excaliburps Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Good article, though at the beginning you lose some credibility (at least with me) for saying that it's the same as walking into a store and taking something off the shelf. It may be just as morally unacceptable, but it's not "the same" any more than murder and rape are the same. Nonetheless, thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Oh yeah, I actually meant to end that by saying that you quickly recapture that lost credibility, it was just right at the beginning that I had a negative reaction to that comment. Overall it's a good article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Geist: Canadian-backed report says music, movie, and software piracy is a market failure, not a legal one Also I'll give your article a peek later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgamemnonV2 Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 16 pages late to this party. That's okay, I'm sure I can drum up some interest. For me, piracy is not as straight-forward as people like to think it is. Like all hot issues, there isn't one side to the coin. In this case it seems to be the popular opinion that if you pirate something you have zero excuse to do so and you must burn in the eternal pits of hell. I sort of want to punch the people who think that in the neck, hard. I've written on the subject extensively: http://agdom.wordpress.com/2010/02/20/giving-pc-gamers-the-middle-finger/ http://agdom.wordpress.com/2010/02/20/drm-or-why-publishers-want-you-to-pirate-their-games/ http://agdom.wordpress.com/2010/06/17/pirated-games-work-legitimate-copies-dont/ http://agdom.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/piracy-the-perfect-patsy/ As long as store return policies remain archaic and there's sparsely a demo for a game that accurately gives you a taste of the finished product, then you'll find me saying piracy does have its place in the industry. There is no end-all, however, and even if some Golden Age of gaming comes along and everything is perfect under the sun, someone will still pirate a game just because they don't want to pay for it. Regardless, we shouldn't lump the looky-lous with the cheapskates. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyberToyger Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 16 pages late to this party. That's okay, I'm sure I can drum up some interest. For me, piracy is not as straight-forward as people like to think it is. Like all hot issues, there isn't one side to the coin. In this case it seems to be the popular opinion that if you pirate something you have zero excuse to do so and you must burn in the eternal pits of hell. I sort of want to punch the people who think that in the neck, hard. I've written on the subject extensively: http://agdom.wordpress.com/2010/02/20/giving-pc-gamers-the-middle-finger/ http://agdom.wordpress.com/2010/02/20/drm-or-why-publishers-want-you-to-pirate-their-games/ http://agdom.wordpress.com/2010/06/17/pirated-games-work-legitimate-copies-dont/ http://agdom.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/piracy-the-perfect-patsy/ As long as store return policies remain archaic and there's sparsely a demo for a game that accurately gives you a taste of the finished product, then you'll find me saying piracy does have its place in the industry. There is no end-all, however, and even if some Golden Age of gaming comes along and everything is perfect under the sun, someone will still pirate a game just because they don't want to pay for it. Regardless, we shouldn't lump the looky-lous with the cheapskates. Fantastic work my friend, I agree with every single thing you said in all four blog posts :3 +1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyber Rat Posted April 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 Those are some nice blog entries. I especially like this part: I’m sick and tired of getting blamed for developer mistakes. It’s not my fault you suck at producing a game of quality that would sell well regardless of the myth of piracy. It’s not my fault that you suck at in-house security. It’s not my fault that some people embrace piracy with the full intention of never paying for what they’ve taken. I’d really appreciate it if you would stop blaming me and other PC gamers for your obvious faults. You fucked up, not us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 Why do all your blogs take this so personally Aga? It's just business. Developers aren't moving to consoles because they don't care about "loyal" PC gamers and like those fickle console gamers more. They do it because they think they can make more money that way. One of the reasons they believe this is because PC piracy is endemic, though the motives behind it are unknown. But there are other reasons, such as a known install base, no divergence in specification, perceived better security of consoles, potential for first party to split marketing costs, the list goes on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgamemnonV2 Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 (edited) Why do all your blogs take this so personally Aga? It's just business. Truthfully it's the way I usually write. I've been told often it's