RANDOM VIDEO GAME NEWS

[Darkpriest]

I thibk that the last part is a bit too much. But going back to the reason. If you are spending n3arly 10% of a monthly income for kids game you want to be sure it will be good. You had no such guarantee so you would get as a kid a pirated version for 4USD i and then that cost is ok for the risk involved. I was buying originals of games i liked. Planescape for example. But the ones i was not sure of i would not hesitate to get it from a "pirate"

[Malcador]

 

 

Lack of piracy isn't amazing news for consumers, really.

 

Good one.

It is amazing news for you? Good news for the companies I guess but piracy hasn't done any in.

 

Hm..guess we just need to turn a Denuvo developer.

[WDeranged]

There's no way I could afford games as a kid, my family were pretty broke too.  Piracy let me get thoroughly hooked on computers and without it there's no way I'd be spending on games the way I do now.

 

Also who doesn't love the crack intros you used to get 

[Fenixp]

Since Steam exists, price of a product is of no concern at this stage.
 

who is not from east europe will never understand probably, but I am pretty sure that for example guys from CD project pirated like crazy when they were young

GOG actually uses cracks to make a bunch of their older games function properly - I believe they even grabbed data from pirates on some occasions when publishers no longer had access to original game's files, but that's literally impossible to prove. (I'm pretty sure I've red it in some interview, but ... Well, difficult to locate)
 

I'm just calling you out on your bull****.
 
You write all these words about cultural significance and preserving of blah blah, to justify not paying for other people's work. It's nauseating.

It's just your opinion and it's worthless.

I actually didn't pirate anything that I would not pay for since... Was it about 2004? Later? Not quite sure now. Anyway, ad hominem is an argumentative fallacy for a reason so please, try to avoid it in the future and attack arguments, not the person making them. You'll note that none of my arguments weight either price or morality of piracy as all of these are highly subjective and completely irrelevant when it comes to actual ways in which consumers benefit from piracy. You might also take a look at the genuine research papers I did actually link.

Naturally, if you don't wish to read my posts, this discussion board has an ignore functionality. There's no need to be rude. Oh and you asked whether I have any sources on cultural significance, not on preservation of blah blah. I can actually back up a fair amount of my arguments if you're interested.

Edited January 15, 2016 by Fenixp

[Amentep]

I thibk that the last part is a bit too much. But going back to the reason. If you are spending n3arly 10% of a monthly income for kids game you want to be sure it will be good. You had no such guarantee so you would get as a kid a pirated version for 4USD i and then that cost is ok for the risk involved. I was buying originals of games i liked. Planescape for example. But the ones i was not sure of i would not hesitate to get it from a "pirate"

 

Last part is too much?  How? 

 

Anyhow, I stand by my assertion - video games are a luxury item and you don't have to spend any money on them at all.  I won't assert that there cannot be positive benefits of piracy, but any use of cost of legal game vs "quality" or "household income" is a rationalization because at the end of the day no one has to have a video game.

[Darkpriest]

Technically true, but then I would probably not be buying any games today. I am not saying it was the right thing to do, but it was a reasonable thing to do considerig cost vs risk and cost vs income ratios.

[Majek]

 

I thibk that the last part is a bit too much. But going back to the reason. If you are spending n3arly 10% of a monthly income for kids game you want to be sure it will be good. You had no such guarantee so you would get as a kid a pirated version for 4USD i and then that cost is ok for the risk involved. I was buying originals of games i liked. Planescape for example. But the ones i was not sure of i would not hesitate to get it from a "pirate"

 

Last part is too much?  How? 

 

Anyhow, I stand by my assertion - video games are a luxury item and you don't have to spend any money on them at all.  I won't assert that there cannot be positive benefits of piracy, but any use of cost of legal game vs "quality" or "household income" is a rationalization because at the end of the day no one has to have a video game.

 

What? But but but Panem et Circenses is the most basic rule of life. How can you say, you don't need video games in life? :O

[Nonek]

 

 

Lack of piracy isn't amazing news for consumers, really.

Good one.

It is amazing news for you? Good news for the companies I guess but piracy hasn't done any in.

