Hi...and at the risk of sounding DUH!

[Iolo]

I agree.

[Nightblade]

But I didn't have to buy TOEE to try it because there was the 6 hour trial to download which I did.

True. I wouldn't have had to borrow ToEE from a friend to check it out. I could have dloaded the demo to see that I didn't like it. So I agree with you there, when there is a fairly large demo, there is no excuse for copying/dloading it.

[Iolo]

In terms of your point in general, as long as you delete the game after you have determined that you are not going to buy it then I guess that's not as bad. In the case of games that are more subpar though, some people might be more tempted to just keep on playing the game and completing it (because it's an easy choice) rather than deleting it when they decide it's not worth their time.

[Nightblade]

In terms of your point in general, as long as you delete the game after you have determined that you are not going to buy it then I guess that's not as bad.  In the case of games that are more subpar though, some people might be more tempted to just keep on playing the game and completing it (because it's an easy choice) rather than deleting it when they decide it's not worth their time.

People don't complete games if they decide it's not worth their time. At least I don't.

[Sammael]

Piracy is stealing. You are robbing the publisher and the developer of that game the revenue that they deserve for making the game, not to mention the retailers and the distributors of that game. Just because many people in Asia do it or have done it doesn't make it right.

*I do not condone or encourage piracy in any way, shape, or form*

 

However, equating piracy with theft is a logical and legal fallacy. It is a violation of intellectual property laws, which are murky at best. If pirating a game is theft, then so is borrowing a magazine from a friend and copying an article from it. Or recording a movie from TV. Or taking a camcorder to a concert. Or whatever.

 

Contrary to popular belief, piracy does not have as great of an effect on revenue as publishers (and software security companies) like to claim. In fact, the vast majority of people who pirate software wouldn't have bought it anyway, and the rest usually do purchase a legal copy if they find it useful. If this was not the case, companies that make shareware products with unlimited trial periods (such as WinZip or Paint Shop Pro) would have gone bankrupt a long time ago.

 

Furthermore, equating piracy with theft is diminishing the severity of actual theft.

[Nightblade]

In fact, the vast majority of people who pirate software wouldn't have bought it anyway

I've seen quite a few screeners and DVD copies bought in south-east Asia, and 90% of it couldn't compete with an original copy. I think most people, locals and tourists, would purchase an original disc, instead of a piracy version, if prices weren't so high. Both movies and games. Personally I don't own any piracy products.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Just curious. How much is piracy supposed to harm companies, anyway? And how much of it is closer to fiction, ie, how much is it actually not harming them?

[Karzak]

Can I get a refund on NWN? I never finished it.

 

The fact is that the most pir8d games are the most financially successful, I didn't see lionheart last time I went to a chinese software emporium.

[Shadowstrider]

In fact, the vast majority of people who pirate software wouldn't have bought it anyway

 

Not exactly. Look at movie bootleggers who go in, and either make copies of, or film in the theatre, then sell it for profit. People are buying, just for a lowered price(and quality).

[Gromnir]

"Dloading a game and testing it, or borrowing it from a friend, maybe copying the CD's, testing it to see if you like it, is as I see it, a necessity."

 

well there you go. is a necessity. if you cannot test, then you won't buy, and if you not buy then publisher is out a sale. what if a car dealer did similar... maybe would not let you test drive cars? what would be your response? steal the car and drive 'round? how exactly do we get to stealing of game from this point?

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Karzak]

what would be your response? steal the car and drive 'round?

Naw, go buy a chinese copy at 1/50th the price and drive it.

[Drakron]

Europe console games being higher is due to royalities since the european publishers also have a cut and so drive price highers.

 

iAnother thing to look into, Amazon and other online shops tend to cut prices ... look at FF X-2 that is not out yet and Amazon.uk is selling at 29.99 when the store prince will be 39.99.

 

Now that means I could be buy it for 44.3972 + vat + ports with I doubt will put the game in the 65 euros mark.

[Nightblade]

"Dloading a game and testing it, or borrowing it from a friend, maybe copying the CD's, testing it to see if you like it, is as I see it, a necessity."

 

well there you go.

[Gromnir]

"As for the car-analogy, I suppose you'd like to test-drive it first, much like test-playing a game first. If you couldn't try it out, would you trust an article you read in a car-magazine and buy it anyway?"

 

don't buy the car. if you feel that it is stoopid to buy a car w/o test driving, then do not buy. no doubt many other folks will feel the same as you. if enough folks feel the same way, sales will drop. chances are that eventually the dealer will change behavior.

