one to have a huge amount of internet good-put just to keep everything peachy without disconnects and lag.
|
On June 23 2011 16:53 jermo wrote:
imo they should just offer companies like MLG a special client that has lan but not for pub
And shit bricks when its leaked, not to mention all the overhead in getting sending each tournament the clients.
|
On June 23 2011 16:53 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 16:39 Olinim wrote:On June 23 2011 16:27 MavercK wrote:On June 23 2011 16:18 Olinim wrote:On June 23 2011 15:51 exittlight wrote:
I've always found (in my case) that pirating helps sales. When ever I pirate a game, Portal 2 most recently, I tell all my friends about it. When I tell all my friends about how great it is, they then go out and buy it themselves. If I never pirated it, they would have never bought it in the first place. Is this actually supposed to be some kind of justification? "I've always found (in my case) that stealing helps people. When ever I steal from someone, my friend most recently, they learn a valuable lesson. If I never stole from them they wouldn't have never learned their lesson, so in actuality, I'm helping them." exittlight logic right here guys. you'd be suprised how piracy can help sales rather than hinder it you know of the deus ex human revolution leak ? most people were basically set on the fact that, that game would be complete shit. after the leak almost every single person that played the leak came out and said "im totally buying this game, it's amazing" People would have read reviews and bought the game regardless if it was really that good, it's not like piracy is the only way to get information about a game or you blow 60 bucks, this isn't the NES era. i've never trusted reviewers. apart from getting paid they get shunned if they give games bad reviews it really only happens with large corporations like EA or activision. yes yes, tinfoil hat, conspiracy blah blah bullshit. but the shunned thing is true reviewers are given early access to games to do reviews. if that reviewer does a bad review for one of their games they wont send them any more early access games. or worse you remember APB initial release? review embargo for a week after launch? because they knew the game was awful but were trying to sell it anyway before anyone knew?
This whole argument is moot, Blizzard thought of that and implemented guest passes. And for anyone claiming that piracy is good for the games industry please realise what you are saying.
Its like saying stealing bread from the baker is a good thing because you can say to your friends what a good bakery it is. You might want to read this to get a glimpse of the real effects.
Did you know that for a large portion of games on the apple appstore 90% of the total downloads are pirated? Obviously, if piracy wasnt there they wouldnt sell 90% more. Some people just download because its easy and that, i get that. But there are people that would have brought the game instead of downloaded it.
|
On June 23 2011 16:52 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 16:18 Olinim wrote:On June 23 2011 15:51 exittlight wrote:
I've always found (in my case) that pirating helps sales. When ever I pirate a game, Portal 2 most recently, I tell all my friends about it. When I tell all my friends about how great it is, they then go out and buy it themselves. If I never pirated it, they would have never bought it in the first place. Is this actually supposed to be some kind of justification? "I've always found (in my case) that stealing helps people. When ever I steal from someone, my friend most recently, they learn a valuable lesson. If I never stole from them they wouldn't have never learned their lesson, so in actuality, I'm helping them." exittlight logic right here guys. That is such a terrible analogy that attempts to skew the argument. If the entire discussion is built on the idea of sales, it's an ends-based discussion about sales, and if the above statement is true/demonstrates that pirating helps sales, then 1+1=2: it's a proper justification. If you weren't too busy trying to insult people to make arguments, it seems your counter would be that the act of stealing itself is unethical. First, that's a means-based judgment that has no application to an ends-based discussion. Second, it doesn't make sense either because the reason that "stealing" is bad is the fact that it harms someone - pirating simply duplicates the copy, so there's no property loss/harm to the company. You might claim that that stealing does result in lost sales, thus creating that harm, which brings us back to his point and things like actually making substantive arguments.
The point of the analogy is he rationalizes a poor and selfish behavior and convinces himself that it's actually a good thing which is bullshit.
|
On June 23 2011 16:48 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 16:24 Seditary wrote:
Is it just me, or did the guy argue against putting anything in games? He says putting LAN would increase piracy, so would putting in anything desirable to the public.
After all, a game gets pirated more than nothing. Maybe he should start selling copies of rubbish data, then all his piracy woes would disappear. No. Getting a better game increases sales, that should be obvious. It also increases piracy, but probably not the piracy percentage, which i would assume even lowers a bit. So as a result, you get more sales, and more pirated games at the same time. Implementing LAN on the other hand means that some people who want to play multiplayer pirate the game instead of buying it. So the percentage of pirates over buyers increases. While it will also probably attract next to no additional buyers, this means that if they implement it, they actually sell less games than if they had not. There are basically 3 numbers here. Total amount of people who play the game, the subset of people who pirate the game, and the amount of people who buy the game. Gaming companies want to maximize the third group, while the other two should not matter to them at all. Making a better game increases groups 1, 2, and 3 all alike. As the company does not care for 1 and 2, but the size of three is important to them, that is a desired effect. Stuff that makes a game easier to pirate, or increases the quality of the pirated version of the game increases 1 and 2, but lowers 3. So if the expected result of a change makes group 3 smaller, there is no reason for a gaming company to implement it.
I see what you're saying and I agree with you, but I've never heard a big company care about piracy percentages, only raw numbers. I'm sure plenty of people have seen times when companies have put all their efforts into reducing group 2, no matter the consequence to group 3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
