Google+

We Recommend By ZergNet

83 comments

  • Ravenbom - September 11, 2008 4:41 p.m.

    fuentesa, REALLY good point. Why didn't someone think of this sooner? A lot of gamers are also collectors of useless hunks of plastic called toys. I myself have a replica lightsaber, which does nothing useful other than making me grin ear to ear every now and again. The games industry really should try to appeal to collectors inside gamers. Why not include a replica of the Enterprise in the next crappy Star Trek game? I'd probably buy it. Or Green Latern's ring in the next crappy DC game? The one ring in a LOTR game box? A plastic batarang in the next Batman game. LEGOs in the next lego game? Give us a little more than instructions that are likely repeated in the first level of the game. That being said, I think I might just go to Amazon and preorder GOW2 with the really expensive Lancer. I mean, I do have a credit card, might as well use(abuse) it.
  • bakakaba - September 11, 2008 4:37 p.m.

    For me this issue is more about a clash of the old with the new than it is about strictly piracy. The old business execs are clashing with the new younger web culture. The execs have been raised on a system of advertising and selling so many physical units to help guide them in their business decisions to help maximize future profits. Seeing that this item sold 300,000 physical copies proves it is more successful than this one that sold only 50,000 so they stop making the 50 seller and make more like the 300 seller. But the rise of easy access web culture has thrown this model for a loop. They see 500,000 people downloading but only 100,000 buying and they don't know what to make of it. No one can know how many of that 400,000 would have bought the game otherwise and how many wouldn't. And, they can't predict how many will be willing to buy a sequel. It screw with their business model and it scares them. And with the rise of sites like YouTube, Kongregate, and formerly Napster, kids are growing up with quick, free sources of entertainment. They are getting used to not paying to get stuff. And then you have stuff like the Radiohead album. Radiohead made a bunch of money all for itself and nobody was required to pay them. The internet allowed them to distribute their art without needing a middle man to pay for production of physical cds and marketing. This freaks the publishers out because they are no longer needed. The entertainment econmy is rapidly changing and if there is one thing big companies, like publishers, are scared of it is rapid change. So we get cries of rampant piracy destroying the industry and consumer punishing DRM rather than seeking to adapt to a new consumer market. And while Steam is a good first step, its also a good example of the unwillingness to change. And don't get me wrong I do love Valve and Steam, but why does a digital version of a game cost just as much as a boxed retail? You have no manual to print, no box to make, no shipping, no cd to write. Shouldn't it be less? Couldn't you sell more if it was cheaper? But the execs have set a price point for games based on boxed sales only and so that's the price of the game. Companies still use NPD as a rubric for their games success even though it deals strictly with retail sales. This is why they cry that the PC market is dying when anybody playing Team fortress 2 or WOW knows that is an ignorant claim. And the irony is games used to be at the forefront of this. How many people have been loyal Id followers because of Wolfenstien and Doom shareware? Publishers in all entertainment industries are refusing to see the internet as a more powerful force than them and embrace a new economy. It is a place where people can spend hours making their own entertainment, or where indie people turned down by big companies can release books, comics, music, etc. and make a good profit off donations and ads without the big companies help. People will support the entertainment they love and when you reward the consumer with freedom of choice and the freedom to find exposure to your work before shelling out 50 bucks or more, they will support you vehemently.
  • oryandymackie - September 11, 2008 3:39 p.m.

    Stealing, is like stealing the local game stores only copy of the latest game. They can't sell that game, and receive the atrocious amount of money paid for that game. piracy is virtual. The game numbers are unlimited. Piracy can muck up your computer, and you still feel like a thief. No one is missing out on piracy. It is wrong, both are wrong but the upside to piracy is -no-one misses out -unlimited number of games. Bad Points -can muck up your computer if gotten off a dodgy supplier -still feel like a thief. Both are wrong.
  • MSCR - September 11, 2008 3:37 p.m.

    Well, I pirate games. And rather than spout off pseudo-intellectual bullshit I simply state that I'm not going to justify why I pirate some old shitty game occasionally. Basically: Fuck 'em that's why. But seriously, who do some of you think you are, ivy league economists? Admit it, none of us know shit about corporate profit schemes. And you tossers on your high horses "oh I've never done it, but anyone who has is a big doodie (or some such)". Fuck you too.
  • netlatnu - September 11, 2008 3:03 p.m.

