BF2S Forums PC Game Piracy Examined

jord wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

Flecco wrote:

Lol PC gaming might actually get assraped by this problem.

The best part: The gamers are doing it to themselves.

Just wait until the developers actually raise the prices of their games to make up for the revenue that has been lost. Then we'll get games that actually are overpriced.

£45 for Assassins Creed which you complete in 2 days and is the same shit over and over again isn't overpriced?

Vote with your wallet. Be skeptical and wait for reviews or a demo eh?

Yeah, I was never big into piracy. The only game I've pirated and then not proceeded to pay for later on was...

Wait for it.....

Master of Orion 2. Why? 1) Because it's $10 2) It's around 10 years old and 3) Because it was abandonware until Atari worked out it had a decent community and decided they wanted money from the dedicated fans who were still playing.

I agree with the guy who wrote the article. Some of it was quite scary, such as the bits about hate campaigns being wadged against successful copy protection software. That was fucked up.

_{Read the whole thing, skimmed some of the more verbose bits with regards to console vs. PC or w/e and some of the StarForce/SecuROM stuff... I haven't read this whole thread either as I was late to the party. Will read later on this morning (it's 1.30am).}

summary of the article in OP wrote:

Piracy is royally assraping the PC games industry. The writer of the article backs up this thesis with a plethora of supporting statistical data, quotes from several notable game designers and a generally unbiased approach to the subject matter.

The funny thing is, the only thing the pirates are doing is fucking themselves in the end. And everybody else.

Last edited by Flecco (2008-12-16 08:09:52)

Flecco wrote:

Vote with your wallet. Be skeptical and wait for reviews or a demo eh?

Tbh mate I'd rather just download them. No risk of wasting my money on something shit, plus it's cheaper if I like the game...

Spidery_Yoda wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Again these numbers are meaningless.

Numerous people have already stated in this thread that, though they pirate game, they pay for the ones they play a lot.

A person that pirates a game and who would never have paid for the game, ever, does not take money away from the industry.

The number of people who buy a game after pirating it is incredibly small. And if they couldn't get hold of a free copy so easily then there's a good chance a lot of people that pirate games would buy a few. Even if it was only one that they had their eye on. If piracy didn't exist, there would be more sales. You can't argue that. Of course every pirated copy isn't a lost sale. However there is, without a doubt, a net loss due to piracy. A significant one.

I don't want to have to debate something thats undebatable. It's all in the article >.<

But it's not un-debatable. That's the reason there is always a debate whenever this subject arises.

Many of the figures in that article are approximations. Pure opinion. And opinion is always biased.

The simple truth of the matter is that it is impossible to tell what effect piracy actually has on sales figures.

And it is equally impossible to tell what effect it would have if piracy was suddenly made absolutely 100% impossible.

There are just too many unknowns.

It is not a black and white issue.

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Spidery_Yoda wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Again these numbers are meaningless.

Numerous people have already stated in this thread that, though they pirate game, they pay for the ones they play a lot.

A person that pirates a game and who would never have paid for the game, ever, does not take money away from the industry.

The number of people who buy a game after pirating it is incredibly small. And if they couldn't get hold of a free copy so easily then there's a good chance a lot of people that pirate games would buy a few. Even if it was only one that they had their eye on. If piracy didn't exist, there would be more sales. You can't argue that. Of course every pirated copy isn't a lost sale. However there is, without a doubt, a net loss due to piracy. A significant one.

I don't want to have to debate something thats undebatable. It's all in the article >.<

But it's not un-debatable. That's the reason there is always a debate whenever this subject arises.

Many of the figures in that article are approximations. Pure opinion. And opinion is always biased.

The simple truth of the matter is that it is impossible to tell what effect piracy actually has on sales figures.

And it is equally impossible to tell what effect it would have if piracy was suddenly made absolutely 100% impossible.

There are just too many unknowns.

It is not a black and white issue.

Those figures on torrent downloads... They weren't approximations and they were quite easy to draw some conclusions on. The simple reality is that games developers are moving from PC to consoles to avoid piracy.


I understand your point though. I know of a group of guys at a Uni here in Australia who bought legal copies of Fallout 3 after a cracked version did the roundsd at that uni. There were around 50 who went out and paid for it. Who's to say that such a large group would have paid for it at full retail price in the second week of release here in Australia without having tried that cracked version.


On the 9th of December the new Prince of Persia game was launched with no DRM. Strangely, after one successful search on a very well known torrent tracker which revealed at least 20 different torrents of the new game, from the first page alone I'll put estimated downloads so far, conservatively, at around 5,000+ from this single torrent tracker. It doesn't seem to be flying about as fast as Fallout did, but then again it's a platform game (shit for PC tbh) and it's not recieved the same publicity Fallout/Crysis etc. did.

The most embarrasing part of all of this for me is that I used to defend piracy with some of the stupider arguments listed in the article.

@ jord, when you have time read that article. Informed debate > Uninformed debate.

jord wrote:

Flecco, I'm just as informed on this "debate" as you and spider are. So drop your condescending tone, because I don't have 4 hours to spare.