 

don't buy the game...

 

am not seeing where this is so confusing.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Volourn]

It's another way to justify stealing something that isn't yours. Pity really.

 

"The companies have lots of money anyways"

 

"I wouldn't have bought it anyway"

 

"I'm just trying it out"

 

 

 

And, more...

 

 

These are all lame exuses to justify a poor morale behaviour, imo. Of cours,e if you have no problem with stealing then no surprise you'd ahve no problem with this.

[Drakron]

Diference Grommir ... diference.

 

A test drive is the same as a demo, we test the product.

 

Many games offer a demo, its common that we can rent console games.

 

We cannot rent PC games (well not legaly under EULA terms) and so we cannot do a "test drive".

 

Also "not buying" just have a rather odd effect, the music industry simply raise prices and blamed file sharing programs (besides piracy) and games are still entertiament ... since entertaiment industr wil raise prices and blame something except to change their own policies we can guess what would happen if we dont buy games without demos and publishers tend to push into the creation of demos.

[Iolo]

Well said. Volourn.

 

Consider the following example (which is similar to the points raised earlier), which is not just about software piracy.

 

You miss this week's episode of Stargate SG-1. In the past, if you missed an episode, you can tape it our borrow a taped copy from someone else. Now instead you can download from the Internet the episode. It's a copy taped by an amateur, it might have Sky One's or SciFi Network's logo in the corner or even small ads on the screen while the show is playing (SciFi does this), there may be obvious placed where the ads had been cut, the quality isn't assured, etc. It's still technically illegal but in this case you can't go to the store to rent or buy the episode and it won't be on TV again for quite awhile. So in this case it is still breaking intellectual property rights but it's quite similar to just taping the episode yourself or borrowing it from someone.

 

On the other hand, let's suppose you download over the Internet Season 6 of Stargate SG-1, ripped off of the DVDs with high quality. Would this not be considered piracy? In this case it's not an amateur's copy but rather a pretty good copy of the original.

 

I see the latter being what software is. It's not some cheap imitation like taking a camcorder to a concert or photocopying an article from a newspaper. It's a pretty good copy. You download software off of the Internet and for all intents and purposes it works the same as the version you'd buy in the store. It may even work better because the copy protection had been removed. You can argue that most of those people who download it never would have bought it anyway but then in that case why did they download it anyway if they are not interested?

[Volourn]

It's a question that I've foten asked; but get no real answer for it. If you aren't interested in it; why waste your time downloading it in the first place. Hmm..

[Gromnir]

"Diference Grommir ... diference.

 

"A test drive is the same as a demo, we test the product.

 

"Many games offer a demo, its common that we can rent console games.

 

"We cannot rent PC games (well not legaly under EULA terms) and so we cannot do a "test drive"."

 

no difference.

 

if a car dealer will not let you test drive his cars then you can purchase his cars anyways, or you can take your business elsewhere.

 

DO NOT BUY.

 

why ain't this getting through? if you don't like a company's business practices or products, then do not buy from them. nobody is forcing you to buy cruddy software. you have a choice. you can accept the software company's offer of X game for Y price, or you can simply not purchase. if you don't like their terms, then do not buy... but don't try to tell us that you ain't stealing.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Exitium]

Obviously Gromnir, you have no understanding whatsoever of economics. The mechanics of supply and demand, in basic form basically goes to suggest that the lower the demand, the higher the cost. If less people bought cars for whatever reason, the cost of the cars would rise due to the lack of profit. Game publishers, the RIAA and your hypothetical car dealers could learn a thing or two from Walmart and decrease the cost of their products in order to increase sales instead of increasing the price during the heavy sales period to make an extra profit because they'll only be losing potential customers who refuse to pay the higher costs.

 

don't buy the car. if you feel that it is stoopid to buy a car w/o test driving, then do not buy. no doubt many other folks will feel the same as you. if enough folks feel the same way, sales will drop. chances are that eventually the dealer will change behavior.

You say this as if a Lamborghini dealer would let you test drive the car. The only way you can test drive is if you're definitely buying, and have basically paid downpayment on it.

 

At most, if not all of these expensive dealerships they run a triple credit check on you the moment you show interest in any of their cars. So much for try-before-you-buy, eh, Grom?

[Gromnir]

actually, we understand economics quite well.

 

these are LUXURY items. when the cost of movies increases, people find alternative sources of entertainment. people will not pay more than X for a video game. game companies may find cheaper ways to make games or they may find ways to cut costs, but they cannot simply keep raising price.

