Tragos
Otinanist
In my experience you are wrong , where the price is affordable ( outside Eastern Europe i mean) pirates will buy a game they like .
Piracy
- Thread starter Davion
- Start date
In my experience you are wrong , where the price is affordable ( outside Eastern Europe i mean) pirates will buy a game they like .
fatBastard()
Hello, I'm a Zombaholic
As Tragos said, this just isn't true. The pirates don't buy games because right now they don't have to, but if a working DRM scheme is actually implemented and they actually DO have to buy games to be able to play them, quite a lot of them WILL start buying games. Playing games is a much a hobby/favorite pastime to them as it is to the rest of us.
Of course not every pirated copy today will lead to a purchase tomorrow if piracy was made impossible but it will most likely lead to an average of at least 2-3 times more sold units than today. (if the claim of 80-90% pirated copies vs. 10-20% purchased copies is to be believed)
I'm not aware of any evidence that pirating leads to a decrease in sales…while this provides evidence that pirating can lead to an increase in sales.
2-3 times more sounds absurd, was there a huge dropoff in sales when pirating began in earnest?
GothicGothicness: I would imagine that pirate servers have a shortage of players, which is the main appeal of playing online. That is just a guess though, Ive never tried one
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2009
- Messages
- 35
dteowner
Shoegazer
There's one major hole in that argument, Center. The content owner may choose to give away his product to generate "buzz". It's fundamentally advertising expense. With pirated software, the decision is made FOR the content owner by OTHERS. That's a key and critical difference.
Rithrandil
SasqWatch
I'll support DRM when it doesn't treat me like some sort of pre-existing criminal. Until then I find it VERY hard to side with the 'big publishers' on this issue.
Im never mentioned the morality of pirating or anything like that, just addressing the notion that piracy hurts sales and the lack of evidence supporting it
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2009
- Messages
- 35
fatBastard()
Hello, I'm a Zombaholic
dteowner already mentioned one hole in this argument, but there is actually another major difference between pirating a book and pirating a game. Only a tiny minority (so far at least) are actually reading books from a digital media (Kindle or some such), so for many people a downloadable book will only serve as an appetizer for the real thing - a chance to find out if the book is worth buying - because reading an entire book from their computer is not even an option.
A pirated computer game, on the other hand, is in its final form right of the bat and the actual experience of playing the game will not be any different in the legal form, thus making the incentive to buy a mere matter of morality.
Tragos
Otinanist
I am not at all interested in morality , i love immoral stuff but thing for us older gamers is that by buying a game we are investing in our future of gaming , if i am still alive i would like to be able to play my favourite games (series) somewhere in the far future.
fatBastard()
Hello, I'm a Zombaholic
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Why wouldn't you be able to play your pirated game in the future as well as you legitimately bought game?
Tragos
Otinanist
Can you imagine what would have happen if Civ 1 or Elite or RR Tycoon were pirated as heavily as modern games are ? Studios going broke , developers losing interest etc.
I believe that i support development by buying instead of pirating .
fatBastard()
Hello, I'm a Zombaholic
Right, okay. Buy the games or new ones will not be made. Totally agree.
For some reason I just didn't interpret your response that way. My bad.
For some reason I just didn't interpret your response that way. My bad.
A book is the finished product as well, and the entire thing can easily be read on your computer easily. Pirated computer games often require you to buy the real thing if you want access to multiplayer or tech support, or any official use of the companies online services.
How about movies? I saw a list recently of the most pirated movies of 2009, and for the most part they were movies that did exceptionally well. Over 10 million downloads for the first two, but they averaged over 600 million dollars made. Hell, it was a record breaking year at the box office, it doesn't seem like pirating movies, which id guess is far more prevalent than pirating games, is having a negative effect.
But! Ive seen no evidence that pirating is hurting the gaming industry. Unless there has been a dropoff in sales unexplained by other factors, I doubt you'll find any support for that theory.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2009
- Messages
- 35
cptmaxon
Watchdog
- Joined
- November 6, 2006
- Messages
- 145
I doubt there will ever be a good DRM and you know what I'm good with that
.I hate DRM, I hate the fact I have to keep the CD in the drive I hate needing an active internet connection just to play my game or sign in on a server each time.
honestly DRM only prevents honest customers from fully enjoying the game they bought
and I leave you all with
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZZx1xmAzg
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2006
- Messages
- 145
fatBastard()
Hello, I'm a Zombaholic
Yes it is POSSIBLE to read an entire book on your computer but, honestly, how many people do you know that actually reads books on their computer? The vast majority are still reading the good old paper books. Consequently a digital copy of the book is NOT directly comparable to the physical version.