    To me, the "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" argument doesn't make any sense. First of all, the very fact that you downloaded it shows that the item had some value even if that value wasn't "full price". Many games may be overpriced, but the the market will take care of that problem. If a game truly is not a good value, the publisher will adjust the price to sell more copies. Maybe that lower price would have made it so you did find it a good value, but then you would not buy the game because you already have played it. In the entertainment industry, like most other industries, there is a general principle that things are going to be more expensive when they are first released. There is a premium to have earlier access to something than some other people. Ultimately, it is up to the companies to set the price at the correct point. That's not to say that consumers have no influence Second, people say that pirating games they wouldn't have bought anyway isn't really costing anyone anything, because they still will be buying the games they would have bought. Unfortunately, this is not true. While you may not have bought that certain game (although maybe you would have if there were no other alternative), you are still using your leisure time on that video game. Assuming you would play video games for about the same amount of time either way, any time you use on a "free" game is time not being used on a game you would have bought. Last, the people do it because they think they are entitled to try the product before they buy it. I understand that trying a game is important to many people before making a $50 or $60 purchase, but that does not entitled you to break the law to try a product. Again, it is up to the companies, with pressure from the market and consumers, to provide consumers with a meaningful chance to try out their product.
  • RCTrucker7 - September 11, 2008 2:29 p.m.

    Here's the first part of my first response. It got cut off for some reason. "While I've never downloaded a pirated copy of a game, I've done more than my share of downloading of movies, music, and software applications. Do I think it was ethical? Ultimately, no. When it get's down to it, regardless of your reason for downloading a copy of a game, or any "Intellectual Property" for that matter, whether it be because you just don't give a f*<k, you feel entitled, you're broke, or if you think you're doing the right thing by "sticking it to corporate America" and standing up for the little guy, the end result is the exact same; You have a product that was created by someone\some group, that was made available by that person\group, in exchange for payment from the intended user, that you did not pay for. Period. There is no arguing that. Product = In your hands \ Money = Still in your pocket."
  • RCTrucker7 - September 11, 2008 2:24 p.m.

    "Is there a difference between copying the property of an individual (like an indie game dev) and copying the property of a large company?" A difference in action or result? No. Regardless of whom you're copying the property from, copying is copying is copying. Is there a difference perhaps in whether I'm more prone, or inclined, to copying from one or the other? Yes. I'd much sooner copy from Electronic Arts, than I would from say Positech, or an individual working from their basement. First, on a monetary basis, EA is much more capable of absorbing the hit of a lost sale, than the guy from his basement. Second, on a more "personal" level, it's much easier to copy from a faceless conglomerate than it is from the guy in the basement, whose basement is perhaps in the house right next door to me. "What do you think the long-term implications of wide-scale IP infringement might be?" I see two opposing paths; First, on the current path of "we download & they fight it"; I think that it will just get harder and harder for the legit buyer(ie; more restrictive DRM, more hoops to jump thru, more hassle) to use a product, shile doing next to nothing to slow piracy, which I think can\could result in more resentment from those legit buyers towards a company. That resentment could translate into three things I think; Nothing: No change on the buyers or companies end. Customer Loss: The legit buyer gets fed up with company A's product protection and goes to company B to use their similar product. Customer Loss & Product Loss: The legit buyer gets fed up with company A's product protection, but likes their product better than company B's similar product, and therefore downloads a copy of it instead. Second, as stated above in the second question, companies embrace the internet to sell their product, and not only sell it, but sell it in such a way as to entice some of those pirates to instead purchase a legit copy. Now I admit, i don't know how that would be done. That is beyond my scope of experience and expertise. But I do know, that the current status quo, will not work to sway some of the pirates out there to go legit.
  • RCTrucker7 - September 11, 2008 2:23 p.m.

