Sarex
-
Posts
2847 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Sarex
-
-
didn't even bother to reply to the weak-sauce. you is much attached to "most" silliness today. so, prove it. the act o' piracy is rather compelling initial evidence that an individual wanted the intellectual property in question. so, rebut that.
HA! Good Fun!Wanted it for free is not the same as wanted to pay for it. Come on use your brain at least.
is even better. at least if you had some misguided notion that what you were doing is Right, you could at least argue that you have a reason to pirate. so, you don't care and you think that makes your position weaker or stronger?
wacky stuff.
"No Gromnir don't give up, it will be a first for you and your record for debating right to the end will be ruined. Be resolute !!!!"
we give up all the time. sure, our stamina for such things is extreme, but am hardly indefatigable.
HA! Good Fun!
I have never once said that pirating is "Right". Twist and turn my words all you want, it just makes you look stupid.
-
where did we get it? what thread are you reading?
"Coming from you that's rich."You said the companies want something, I said the consumer wants something too. The companies aren't too broken up about what the consumer wants so why should the consumer care what the companies want?"My point exactly, why should we care that they didn't meet their ridiculously high numbers? That doesn't mean we should buy more or pay at a higher price, it means that those people need to reevaluate what kind of profit they can make from games."so, am gonna essentially repeat our self by responding to same nonsense again.as a corporate entity that sells shares, publishers rasion detre is to be making money. you don't like it? you says "most" companies is baddie no-goodnicks? HA! you is making your position less tenable and not more with your complaints 'bout Gromnir characterizations of your posting. piracy will not fix your imagined evils, regardless o' the strawman 'bout "ridiculous high numbers," whatever the hell that means. what the consumer wants is expressed by how they spend their dollars or euros or whatever. you don't like what a publisher is selling? Shocking Revelation: you don't have to buy what they is selling....this is getting ludicrous, even for Gromnir.HA! Good Fun!Again who said piracy is going to fix anything. My opinion is right there where you quoted me. They don't care about us I don't care about them...
-
I use a card to spread a thin layer covering the whole surface myself.
You create air bubbles like that.
-
I LOVE QUOTE PYRAMIDS SO..Suck it. Yeah, I went there.
It's not really about esthetics, it's about ease of reading. Most forums have rules about this.
-
Not to mention who Putin learned that particular kind of trolling from.
-
your characterizations is amusing broad. you is quite terrible at being reasonable. elerond already pointed out the bad logic, so we won't retrace that point, but your notions o' what is acceptable profit is... cute.
expecting investors to be reevaluating what is acceptable profit to meet your childish notions is narcissistic and fanciful. briareus, Gromnir and others is telling you the way things is, not the way things should be. after all, game publishers can't run their business on the sarex model of acceptable profits, and lord knows your piracy won't bring 'bout some kinda trotskyist epiphany on the part o' publishers and developers. seriously, how resilient to reason is you gonna be on this matter? is axiomatic that if investors can make more money investing in real estate, or even a savings account or mutual funds, then the shareholder/stockholders/investors who is currently putting their money into game development will find better investments. by definition, any business that sells public stock is in business to make money. your piracy won't change that. if you and every other disgruntled purchaser didn't buy games, that might help change things, but piracy sure won't be the thing to convince publishers that a reasonable rate of return for investors is teh evil.
HA! Good Fun!
Where did you get all that from? I didn't even say half those things... Also jumping to conclusions much? I simply said that I don't care that those shareholders don't make large profits, be it games/movies/medications/anything else realy. Most corporations have shown them self for what they are, money hungry companies who won't stop at anything to make a buck. In fact they are the number 1 thing that is wrong in the world today.
as vol would says, "no."
also,
http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66262-piracy-or-not/?p=1454894
HA! Good Fun!
Sing me up for a NO on that "no" of yours. Not everyone that pirates would buy the game, in fact most people who pirate wouldn't buy the game. On the flip side of the coin arguments have been made that pirates are free marketing and bring in more sales.
-
So Keyrock the big question, how do you apply your paste? Do you spread it over the cpu with a credit card or do you put some in the middle and let the heat sink spread it out?
-
But there's the turn off bbc code where you can easily delete unimportant bits.
-snip-
Surely someone has enough time to click and drag before posting.
TIL
In other news I finally hit diamond in LoL, could have probably done it sooner but I can't bring my self to play more then 2 games most days. Slowly going through W:TNO (but motion sickness too OP), and Transistor is gathering dust (even though I'm almost finished).
-
Have fun dude, hope it starts on the first try.
-
1
-
-
Stop making quote pyramids, dammit. <_< Incompetent forum users.