a signature thing of mine and I should continue to run with it. It's served me well for the most part. Developers aren't moving to consoles because they don't care about "loyal" PC gamers and like those fickle console gamers more. They do it because they think they can make more money that way. One of the reasons they believe this is because PC piracy is endemic, though the motives behind it are unknown. But there are other reasons, such as a known install base, no divergence in specification, perceived better security of consoles, potential for first party to split marketing costs, the list goes on. Oh, I know the real reasons why they move away from releasing their titles for the PC. The last article I wrote on the subject, specifically "Piracy: the perfect patsy" dealt more with the fact that Crytek has been bemoaning over and over how "PC gaming this, PC gaming that, blah blah blah, we should just move to consoles." Other developers have been playing the Piracy Card as well, just to make up an excuse to the number one reason why some developers stop developing for the PC (which is ultimately risk vs. rewards). Crytek realizes they could be turning perhaps 400% of their profit on Crysis by simply marketing to the Xbox 360 and the PS3. At which point it comes down to the things you mentioned; why bother with a release platform that has a lot of variables to it for working? My issue rises up from developers that don't have the stones to step up and say, "Look, we're not developing for the PC any more because there's more money in consoles." Developers don't do this because they know exactly how it sounds (and they're right if it sounds like they're greedy developers who lose sight to the objective of creating a video game). So every chance they get they try to throw out an excuse. Now, I've invested time and money into my computer just to ensure that I can play said games. So yeah, I'm going to be a little irksome if I see a title like Red Dead Redemption or Halo sticking to console-exclusivity, especially after knowing the roots of both of those companies and how and where those games are developed. If accessibility is the root to all other issues for developing on the PC, then perhaps some developers should learn their lessons by looking at what the market norm is for an every-man's computer. I don't NEED Crysis-level graphics to enjoy a game and the sooner developers realize that the sooner they can stop complaining about accessibility. The PC gaming market is about $11 billion dollars worth and that figure only continues to rise each year. Yeah, maybe a good chunk of it can be attributed to MMOs. Maybe even the whole RMT craze with Facebook games. But when no one is trying to make a real effort to say, "Hey, this is why you want to play this on the PC," then what do they expect the reaction will be from PC gamers? Edit: Ooh, I have a doggie! Edited April 5, 2011 by AgamemnonV2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 I wasn't sad about RDR because at the time my "gaming" PC was looking a little long in the tooth, so it couldn't have run that game anyway, but now that I've upgraded I am sad that LA Noire is only on console. It's especially odd to me when I watch the LA Noire dev videos talking about how they're pushing the boundaries of technology with their facial animations and digital actor performances, but they're doing it console-only. Sure the animation/expressiveness of the faces is amazing, but the modelling/texturing is really low; it looks like lumps of clay shaped roughly like a face. Imagine the kind of fidelity those faces could have on PC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 The PC version didn't have enough polygons left over for the fedora though. Also still has the uncanny valley creepiness to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 http://piracy.ssrc.org/adobe-logic/ I'm sure anyone in the digital creative industries this information is old hat, but I think it's maybe a sign that games companies shouldn't be looking to Sony-DADC for info on how to battle piracy, but maybe ask the software market, specifically Adobe. According to that article Adobe made $3.8billion last year. EA's revenue for 09 was $3.6billion. I've personally never bought anything from Adobe. Folks say games are expensive, CS5 would buy you a game a week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 Well, the Creative Suites are usually an investment, something you plan on using actively if your career is in Visual Arts or simply requires artistic means to achieve a goal. If you just want to Photoshop images for laughs over the Internet, Adobe is well aware of that fact. I was only able to legally purchase Adobe CS3 some years ago because my small community college was receiving only a few copies, and so the price could be reduced to $200. Otherwise, you're either going to pirate Photoshop or download Gimp. I checked not too long ago, and even with a student discount, one of the CS5 packages (Design Standard) was about $600. I have a friend working at Adobe, and he was telling me a story about a business transaction with a marketing firm in India. To summarize, Adobe wanted them to at least purchase a few licenses because they knew that the programs would spread further than where they were selling them. So, yeah, they're pretty cool with piracy because it has benefits such as training and branding their products international. I'm not sure this model could apply to gaming since, really, there's not much "training" to gaming. Obviously we all agree it's perfectly fine for low-income countries to pirate since they wouldn't even receive the games to play and/or pay, but I doubt you could convince them to ever legally purchase games based on any gaming series or gaming company. Unless it's a fairly priced digital download, some of the taxes and limitations make it an insane concept to "purchase." