Cyber Rat

Buck Rogers: Countdown to Doomsday

Fixed that for you.

Almost every crack group tells you to buy the game if you enjoyed it within the instructions file. And agreed with Rocky, "deal with it" isn't a solution. Consumers have rights as well. Having a game roothack into your OS and destroy your CD-Drive is a fucking good justification.

I am still waiting for the explanation as to why they should alienate a good deal of markets.

Bah, I was looking for more of a FPS/dating sim/sport/puzzle/space shooter. Why doesn't anyone cater to me any more? I'm telling you, the market has gone to the casuals. That's Mass Effect if you keep your head REALLY close to the screen.

Now? Very few. Which is a shame, because a lot of previously console-exclusive games (mostly indies), got better sales only after moving to the PC. It doesn't mean the same couldn't happen to Driver if it were a good game.

Yea, I just read that. I've been reading a lot of people say stuff like "I'm not even motivated to pirate it".

To answer you first question, no, it doesn't. Sadly, we have yet to determine whether piracy is not alright only on a legal level, or whether it is morally bad as well. Just to be clear, I agree it is illegal, I mean, it's fact, it's not a matter on whether I can agree or not. Whether piracy is morally alright is a completely different question and I'm not sure what the answer to that would be.

I just mean, does not having the money affect the morality of the action. If you're too poor to afford a videogame (don't know how you got the console or PC) then does that make piracy okay? It could be inferred from your statement "but individuals who can't afford it or are careful with their money are shunned by society?". that your financial situation affects the morality of your actions. Is that not what you meant? It's a faulty comparison, just like every single one in this thread. You cannot compare it to pirating games because it is not pirating games. That's my point, so I'm not even going to defend the "it's like the poor stealing bread". That's why I'm disgusted by most comparisons here because there seems to be an imaginary subjective line drawn which decides which crimes are like pirating video games and which aren't.

Oh, dude, then you have no idea how mad the whole damn world is. My advice? Don't waste your fingers typing to them. If you want to type, start doing writing yourself.

They are expecting you to pay regardless of whether you like it or not, or whether it is objectively good or bad. How is that morally alright? Oh, so that's not alright as a comparison? See, I thought apples, cars, theaters, joyrides and such were ok when compared to piracy, but stealing bread? Damn, you must be on some heavy crack if you're comparing it to something from a bakery, huh?

According to you, it is bad if you pirate a product before you decide to invest in it, but it is not bad if a company demands that you pay for their bad product before you know it is bad. IE, you know that a lot of cinemas would go out of business if people were to choose to pay after they've watched a movie. This would, of course, happen because the majority of people are the scum of the Earth and wouldn't pay regardless, but that also means that people who would pay for a good movie in that case are getting screwed over. So, in your example of theaters, it is alright for companies to ask for money and time for bad products, because they have a business to run, but individuals who can't afford it or are careful with their money are shunned by society? So, we are ok with companies being conniving and deceitful, because they just want to run a business, but the fellow man for whose reasons no-one ever asks is compared to a thief, a sinner by most religions. We are giving power to the companies. You are giving power to the companies. You say you fight for moral causes, yet you support false idols. You people disgust me.

Ummm... deliberate? Yes I'll let you think about the implications. Your argument is invalid. It can deprive a person of a seat. Also, going to a movie requires entering private property, using services like the snack bar, the restroom, the seats and so on. It's closer to a dine and dash than piracy. And it's not completely dine and dash either. Why don't you take a look at piracy separately (like some people in this thread have, regardless of "side taken") and comment on it like that? Do you need to compare it to sneaking into places or stealing physical objects? Why doesn't anyone quote copyright laws, which would make more sense?

Video games and software are not: apples, cars, rides, events, hardware, tools, movies, cinemas, theaters... Just because you pay for all those things, doesn't mean they are comparable, otherwise I'd start asking everyone "How can you eat chicken? Would eat a human?" based on the fact that both have two legs and breathe. Not saying that piracy is good or bad, but what the fuck? Stop using comparisons like fucking twats.

Wow, you're a real douchewaffle.

Wait wait wait wait wait... You mean you're not a cat held hostage with a toy gun?

Like Dex said, it's a matter of principle. If you see that as pointless, there's nothing really anyone can say that will make you think differently.

I'm not saying anything, I'm asking why it's a grey area according to you? I would like to know.

Why would piracy fall into a grey zone?

I didn't meant "anyone buying Diablo 3", I meant the people being vocal against stuff in Diablo 3 like online-only, no mods and so on, who end up buying it anyway. ^I read this as "I don't see the point in boycotting it".

Not being a hypocrite. It's not like the game market isn't full of other quality entertainment.

They so are...

I don't think I'll be playing it. Financial issues aside, I'm not comfortable with paying for digital collectibles. Real cards, I'm ok with. It's just a quirk of mine.