    "If at some point you’ve downloaded a pirated copy of a game (or anything else), do you think that what you did was ethical? If yes, why? If no, why did you do it anyway?" While I've never downloaded a pirated copy of a game, I've done more than my share of downloading of movies, music, and software applications. Do I think it was ethical? Ultimately, no. When it get's down to it, regardless of your reason for downloading a copy of a game, or any "Intellectual Property" for that matter, whether it be because you just don't give a f*<k, you feel entitled, you're broke, or if you think you're doing the right thing by "sticking it to corporate America" and standing up for the little guy, the end result is the exact same; You have a product that was created by someone\some group, that was made available by that person\group, in exchange for payment from the intended user, that you did not pay for. Period. There is no arguing that. Product = In your hands \ Money = Still in your pocket. But, as I said above, I did it anyway. Why? Several reasons I guess. Using an example of downloading a movie; First; The idea of just a couple of mouse clicks and 30 minutes time equals me having a watchable version of the lastest hit movie, just strikes me as "cool". Not as in, "I'm cool and you're a dork.", but cool as in "adjective (slang) great; terrific; fantastic. Example: Wow, that's really cool!; You look cool in those jeans!" (from dictionary.com) Second; I'll admit it: I'm a cheapskate. So when presented with these two ways to see that hit movie: 1-Pay up to $10.00 for a ticket 2-Click & downlaod then most likely, #2 is going to win. Third; While I agree that downloading doesn't pay the person\group that should be paid for the product I've downloaded, I also feel somewhat absolved for my actions, by the actions in response of those that made the product. Example; The RIAA goes after people for not paying for the songs they've downloaded, because by downloading the song, you've not paid the artist(s) for their work. Yet, the RIAA doesn't use any of the money they gain from their settlements to then pay that artist(s). They instead use it to fund more suits against other people. How then does that benefit that artist(s)? Movie studios show commercials of recently laid off cameramen, grips, stagehands, etc, etc because Hollywood looses so much money every year to movie downloads. Yet, in general, summer after summer and year after year, a new total box office record is set. Plus, some individual studios just make an obscene amount in a given year. Now I have a hard time reconciling Studio ABC123 telling me on Thursday that poor John Smith the Boom Mic guy just got laid off because the studio lost X amount of money last summer\year, and then having Studio ABC123 telling me on Monday about it's latest hit making 100+ million on opening weekend, and that that same movie goes onto make over half a billion dollars. Fourth; Finally, the IP owners need to step up and take some share of responsibility. Once it's know how prevelant the downloading of a product is, the almost always response is to go overboard on trying to protect that product. However, all that typically results in is, headaches and problems for legit buyers, while only perhaps denting the piracy of their product, and certainly not stopping it. Instead, they should be embracing the internet, and harnessing it to sell their product.Mann
  • lordkemo - September 11, 2008 12:24 p.m.

    I have pirated 1 game in the past, but no more than that. I really want PC gaming to stay. I like the games and controls better, and i love the mod communities. With that said, at what cost? I think restrictive DRM is leading people to pirate. I had a friend who always pirates games ask me if wanted the game (Spore). I told him no, I wasn't buying the game on principle and that I would wait for it to either patch out the DRM or not buy it at all. He said, "well you don't have to buy it. I'll just give it to you." I have to admit that i was curious. I almost did it by saying to myself, "well it's EA they can afford to not have my money and i can get the game for free." To be honest where is the line? When is ok to break the rules to protest or to get change?
  • Edwardbedaking112 - September 11, 2008 5:42 a.m.

    If anyone is interested in taking surveys for free Microsoft points or Wii points can goto http://www.rewards1.com/index.php?referrer_id=323605
  • Hiimad - September 11, 2008 2:45 a.m.

    Pirating is illegal.Anyone who does it,in my opinion,Should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
  • theturbolemming - September 11, 2008 2:31 a.m.

    I have never pirated a game. There was a time when I downloaded some songs, years ago, but that was before I became a musician and realized the huge amount of effort that it takes and when I put forth that effort, I want to reap the benefits. I think that there is a difference between copying the property of an individual and copying the property of a large company, but it think that the difference is small. It's property, and we need to obey the law when it comes to property. The long-term implications are as numerous as they are potentially terrible. Each time you pirate a game, funds are diverted from the companies that make games (an infinitesimal amount, but a funds nonetheless) and a portion of these funds go towards making new games. Without good funding, we don't get good games. It's as simple as that.
  • netlatnu - September 11, 2008 1:51 a.m.

    I think the thing that concerns me about IP infringement is it seems to have created an unwarranted sense of entitlement. A lot of people are saying that because they can't afford all of the games they want, that justifies them violating someone else's copyright. Also, they might not have bought the game for $50 even if they did have the money because it was not worth it. It seems to me that things such as games and other entertainment are luxuries and if you cannot afford them or don't want to pay, then you are not entitled to them, regardless of whether they are tangible or intangible. As for other problems that people have with the current system, such as Digital Right Management or just copyright in general, that does not entitle you to pirate either. If you have ideological problems with the way things are, you try to get the business or government to change their policies and you choose not to buy things from companies you have problems with.
  • Kudo - September 11, 2008 1:50 a.m.