 

Hm..guess we just need to turn a Denuvo developer.

 

 

Oh sorry, I thought you were making a joke because one expects consumers to pay for what they consume while piracy allows one to not do so. I thought it was quite a witty ironic slant making light of the whole matter, guess I was just reading too much into things as usual.

 

Personally I have no feelings on piracy, I don't use such methods because as a moderately wealthy gentleman who has been in continuous employment for almost four decades, I can't justify using someone elses product without their permission and the usual exchange of renumeration. However others are free to do as they wish, and I realise that this is a far cleaner and less dangerous form of theft than mugging etcetera.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Nonek

[Hurlshort]

 Good news for the companies I guess but piracy hasn't done any in.

 

 

That is pretty hard to prove either way.  We do know that a lot of developers have gone out of business.  Sure, a lot of it can be blamed on bad business practices.  Troika is a good example of that.  They made decent games that were fairly popular, so you would think they would have been able to stay afloat.  It's interesting to think of what Troika would have done in our current market, given the ability to crowdfund.  

 

But it is reasonable to say that if they received money for everyone that played their games, they would have had more profits.  That may have been the difference between closing the doors or keeping them open.  Yes yes, we all know that pirated copy does not equal lost sale, but it certainly doesn't help them at that specific time.

[Fenixp]

Yes yes, we all know that pirated copy does not equal lost sale, but it certainly doesn't help them at that specific time.

Well iD have taken a look at what kind of phenomenon sharing content is and released a significant chunk of their games for essentially free consumption. Shareware model then proved to be an extremely successful way of marketing your game for years to come. You might ask "Well what does that have to do with piracy?", but it's taking advantage of the very same mindset.

 

But even in modern days, pirates were used as a marketing tool and that alone brought games a lot of free publicity - whether it's examples of games like Serious Sam 3 or Developer Tycoon which used cracks in a clever manner to enhance their marketing while giving crackers more of what they enjoy or, say, developer of Hotline Miami who essentially said "I don't care who plays my game, I want you have the best possible experience" and started releasing either his game or patches on torrent sites.

 

There is a reason why different companies are affected by piracy differently - as I said tho, pirates are not the enemy. If you understand reality of their existence you can actively use them to make your product more popular and to have more people purchasing your product. So even statements like "we all know that pirated copy does not equal lost sale, but it certainly doesn't help them at that specific time." might not quite hold water.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Fenixp

[melkathi]

They have said so in some interviews

 

In response to chill`s comment abou cdproject red devs and piracy. Posting from phone is annoying

Edited January 14, 2016 by melkathi

[Oerwinde]

I pirated a lot as a teen and when I was unemployed in my 20s. Now that I have Steam and a decent job I tend to buy a lot of the games I pirated knowing full well I am not likely to play them again. For me it was simply I had no money and wanted to play games. I had no justification other than I wanted to play and piracy allowed me to do so. Now I have almost 300 games in my steam library because games are much more affordable for me.

[Malcador]

I pirate less as well, not a lot worth playing. Was a good option when I suspected a game would be a gamble - like So Blonde

[Mr. Magniloquent]

 

I thibk that the last part is a bit too much. But going back to the reason. If you are spending n3arly 10% of a monthly income for kids game you want to be sure it will be good. You had no such guarantee so you would get as a kid a pirated version for 4USD i and then that cost is ok for the risk involved. I was buying originals of games i liked. Planescape for example. But the ones i was not sure of i would not hesitate to get it from a "pirate"

 

Last part is too much?  How? 

 

Anyhow, I stand by my assertion - video games are a luxury item and you don't have to spend any money on them at all.  I won't assert that there cannot be positive benefits of piracy, but any use of cost of legal game vs "quality" or "household income" is a rationalization because at the end of the day no one has to have a video game.

 

Intellectual Property laws are a farce. If, with the click of a button and a few electrons, I could duplicate any worldly good in minutes--I would be hailed as the savior of humanity. Vehicles, homes, medical supplies, click-click-click. See: Cornucopia. Every "pirated" game is not in fact stolen. Each copy is perfectly replicated. The quantity of games in existence increases. The whole fact that any digital good is no more material than memories within my skull. It would not be desirable to try and incarcerate every person who acquired an idea without having first purchased it. That's absurd. If anyone needs that explained, I will do so in a very belittling fashion suitable to the stupidity of needing to ask such a question.