The fact is I wouldn't buy games anyway. I don't have enough cash. So me downloading the games isn't me taking money off billion dollar companies. I wouldn't play them if I couldn't download them. Now that you are informed about that I guess the debate isn't as "undebatable" (Still lolling at that) as you thought...

That's hardly an argument, you can't argue with The Bible Article

This debate is over, the subject is undebatable.

I download the games, then if I like them I buy them. Simple as that. I am not damaging the industry at all.

Well i'm happy to see that the debate has become more civilised now . I realise a lot of the reason that it wasn't before was me having a hissy fit but there you are. Like I said I wasn't expecting it and got angry.

I too was very suprised by what it said about Starforce. Very suprised. Like the article says, Starforce's name is mud on the internet. It was a shocking read. I think anybody who hasn't read the article should at least read the 2 pages about DRM, they're very enlightening .

Spidery_Yoda wrote:

Well i'm happy to see that the debate has become more civilised now . I realise a lot of the reason that it wasn't before was me having a hissy fit but there you are. Like I said I wasn't expecting it and got angry.

I too was very suprised by what it said about Starforce. Very suprised. Like the article says, Starforce's name is mud on the internet. It was a shocking read. I think anybody who hasn't read the article should at least read the 2 pages about DRM, they're very enlightening .

Not really shocking at all. Anyone who'd heard of starforce knew they were universally hated because of various conflicts but then you actually read what people have to say about it and it's obviously the same stupid hivemind hate mentality at it again. No real conclusive evidence to back it up, just lots of people shouting a lot of nasty things.

jord wrote:

The fact is I wouldn't buy games anyway. I don't have enough cash. So me downloading the games isn't me taking money off billion dollar companies.

So ignoring the actual topic and taking a peek at this little jewel, let's put it in other words. You wouldn't buy the games because you don't have enough cash, insinuating that if you did have the cash you would buy them. Because your hand is forced in to not buying them, you download.

To reiterate, you would buy the games but because you can't, you download.

Officer, I wouldn't have robbed the store if I had money!

Is it honest? Yes, but it's no excuse.

Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

I think that your taking it out of context and your argument fails when you use the term potential to qualify it as stealing.

Me not picking up the cd case and looking at the price is taking away potential income from the developer because I'm not considering buying it.

Walking past the game, leaving it on the shelf is taking away potential income from the developer.

Not going into the store is taking away potential income from the developer.

No, because if you look at something but don't buy it that's not losing potential income. It's loosing potential income if someone would have paid for something, as per the $.01 argument, but didn't because they got it for free. You don't gain anything by picking something up in a store, or by walking in a store. You gain something by pirating a game, and that gain comes from the developer's loss.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

If anyone would not buy a game they have pirated for $.01, they are lying.

Of course they'd pay 1c for the game.

What they don't pay/want to pay is the full RRP, which in many cases is higher than what the game is worth (Be it an actual overpricing or just the pirates opinion).

Which brings us back to why Pirates pirate.

I didn't respond the first time because I didn't see how it was even a counterpoint. Just because they aren't paying full retail price doesn't mean they wouldn't buy it at some other price, more reasonably at a sale or to rent it.

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

I didn't respond the first time because I didn't see how it was even a counterpoint. Just because they aren't paying full retail price doesn't mean they wouldn't buy it at some other price, more reasonably at a sale or to rent it.

And this is exactly how the pirates feel. I would buy your games, but it's certainly not worth the price tag you've put on it.

So what I'll do is download the single player games and spend my money on the multi player games which need a cd key. Because I can't afford to buy the single player games and finish them in a day and still have money to buy the multi player games and have hours of online fun.

If single player games are to be released with a $50us price tag and offered less than 50 hours of game play then they shouldn't be priced the same amount as a multi player game which has countless hours of game play.

Then don't buy them. Don't steal them either.

DoctaStrangelove wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

And this is exactly how the pirates feel. I would buy your games, but it's certainly not worth the price tag you've put on it.

So what I'll do is download the single player games and spend my money on the multi player games which need a cd key. Because I can't afford to buy the single player games and finish them in a day and still have money to buy the multi player games and have hours of online fun.

If single player games are to be released with a $50us price tag and offered less than 50 hours of game play then they shouldn't be priced the same amount as a multi player game which has countless hours of game play.

Then don't buy them. Don't steal them either.

But if you're not buying them in the first place then you aren't damaging the makers anymore than by pirating them. So the makers don't make money either way.

Basically what you're saying is that we shouldn't pirate games for the sake of not pirating games.

I'm saying the argument of "not buying them anyways" is a load of bullshit. You would buy a game for $.01 right? Hell the bandwidth/electricity used to pirate these games is worth more than that. Everyone has a price, and when you pirate a game the developer is losing that price. Granted that price may not be $50 for most people, but that doesn't mean they don't lose when you pirate it.

To be perfectly honest I doubt it's much harder to shoplift a game than it is to pirate one. Do people not do that because they realize the cost of the CD the game is burned onto by the developer is worth something? lol