There should be a rule for this in the forum, but the forum quoting system is beyond retarded, so I kind of get why people are reluctant to edit quotes.
-
1
-
-
What I dislike is the discrepancy with Digital distribution. Such as a game on Steam will be US$50 for US residents and US$85 for Australians. The same game on the same platform, but because your IP is different you pay more. Which is why I never buy games on Steam. Never have, never will. And it's even more absurd when Steam won't reduce the cost and keep it at US$85 and yet the distributor/stores will reduce the price of the physical copy and I can pick up that same game in a store for around $28. Same day, same game, different prices. This happened with Rage back in 2012. And it appears not much has changed since.
If you're talking about Adobe and other apps and products. Then yes, it's downright criminal what they're doing which is why there was a parliamentary inquiry into it. Never bought any Adobe products. But I do find their apps to be quite good.
That is what I was talking about.
-
Wouldn't be surprised if they push the launch a bit later, but things are going as I planned. Build a xeon rig as cheap as I sensibly could and it will carry me nicely till skylake arrives. And actually little over it for a slight price drops. Then it's monster rig time.
I am more and more up for the option to pull the trigger on the Haswell-e build, 5820k will be a 6-core and "cheap", then go for a asus-pro x99 board and some cheap ddr4 sticks.
-
-
Some games just have very high production cost, which means that they need to actually sell millions of games to be even break-even let alone to make profit. Like for example Tomb Raider's big sell figures weren't enough to cover its over $100 million budget, which was the reason why Square Enix said that it didn't reach its sale goal when it has sold "only" 3.4 million copies, as it needed to sell about 5 million copies to break-even (which it now has done, selling over 6 million copies).
I remember reading that they covered their production costs with the initial sales, but that the stock holders weren't satisfied with the numbers and thus considered it a failure. I could be wrong about that, I read it a while ago.
you is being particularly carefree with the fallacies today. am suspecting it has something to do with your untenable position, but that is a guess.
"And I want games to be cheaper, especially now that they are mostly digital, I also want dlc to be reasonably priced (compared to their size) but hey why should they care what I want."
non-sequitur, or do you have a point? just posting random nonsense is hardly constructive, but it is becoming a trend.
"The problem with that is that they have a funny way of gauging the point at which the game is profitable. A normal person would think that a game would be profitable if it covers it's production cost, but it seems it ain't so."
actually, profit and profitable are two separate things.
is just one example.
the publisher needs investors, and investors need a far better return than simple profit to make their high-risk investment profitable. is any of this getting through?
HA! Good Fun!
ps for folks that don't know, briareus were a black isle developer
Coming from you that's rich.
You said the companies want something, I said the consumer wants something too. The companies aren't too broken up about what the consumer wants so why should the consumer care what the companies want?
My point exactly, why should we care that they didn't meet their ridiculously high numbers? That doesn't mean we should buy more or pay at a higher price, it means that those people need to reevaluate what kind of profit they can make from games.
I just can't take anyone seriously that uses these excuses:
1) Publishers don't pay devs anyways so we should pirate so nobody gets any money (which, obviously, makes no sense)
2) Kids don't have enough money to buy the games (boo hoo?)
3) Devs make "Just Enough"
So you can imagine, Sarex, how much I take into stock your opinion on the matter.
I mean, you're one foot away from saying "devs actually want piracy".
1)Never said that.
2)Kids don't have money, period.
3)Devs make what they accepted to make in their contracts, piracy doesn't affect that at all.
Well for someone who doesn't take stock you sure reply a lot. As you may have noticed I don't take stock in what people like BruceVC/Mor say and after a point where I figured that out, you won't find a single reply from me to them.
Games are priced at the level most will pay for them; it's always been like that ~with everything (clothes, food, shelter, entertainments).
Games are cheaper now than decades ago. "Eye of the Beholder" originally sold for about $90 [adjusted].
**Notice that Hillsfar sold for $49.95 [$90] as well.
They are (and have been) priced at the market value.
The problem with that is that you are talking about the American market, where as I'm talking about countries in which piracy is widespread and a part of everyday life. The price for those markets is way too high.
Also what about Australia, games are a 100$ there, other software prices are also unproportionally higher, how would you explain that?
-
you haven't realized yet that this observation is not helping you?
*chuckle*
HA! Good Fun!
You haven't realized yet that you are not as smart as you think you are... I know what he meant, it's simple logic, should I deny it because it doesn't help me? That may be your modus operani, but it ain't mine.
ignoring your fallacy for the nonce, we will observe that given the obvious high-risk nature o' game development and publishing, piracy clear ain't helping. so' 'tween your desire to indulge in info piracy and the developer/publisher desire for you to stop, we thinks it is obvious that the creator o' the info is maintaining the moral high-ground.
duh.