    @N8ture Pretty much in agreement. I admit that I've illegally downloaded many games and you summed up my reasoning behind it. Any game that I've played and got something out of it, I've bought it in support of the developer's work and dedication to the product. Any game that wasn't an enjoyable experience, I don't buy it! Considering not every game comes with a demo, I think it's fair to test out the game before spending hard earned cash on it.
  • Assassing3 - September 11, 2008 12:06 a.m.

    i view it from an economic stand point when you put games out at 50$ or more and all these new cool games are coming out not everyone who wants them can afford them take spore for example i just bought Facebreaker for my 360 and now even thought i want spore i cant afford to get it so no what im on my favorite torrent site and im looking for a good version of it to get lets face it to get three brand new off the shelf games would cost anywere from 150-200$ depending on taxes and what not so when it comes to pirating i say maybe if everything wasnt so expensive i wouldnt do it but now i got a day of torrenting because of it (you know what wish i could just buy and install but i cant
  • slapme7times - September 10, 2008 10:32 p.m.

    Buying used software and pirating software both make jack shit nothing profits wise for publishers. A used game can be played by 100 people before it eventually gets lost and broken, that's only 1 sale per 100 people who should have paid full price for it netted by the maker of the product. Yes, Piracy is a crime and should be illegal, but it's the exact same crime Gamestop legally makes a majority of it's profits off of. Close down used game stores, and then talk to me about piracy. I think both industries need to die, but obviously the one that is making profit needs to die first. That would make Gamestop a criminal organization. DRM technology that makes legally purchased videogames unplayable is also theft, so publishers are stealing from honest consumers. The cost of PC hardware is ridiculous. If you couldn't pirate content, there'd be no way to justify the purchase of new pc hardware, which means those gamers would merely transition to consoles where they would buy used games, which is also stealing from publishers and developers. The government needs to bring the hammer to gamestop, then it needs to bring the hammer to peer to peer, in that order.
  • Juriasu - September 10, 2008 7:20 p.m.

    I've never downloaded any software illegally (that I can remember at least) and I hate DRM! It feels like I'm being punished for someone else's fault. But I do understand why developers and publishers would want to put DRM and whatnot in their games.
  • Gilbert_pwns - September 19, 2008 3:43 a.m.

    While it is true that piracy is a problem, the way the corporations count their losses is not accurate. Just because a million people or so pirated Crysis, doesn't mean you would have sold a million copies of Crysis if pirating it was not possible. If pirating games was not possible then the same people that do pirate games would probably not have bought them in the first place.
  • Seriuqs - September 19, 2008 1:08 a.m.

    I actually created this name just to answer this thread... Let me tell you the tale of a young man, who once, in his college days, didnt think twice about pirating music or games... As this young man grew older and more wise, and got into the working world, he realized that perhaps it really wasnt right to be pirating and decided to "go legit". He stopped pirating music and software for many years, and enjoyed paying for both his music and games, since he felt like he was supporting the developer... Then one day, those who made the games developed DRM that was such an inconvenience to all paying customers, and limited his ability to play a game he had LEGITIMATELY PURCHASED, yet did nothing to actually stop pirating, and this young man asked himself... "Why would I PAY for something that is such a pain in the a@# when I could get it for FREE without the HEADACHE." That story being told, I havent made up my mind to start pirating again yet, but I do know that I find it incredibly frustrating that I feel punished for legitimately purchasing a product when I could pirate it for free with none of the headaches and ridiculousness.
  • zer0state - September 15, 2008 9:46 p.m.

    I found a related tshirt on ebay http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?sofocus=bs&sbrftog=1&dfsp=32&catref=C6&from=R40&satitle=piracy+theft&sacat=-1%26catref%3DC6&sargn=-1%26saslc%3D2&sadis=200&fpos=ZIP%2FPostal&sabfmts=1&saobfmts=insif&ftrt=1&ftrv=1&saprclo=&saprchi=&fsop=32&fsoo=2 In the end it's the same this although technically the terms "piracy" and "theft" are legally different.

Showing 21-40 of 83 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.