 

That copyright laws are needed to incentive development and production is an outright falsehood. Copyright laws are an attempt to create an artificial scarcity and are an impediment to mankind's development. The ease of crowd-funding is now making this argument entirely disprovable, and we should all rejoice. Artistic diversions are important, but entirely superfluous to survival. Finally these things can cease be profit motivated abominations like EA and go back to being people whose creation stems from passion. The printing press revolutionized the world because it dramatically lowered the cost of print. Digitization has now reduced the cost of many goods to essentially zero. This is a good thing.

[Hurlshort]

 Digitization has now reduced the cost of many goods to essentially zero. This is a good thing.

 

 

Yeah, unfortunately the artists and programmers don't digitally end up with food on the table when people digitally duplicates their work.  

 

You bringing up crowd funding is ridiculous.  You don't want to pay for a digital product because it can be duplicated for free, but you want to pay someone to create a digital product with little guarantee that it will be completed?  Okey Dokey.  

 

The publisher model may stifle creativity, inflate costs and create a general mess, but it gives both the developers and consumers security in an open market.  It may change as we move to a more digital age with crowd funding and other factors, but it most likely is not going away.     

[Darkpriest]

Ultra commie detected...

[Gfted1]

Valve deploys 100Gbps Internet ports to handle 75% traffic growth.

[Oerwinde]

 

This trailer made me very interested in a game I had no interest in at all.

[Vaeliorin]

I remember the first videos of it, and it looked really interesting. Then I found out it was multi-player/online only.

[Oerwinde]

I remember the first videos of it, and it looked really interesting. Then I found out it was multi-player/online only.

And all that interest is gone.

[Fighter]

The Division's combat looks terrible. Some of the worst case HUD spam that I've seen & and bullet sponge enemies.

[Ganrich]

Honestly, I saw the trailer and then I saw Ubisoft, and was like "whatver." I have climbed enough towers to unlock sections of map for a few years. Also, I hate Uplay, and Ubisoft's online games (or online requirement for games) never work at first and they keep doing it.

[Mr. Magniloquent]

 

 Digitization has now reduced the cost of many goods to essentially zero. This is a good thing.

 

 

Yeah, unfortunately the artists and programmers don't digitally end up with food on the table when people digitally duplicates their work.  

 

You bringing up crowd funding is ridiculous.  You don't want to pay for a digital product because it can be duplicated for free, but you want to pay someone to create a digital product with little guarantee that it will be completed?  Okey Dokey.  

 

The publisher model may stifle creativity, inflate costs and create a general mess, but it gives both the developers and consumers security in an open market.  It may change as we move to a more digital age with crowd funding and other factors, but it most likely is not going away.     

 

You don't weep for the Monks who no longer charge small fortunes for hand written books. The printing press crashed the price of publications, and the world has been far better off for it. I haven't pirated a game in ages, but that doesn't change the facts. Copyright laws are legislated scarcity. It's the prohibition of perfectly replicating something with the same degree of tangibility as a memory or concept. If we could so easily replicate any other form of good, the world would be collectively rejoicing. Copyright laws are a fraud to keep you paying.

[Nonek]

 

You don't weep for the Monks who no longer charge small fortunes for hand written books. The printing press crashed the price of publications, and the world has been far better off for it.

 

 

There is still a thriving trade in hand written scripture as is still practised by quite a few abbeys around the world, indeed the scarcity of the art form has only increased its value.

[rjshae]

You don't weep for the Monks who no longer charge small fortunes for hand written books. The printing press crashed the price of publications, and the world has been far better off for it. I haven't pirated a game in ages, but that doesn't change the facts. Copyright laws are legislated scarcity. It's the prohibition of perfectly replicating something with the same degree of tangibility as a memory or concept. If we could so easily replicate any other form of good, the world would be collectively rejoicing. Copyright laws are a fraud to keep you paying.

 

It's a shame we can't charge for trolling. Maybe there should be a law....