 

*shakes head sadly*

 

"You say this as if a Lamborghini dealer would let you test drive the car. The only way you can test drive is if you're definitely buying, and have basically paid downpayment on it."

 

what the heck are you talking 'bout? are you suggesting stealing the lamborghini? if not, then what is the point? the dealer offers you the lamborghini at X price w/o a test drive. you can accept that deal or not. obviously 'nuff folks accept that kinda deal to keep the little italian car maker in business, no?

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Exitium]

It may even work better because the copy protection had been removed. You can argue that most of those people who download it never would have bought it anyway but then in that case why did they download it anyway if they are not interested?

They downloaded it because they may have been:

 

a) interested in seeing if it was worth buying

 

B) not interested in paying for it in the first place. Even if the pirated copy was not available, they wouldn't have gone out and bought it.

 

You have yet to disprove the argument that piracy results in lost sales.

 

As for the copy working better because the copy protection was removed, that should be an argument FOR piracy, and not against, because what you virtually said that pirated copies were superior to the legitimate ones that have to be paid for. Who in the right mind would pay for an inferior copy of a product which he could get for free?

 

It could be comparable to paying less for an illegal copy of a hardcover book with legible printing instead of paying more for a legal copy of a softcover book with its pages stuck together and many of its words blurred out due to poor printer quality. If you're wondering where this happens, it happens in China. The illegal copies of the hardcover Harry Potter books sold better in China than the actual legal, softcover copies that cost five times more and had illegible printing due to shoddy production costs. How's that for irony?

 

Concerning legal copies of games, I think that many would-be piraters would pay for games like Warcraft 3, Diablo 2 and Counterstrike for their online multiplayer features which are only available to legitimate buyers, so in cases such as those, the only reason people would pirate them is to try them out offline, which do not have any of the online content.

[Exitium]

actually, we understand economics quite well.

 

these are LUXURY items. when the cost of movies increases, people find alternative sources of entertainment. people will not pay more than X for a video game. game companies may find cheaper ways to make games or they may find ways to cut costs, but they cannot simply keep raising price.

 

*shakes head sadly*

 

HA! Good Fun!

The price of games in Asia is steadily rising and is blamed on piracy regardless of the fact that more and more people own computers and are willing to pay for decently priced games (e.g. ones that don't cost half your salary).

 

Locally produced games, like Prince of Qin and Ragnarok Online that cost a small fragment of imported games, have a far bigger market share than imported games because they cost less, and the existence of these games just goes to prove how willing most people are to buy original titles. I guarantee you, you won't be able to find a pirated version of either of these games in the market because people actually like the packaging of an original game and are definitely willing to pay for them if they're affordable - even though they cost much more than pirated ones do (which cost a dollar more than the CD they're burned on).

[Gromnir]

and your point?

 

if you can get other games cheaper, then buy them. if western games cost too much, then do not buy them.

 

we like prosciutto di parma. we is willing to pay extra for di parma, but you know what, if prosciutto di parma became too expensive for us to afford we would not steal it no matter how much we like it.

 

is this some bizarre cultural thing?

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Revolver]

Obviously Gromnir, you have no understanding whatsoever of economics. The mechanics of supply and demand, in basic form basically goes to suggest that the lower the demand, the higher the cost. If less people bought cars for whatever reason, the cost of the cars would rise due to the lack of profit. Game publishers, the RIAA and your hypothetical car dealers could learn a thing or two from Walmart and decrease the cost of their products in order to increase sales instead of increasing the price during the heavy sales period to make an extra profit because they'll only be losing potential customers who refuse to pay the higher costs.

Ugh, that was the worst economics explanation I've ever heard. The most basic idea in economics is that the lower demand the LOWER the cost and vice versa. If less people were willing to buy cars, then car dealerships would have to lower their prices in order to sell the same volume. You contradict yourself with your next line because you then correctly say that decreasing costs will result more buyers.

 

However, volume by itself has no bearing on the pricing decision. The decision to raise and lower prices to maximize revenue has to do the price elasticity of the product. If the product is readily substitutable and becomes more price elastic (market is more sensitive to changes in price), then the producer should generally lower the price in order to maximize revenue. If the product becomes less price elastic, then the producer should then raise the price.

 

Now if you gave evidence for why you might feel those markets (car dealerships, RIAA, and game publishers) are all highly price elastic, your arguments might have made sense.