Movies and music are not valid comparisons either. Movies have 3 major branches of income:
1) The movie theaters (only handheld "live" recordings are available for pirates and thus not comparable - i.e. not the same product).
2) DVDs (the only branch where piracy is comparable)
3) TV (no matter how many viewers are watching the network pays to air the movie)
Only for the DVD branch can any comparison between sold units vs. pirated units be made but the total tally for the movie is usually either for the theaters or for the sum of all 3.
The same issue applies to music where CDs are only a part of the income. Concerts, radio airings, merchandise etc etc are different income venues that are not directly affected by piracy.
Games have 1 and only 1 way to make money and that is if you buy the games you play. Furthermore there is absolutely no difference between the legitimate product and the pirated product. If we are still assuming (like I did in my the initial post) that the ratio between pirated copies and legitimate copies are 80%-20% and even if we then assume that only half of the 80% pirates are actually playing the game more than just the initial 30 minutes that would constitute the "try before you buy" claim we are still talking about 40% cheapskates vs. 20% legitimate customers - i.e. twice as many.
How is that not "hurting the industry" when only (an estimated) 1 in 3 are paying for the games they play?
The interesting ratio isn't pirated vs bought copies. The interesting rate is the bought copies in a world with piracy vs bought copies in a world without piracy. If piracy means that companies sells less games then they lose money, but what Center is trying to show is that you have no evidence that piracy acually does lead to less sales.
Oh, and I'm sure it's just a coincidence that you're doing exactly what that article Center linked to says pepole do: explain why every time piracy is shown to increase revenue it's a special case. I'm not saying you're wrong (I find it hard to believe that piracy helps game sales myself, even though I don't think it reduces them by anything close to an 80 % ratio), I just found it a bit ironic.
Übereil
Oh, and I'm sure it's just a coincidence that you're doing exactly what that article Center linked to says pepole do: explain why every time piracy is shown to increase revenue it's a special case. I'm not saying you're wrong (I find it hard to believe that piracy helps game sales myself, even though I don't think it reduces them by anything close to an 80 % ratio), I just found it a bit ironic.
Übereil
- Joined
- October 18, 2006
- Messages
- 3,508
Well, I think the gaming industry (just like the music and movie industry) is full of shit when they calculate losses based on the number of copies pirated.
I also think pirates and DRM-haters are equally full of shit when they claim that piracy does no harm or even helps sales.
I pirated when I was a kid. I certainly pirated way more games than I could ever have bought from my pocket money or could have talked my parents into giving me for christmas. But I didn't buy any games. And I had pocket money enough to afford a few. So the industry made some losses. My brother still pirates games. He has as much disposable income as me, plays probably some more games than me, but rarely buys (and then only from bargain bin). I think his pirating is definitely leading to losses for the gaming industry.
I don't think console games have better sales because the games are better or because all people just prefer to sit in a couch. I think its because its so much harder to pirate games for the console.
I don't think DRM (as we have it today) is a very useful answer, certainly not by itself. But neither is negating the problem. Or fooling yourself into thinking you are doing no harm if you pirate a game.
I also think pirates and DRM-haters are equally full of shit when they claim that piracy does no harm or even helps sales.
I pirated when I was a kid. I certainly pirated way more games than I could ever have bought from my pocket money or could have talked my parents into giving me for christmas. But I didn't buy any games. And I had pocket money enough to afford a few. So the industry made some losses. My brother still pirates games. He has as much disposable income as me, plays probably some more games than me, but rarely buys (and then only from bargain bin). I think his pirating is definitely leading to losses for the gaming industry.
I don't think console games have better sales because the games are better or because all people just prefer to sit in a couch. I think its because its so much harder to pirate games for the console.
I don't think DRM (as we have it today) is a very useful answer, certainly not by itself. But neither is negating the problem. Or fooling yourself into thinking you are doing no harm if you pirate a game.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 3,508
fatBastard()
Hello, I'm a Zombaholic
This is where it gets hairy. How would history have unfolded if Hitler had been successfully assassinated before he came to power. We have no way of knowing because he didn't and WW2 ensued. Since we apparently can't find a way to get rid of piracy we can only look at the sales figures WITH piracy and thus the only thing we can compare is how many people are playing a game vs. how many have actually bought it.