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 -SNIP- Edit: Ooh, I have a doggie! Liking your style, also agree that if a company wants to go where the money is, they should just say so. Thing is, with companies like Crytek, selling Cryisis 2 multiplatform could well fund their next big PC exclusive. Much better to sell the decision that way than to try and focus on one reason (especially when it's impact is unknown). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 Thursday, a month or two back, I thought that what Crytek would be doing but after seeing and hearing on what they had done with Crysis 2... I doubt it. Even if they are doing that... I would be very wary on getting even a PC exclusive from them. They stained their hands. If they were going the route of going multiplatform and then doing a PC exclusive, I would think that they would handle Crysis 2 a lot better... @Photoshop thing. Yep. I pirated the hell out of Photoshop when I was making wallpapers and stuff. Do you think that all the folks on those wallpaper making sites and even Deviant Art have legit copies of Photoshop? Hell no. Most were and are poor teenagers. I'm actually surprised on how lax Adobe is with the piracy for all these years. I heard about what Atomsk/Dean said a year or two ago. It make sense. Kids that were like me , in most cases, cannot ever afford Photoshop or anything Adobe. Hell, most can't when they grow up. But for those who can and are interested with anything that can go back to Adobe products... guess what they are getting when they can? But yeah... software is one thing. Games are another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 They stained their hands. By doing a console game? Or by doing a bad game? If the latter, then, I know we shouldn't put too much weight behind review scores (and I'm biased) but, it's received generally favourable reviews. Yes it's streamlined / linear / dumbed down (delete as necessary) but it's not (in my opinion) a bad game and certainly doesn't suggest to me that they are incapable of making a good PC exclusive, more that they (perhaps) overreached in going multiplatform. If the former, well, that's fine and all, but you can't blame Crytek for wanting to make more money. They've got a lot of mouths to feed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyber Rat Posted April 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 They stained their hands. By doing a console game? Or by doing a bad game? If the latter, then, I know we shouldn't put too much weight behind review scores (and I'm biased) but, it's received generally favourable reviews. Yes it's streamlined / linear / dumbed down (delete as necessary) but it's not (in my opinion) a bad game and certainly doesn't suggest to me that they are incapable of making a good PC exclusive, more that they (perhaps) overreached in going multiplatform. Most reviewers didn't even play the first and just knew it had shiny graphics. Look at the Crysis 2 thread. It's obvious they treated it as a port. No advanced graphics options, lower texture resolutions and initially having aim assist? And the shoddy lobbies (which I hope was demo only)? This is a studio that tried to push the limits of technology and then they started throwing around piracy as the reason the PC platform was bad (this was somewhere when Crysis 2 was announced for consoles as well). If the former, well, that's fine and all, but you can't blame Crytek for wanting to make more money. They've got a lot of mouths to feed. I did not realize that the more money you earn, the larger the mouths of your families become. Then I think all the developers should go indie so we don't use up all of Earth's resources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 I did not realize that the more money you earn, the larger the mouths of your families become. Then I think all the developers should go indie so we don't use up all of Earth's resources. If you want to be a pedant about it then they bought Free Radical, therefore more employees, more mouths, more infratstructure and more costs. I never actually said that there was a correlation between Buccal Cavity Capacity and Net Profits of Crytek GmbH, let alone implied that the link was in any way causal. My intention was to remind people that "Crytek" is not some big machine that sits in Germany churning out PC games. It is a company made up of people. These people need money to live. If they get more money by selling to console and PC owners than they do just selling to PC owners, then yay for them. It should not be considered a "stain" on their reputation that they expanded their market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyber Rat Posted April 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 My intention was to remind people that "Crytek" is not some big machine that sits in Germany churning out PC games. It is a company made up of people. These people need money to live. If they get more money by selling to console and PC owners than they do just selling to PC owners, then yay for them. It should not be considered a "stain" on their reputation that they expanded their market. We are often reminded that the game industry is composed of people, but I rarely see the mention of consumers being human beings. Was it not this very thread that mentioned a few dozen times how gaming is a luxury and service, and anything but a right? If it is a service and/or product, it competes on the market with other releases. Games are expensive, you can't buy them all. When a product lacks basic functions like advanced video settings, when it is a step backwards from a previous installment, a consumer should talk with his wallet. You know why people keep saying Crytek stained their reputation by moving to consoles? Because everyone expected the PC version to suffer to some degree from being multiplatform. Did it need to happen? No. Did it happen? It did to a certain degree. (And I am not even considering the fact that Crysis went to a more closed environment since it's better to handle on consoles.) So wait, they have mouths to feed so I should just forgive them and go with whatever they release? I'm sorry TN, but I don't get some of the stuff you say. When someone points out how fucking unfair EA's Eula is, you say "That's business." But when someone says how they've written off Crytek because a platform which got them started was given a port treatment, you try and go with feelings saying how Crytek has mouths to feed? It's businees. You release something that makes consumers unsatisfied, you don't get consumers to buy the game. Developers don't owe you anything, but you sure as hell don't owe anything to developers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 I'm sorry TN, but I don't get some of the stuff you say. When someone points out how fucking unfair EA's Eula is, you say "That's business." But when someone says how they've written off Crytek because a platform which got them started was given a port treatment, you try and go with feelings saying how Crytek has mouths to feed? It's businees. You release something that makes consumers unsatisfied, you don't get consumers to buy the game. Developers don't owe you anything, but you sure as hell don't owe anything to developers. 1. I suggested that the implication that Crytek cannot make a good PC exclusive title on the basis that their multiplatform title was of a lower standard was a somewhat hasty judgement that should perhaps be held until a PC exclusive title is even announced. 2. I said that saying that Crytek are "tainted" just because they went for a bigger market was unfair. These two statements are independent. I'm not sure why you read them as one thing. Everyone is of course free to spend their money as they wish. If you feel that Crytek has "abandoned" you because they made a multi platform game, and that as such you will not buy a PC exclusive from them, fine, make your stand. Not sure how not buying a PC exclusive will show them the error of their ways though. If you think that making a multiplatform game that falls short of what you expect means that you don't want to buy a PC exclusive title (that hasn't been announced, may not exist or may be the greatest game of all time) also, fine, if somewhat illogical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 We've kinda really gone off topic here. Anywho, Crysis 2 PC version was a fair dip in quality over both the original Crysis and PC games in general. And I don't see how it's really excusable. Why does it have to be a exclusive title for us to expect at least the very basics of a PC title? They already had much of the things in place from the first game. Bulletstorm, a game that made no qualms on been a console port to the point the PC demo came out a month after release, is a better PC game than Crysis 2. And they didn't even come out n say how PC is totally the lead platform n shiz. Why should it be all groovy and excusable to shit on the PC version in multi-platform titles, especially when the company making the game has clearly shown they can make a PC game n a half? If the console version said "press F to open hatch", had stupidly high res textures that ground the game to a halt, or whatever, I'm pretty sure console guys would be up in arms. But for some reason devs are fine to make the console version cool, and just shit out a PC version and expect cash for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 Anywho, Crysis 2 PC version was a fair dip in quality over both the original Crysis and PC games in general. Bit of a sweeping statement that. I agree it was a dip in quality over Crysis, but still it's far from the worse game released on PC this year. And I don't see how it's really excusable. Why does it have to be a exclusive title for us to expect at least the