HA! Good Fun!
And I want games to be cheaper, especially now that they are mostly digital, I also want dlc to be reasonably priced (compared to their size) but hey why should they care what I want.
Not all most popular games success to make their production budget back (for example new Tomb Raider had hard time to become profitable even though it was popular game, as it took it over year to do so), although they are most likely do it, as they are popular, but not all high budget games become popular, for one reason or another (or multiple) and they are ones that need to be compensated by those games that make profit.
The problem with that is that they have a funny way of gauging the point at which the game is profitable. A normal person would think that a game would be profitable if it covers it's production cost, but it seems it ain't so.
-
Have to think the big sellers get pirated more heavily than the others too.
Without a doubt.
-
They did go out of business because their games didn't produced less money than what did go to making them. There is no single reason why this happened and there is no evidence that piracy was even factor in one way or another, but that wasn't part of original argument that publishers lose money on majority of their games, which is compensated by big sellers
Well now days that is not even a problem, no one is risking anything anymore. Everyone is rehashing their big hits and raking in the money. Also I still stand by my argument that most popular games, make their production budget back, it's just that companies have unreasonable standards by which they judge a success and thus get too bloated to support their own weight without those big profit games.
If you want an example look up what square enix said about Tomb Raider, Infinite is another good example. It's more of a case with publishers/devs being unreasonable with their expectations then pirates taking their money away.
-
ps for fun, try google to take a looksee at video game publishers that has gone outta business in last 10 years.
You wanna say they went out of businesses because of piracy?
-
its still bs. most large publishers lose money on a majority o' their games-- is a handful of successful titles that keeps the light turned on. also, lining the pockets o' investors is what makes the whole system work. if a publisher makes investor no more money than the investor would see from an ordinary savings account or even mutual funds, what is the motivation to invest in riskier game publishing ventures? decrease money that would otherwise go to investors decreases investor motivation to be investing in games development and publishing. am sure you can see how that impacts future game development, yes?
HA! Good Fun!
Now that is a load of BS. It's just the accounting arithmetic all large companies do to avoid large taxes. I mean Warner Bros claimed a loss on the lord of the rings movies... Every Hollywood production company claims a loss on their movies, I'm sure it's the same with game publishers.
Not to mention how stupid it is to claim that piracy caused a loss on a game/movie.
-
Actually I misunderstood your post I asked my question on; re-reading and with this further discussion I see you're saying
"they make enough money now to continue creating games, so the only loss is to their profit margin which doesn't (typically) get invested in game development but lines investors/owners pockets"
whereas I read it as
"they have enough money now to make games, it doesn't matter if they make any more money".
So a total reading comprehension fail on my part.
Ah, apologies on my part then. I though you were intentionally muddying the water. I spent too much time in the Ukraine thread...
-
Under your scenario presented
"devs have salaries"
Yes, as does every employee of the company. This money has to be achieved somewhere.
"part of the money made from the game goes in to covering the cost of the next game"
Which would be here. But if the game makes no money, how can it cover the cost of the next game?
Nintendo famously had so much money after the SNES era, it didn't matter if the Nintendo64 was a success - they had plenty of capitol to keep working on. But after a while that model is just unsustainable, no matter how much of a cash reserve you have you will exhaust it if you continue to be unprofitable.
It's like you just selectively read my posts, almost like magic. Almost every popular game that is pirated makes enough money to cover it's production cost. It seems you skipped that part of my post.
Also make no mistake, I am not condoning piracy or saying it's good, all that I'm saying is that I don't care that the big companies get ripped off, because they sure as hell have no qualms about ripping off their consumers.
-
I was trying to think of posts I've seen on this site that were more ridiculous than yours.
I know, but in what thread was this anti-woman rant you talk about?
-
This is the biggest load of BS I've yet read on this forum outside of an anti-woman rant.
Where was the anti-woman rant?
-
How will they continue to have enough to make games if they've not bought in sufficient quantities to cover the cost of making them?
But then it doesn't work like that does it, and I already explained it, but you are being intentionally daft to confuse the topic. Well I'll explain it again, devs have salaries, they are paid by the hour, part of the money made from the game goes in to covering the cost of the next game the rest of it goes to the CEO to do with what he will... wait no scratch that, all the money goes to the CEO and he decides what he is going to do with it.
At least that is the case with big companies which I already said I was talking about.
Piracy or not?
in Computer and Console
Posted · Edited by Sarex
But in the end why does anyone come to the forums anyways, but to lose some time and have some good laughs.
Not really, I have been saying that piracy is not as big of a problem you make it out to be. But there are some real hardliners here...