The next logical step is then: Is it okay that x number of people are enjoying product A illegally for free while y number of people had to pay Z amount of money to play the same product legally?
If yes, then only sold units w. P vs. sold units w/o P is relevant.
If no, then bought units vs. pirated units is just as relevant as any other comparison because it shows how many freeloaders there are.
Indeed, but the argument is flawed and meant to dissuade any contradiction to his/hers position. It's like the witch/McCarthy hunts all over again. Refuse to cooperate and you're automatically a witch or a communist even though the initial claim was false.
When comparing gaming piracy with books, movies or music piracy the article's statement forgets to take the other branches of income into account and thus the comparison is false but if I open my mouth to explain why the comparison is false I'm naturally making excuses. Talk about a rock and a hard place.
JemyM
Okay, now roll sanity.
- Joined
- October 26, 2006
- Messages
- 6,027
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2006
- Messages
- 6,027
I'm starting with the important bit first:
As a matter of fact I don't care at all how many pepole pirate a game. 100k sales and 0 pirates or 150k sales and 2 million pirates? Option 2. 100k sales and 0 pirates or 150k sales and 200 million pirates? Option 2. In fact, if I were to pick between 150k sales and 2 million pirates vs sales and 200 million pirates I'd pick option 2.
I'm a consequentialist and a pragmatist. If torturing every second baby would lead to higher overall life quality then torturing babies is the right thing to do.
When it comes to pirating games there are two things I think is important. The first is that games is a recreational activity, so for it to "do it's job" it has to be played. Piracy (if we only look at recreation) is a good way to distribute games so that they get payed. However, in contrast to this we need to buy games for the quality of the games to stay high. So, piracy is positive for increasing the recreational value of each games by distributing it on one hand, but negative in that it decreases the quality of games by developers making worse games on the other. Along with game developers employing pepole we have the things I feel are the key factors of the piracy issue. Because of the two last options we want to sell as many copies of each game as possible. The only problem I have with freeloading is that it (probably, but we don't really know) reduces game sales. If it turns out it doesn't then I'm all for freeloading.
Which can then only be applied to try and predict if piracy negativly affects sales.
But yeah, predicting things like this is never easy. It's not like we can't reload and try a diffrerent approach and compare the difference.
Agreed.
Assuming that's how they acually compare. I see your reasoning with books (and it does make sence). But with music it's not impossible that they compared record sales rather than overall income. Same with movies.
(And on movies, I find it a bit silly to claim that piracy only affects DVD-sales. You're less inclined to go to the theatre if you've already seen the movie, aren't you? It doesn't affect as much as game piracy does, but I still believe there is some influence.).
Übereil
As a matter of fact I don't care at all how many pepole pirate a game. 100k sales and 0 pirates or 150k sales and 2 million pirates? Option 2. 100k sales and 0 pirates or 150k sales and 200 million pirates? Option 2. In fact, if I were to pick between 150k sales and 2 million pirates vs sales and 200 million pirates I'd pick option 2.
I'm a consequentialist and a pragmatist. If torturing every second baby would lead to higher overall life quality then torturing babies is the right thing to do.
When it comes to pirating games there are two things I think is important. The first is that games is a recreational activity, so for it to "do it's job" it has to be played. Piracy (if we only look at recreation) is a good way to distribute games so that they get payed. However, in contrast to this we need to buy games for the quality of the games to stay high. So, piracy is positive for increasing the recreational value of each games by distributing it on one hand, but negative in that it decreases the quality of games by developers making worse games on the other. Along with game developers employing pepole we have the things I feel are the key factors of the piracy issue. Because of the two last options we want to sell as many copies of each game as possible. The only problem I have with freeloading is that it (probably, but we don't really know) reduces game sales. If it turns out it doesn't then I'm all for freeloading.
Which can then only be applied to try and predict if piracy negativly affects sales.
But yeah, predicting things like this is never easy. It's not like we can't reload and try a diffrerent approach and compare the difference.
Agreed.
Assuming that's how they acually compare. I see your reasoning with books (and it does make sence). But with music it's not impossible that they compared record sales rather than overall income. Same with movies.
(And on movies, I find it a bit silly to claim that piracy only affects DVD-sales. You're less inclined to go to the theatre if you've already seen the movie, aren't you? It doesn't affect as much as game piracy does, but I still believe there is some influence.).
Übereil