very basics of a PC title? They already had much of the things in place from the first game. Bulletstorm, a game that made no qualms on been a console port to the point the PC demo came out a month after release, is a better PC game than Crysis 2. And they didn't even come out n say how PC is totally the lead platform n shiz. I'm certainly not saying that it should be applauded. It's definitely a case for voting with your wallet and not getting the game. Why should it be all groovy and excusable to shit on the PC version in multi-platform titles, especially when the company making the game has clearly shown they can make a PC game n a half? If the console version said "press F to open hatch", had stupidly high res textures that ground the game to a halt, or whatever, I'm pretty sure console guys would be up in arms. But for some reason devs are fine to make the console version cool, and just shit out a PC version and expect cash for it. Firstly, this would never happen. MS and Sony would (and do) pitch a fit if you use the wrong button names. As to performance, making a game ugly on PC is not the same as making it unplayable on console. Finally, lurching back on topic. People shouldn't use the shoddy port as an excuse to pirate the game (not saying anyone here has) any more than Crytek should use piracy as the scapegoat for going multiplat in the first place. If the game is so offensive to PC gamers, then leave it to rot, otherwise you'll just get more of the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgamemnonV2 Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 I've certainly not purchased (or pirated) Crysis 2 despite being a fan of the first game. Crytek has just said or done way too many negative things in regards to PC gamers (like making the beta a console-exclusive) that I really have no interest in their games any longer. So I suppose there's "voting with your wallet" in action. I've still never liked that term, however. How will companies ever learn from their mistakes if the only feedback they get is silence? Anyway, I don't think exclusivity is the answer. Them going multi-platform is just fine--as long as each game the platform is on works as flawless as possible. As I've said, as I haven't played Crysis 2 in any iteration, I can't speak truly on that detail, but if it's anything like the horrid Halo 2 port, then the argument on whether developers shclup their PC ports or not really doesn't have to be made if it's already made for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 Didn't say it was the worst, just it's a fair dip below the original. Surely it's fair to expect at the very least a comparable product in the sequel? And it's quite possible that it's not the worst PC game of the year, doesn't mean it still can't be bad. Yeah my example was a bit iffy. About the closest I can think of as an actual example is that Need for Speed (hey isn't that an EA franchise? ) that had the xbox live messages in PS3 version or whatever (also I think COD map pack had references to XBL as well too). And people rightly complain. But you do the same on PC and it's elitist entitlement, or it's okay cos there's not just one model of PC, and I guess as implied from your response, because there's no MS or Sony equivalent to tell them to keep up the quality. Are devs really that bad that they need the manufacturers with cattle prods to make sure that the version of the game has the correct on-screen buttons to match the controller of the platform it's on? Generally folks pirate ports just to see how bad/good it is. If it's a perfect port it's worth a buy. If it's a shitty port then you know to steer clear. E.g I pirated Crysis 2, it was trash port, not buying it. I pirated Bulletstorm, as I mentioned it's a decent port. I'll be picking it up over summer hopefully. Look, PC multi-plat titles tend to come out the ginger step-child of the bunch, usually late, buggy, missing basic pc features, etc, so PC gamers have just reacted in kind. If there's a industry wide up tick in the quality of PC ports then people would have less reason to be unsure if the game they're being asked to dump £35 on is going to work or not.* When you buy a game you shouldn't be having to get community made config editors and importing textures from the first game to get it up to scratch. *which as a generally high class PC developer for the past decade Crytek actually had the get out of jail free card on if they're were going to be making a decent PC version. Then it all went a bit pete tong to the point it's more than likely tarnished their reputation of the past decade of games with PC gamers for a fair few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 Are devs really that bad that they need the manufacturers with cattle prods to make sure that the version of the game has the correct on-screen buttons to match the controller of the platform it's on? Yes. They are. Then again, Sony have been known to throw their toys because "START button" was written "Start button". Seriously. They love the ALL-CAPS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 I don't like it when games say "START button." It makes me feel like I'm being yelled at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.