Piracy

[fuchikoma]

Explain to me the logic where simply the act of playing a game will support a developer.

I guess hypothetically it makes sense - if you like the game, you'll talk about it and promote it, as opposed to simply not being in the loop about it. I think calculating how much you help them would be as hard as calculating how much you may have lost to piracy though.

 

Still, I'd accept that it's marginally better for them if you pirate it than ignore it... as they say, "no publicity is bad publicity." It's better to be liked and unsupported than to be totally irrelevant.

Edited December 10, 2011 by fuchikoma

[Cyber Rat]

Fuchikoma pretty much got it.

[TheFlyingGerbil]

You're also playing into their hands by being part of the statistic that justifies in their minds their DRM measures.

[Johnny]

This line of thought is, I feel, slightly silly.

 

Just because I am not willing to give a company my money, does not mean I will go to every possible measure in order to ensure that nobody else does. When speaking of such a game to my friends, I would point out the reason why I did not buy it, and even recommend they do the same. But, I would not attempt any further manipulation. If other people want to buy the game, that's entirely on them, and I would not wish to try to obscure anything I know about the game from them in order to prevent it. If the game is good, I would say so despite the other misgivings I have about it.

 

That does not, however, mean I would ever feel right about personally giving money to them.

[Cyber Rat]

So, you are disgusted enough with CD Project not to give them money, but you're still willing to support them by other means?

[Johnny]

I can not name a single thing within gaming that is more disgusting to me than these "pay up or else" schemes and I will not personally give them any money.

 

I will not, however, try to manipulate other people to do the same. If someone asks me about the game in question, I will say what I have to say, including discussing the quality of the game itself, and warning people that paying for the game equates to giving money to a company that partakes in these pay up or else schemes. I do not see this as "supporting the developers", I see this as not being a manipulative douchewaffle towards my friends. Other people's money is their business and if they want to spend it on The Witcher 2, or whatever else, that is not really my business.

[Cyber Rat]

You're missing the point. It's not about you manipulating your friends by lying to them. Just by playing the game and having any input about it, whether positive or negative, you are helping. If you really want to show your disgust with the policy of a developer, take both your time and money elsewhere. Don't want to support the Witcher? Go play Skyrim. Your life won't be worse if you don't play a single popular game.

[Johnny]

It's incredibly farfetched that me pirating the game will have any significant positive effect.

[Cyber Rat]

As farfetched as saying that you never would have bought a game were it not possible to pirate it?

[deanb]

If you pirate the game it at the very least shows interest (and piracy rates tend to scale with metacritc ratings). So this enforces that at the very least there is a much wider market and interest in this kind of game than purely those who purchased it. Now should a game get just enough sales to be financially viable, but not enough to straight away warrant a sequel piracy numbers indicate an untapped market. This does mean that in their next version they'll attempt to grab those who pirated too. Most developers take the route of being DRM heavy, CD Projekt take the route of being DRM-free (And bunch of extras on top). So the net positive effect is that 1. sequel gets made, people rejoice. 2. depending on developer it comes with more incentives too for the legit buyer.

[Johnny]

So... Are we now arguing that piracy DOES support the developer in a significant manner?

Well, I'll keep that in mind next time someone gets angry at me for not buying a game.

 

Oh, wait, that already happened in regards to this very game on the previous page.

[fuchikoma]

Haha... the speculation is dragging it back and forth on this issue... That's why I keep such an ambiguous view on it. Casting speculation aside and going only on evidence, at best I can say "piracy doesn't necessarily do harm unless it's an alternative to buying." Beyond that, it's personal opinion.

 

I'd accept that piracy often leads to secondary benefits like promoting the game or buying the sequel. I'd also accept that the ability to pirate probably makes a lot of people lazier and more willing to think up excuses to pirate games they might have bought. I'd say that customers who CAN pirate with minimal risk probably SHOULD, either to get a DRM-free copy or to try out the game in what's not a staged, cropped highlight reel demo. A $60 lottery, where if you win, you get $60 worth and if you lose, you get literally unplayable crap is stacked completely against the customer. At the same time, I'd also say these companies have the RIGHT, and even the OBLIGATION to their shareholders to stop the pirates with what means they can, so long as it doesn't alienate paying customers. In short, it's a complicated issue and it's not easy to just draw a line and say one party is right and the other is wrong, especially looking back at the evolution that brought us to this point.

[SomTervo]

So... Are we now arguing that piracy DOES support the developer in a significant manner?

Well, I'll keep that in mind next time someone gets angry at me for not buying a game.

 

Oh, wait, that already happened in regards to this very game on the previous page.

 

Haha, excellent resolution.

 

The problem here seems to be that the 'playing it alone helps the developer' argument is very, insanely contextual and spectral, and is a very personal, abstract thing. Money is science. It's concretely measurable. However liking a game is qualitative, not quantitative, so it's measured on a whole spectrum; including how likely you would be to tell your friends (some people might adore a game and never mention it, thus never helping the developer practically), whereas buying or not buying the game is binary. 'The game has been bought or it has not'.

 

However, I have to say, playing a game and liking it does positively support the developer in an abstract way. But it's a completely arbitrary concept; equally the person might hate the game and it would detract from the developer yet further. The idea is so abstract that the effects will often be invisible, but a positive or negative outcome will always take place.

 

The whole thing is just like the music piracy analogy; if I download a band's album because I can't afford it but want to hear it, and I like it, I'll probably tell all my friends about it and spread the word. I've never bought an Animal Collective album. But I've turned at least 10 people onto them, who have individually gone on to buy their own copies, or have seen them live, thus supporting them. It's not dissimilar to spreading the word for a game you've pirated.

Edited December 11, 2011 by kenshi_ryden

[deanb]

So... Are we now arguing that piracy DOES support the developer in a significant manner?

No, I'm arguing that..

 

me pirating the game will have any significant positive effect.

 

Money is what supports a developer, any moron knows that. But piracy can serve as a positive metric. If people are pirating a game it implies there's at least an interest. I can't see Barbies Pony Adventures topping the most pirated lists.

[Johnny]

Quite true, Kenshi.

 

It is also worth noting that the gamers I know are generally people who also care about these things and would in turn not pay for a game where the developers are pulling pay up or else schemes.

Maybe if Dean or Cyber Rat was pirating it, they'd tell all their friends about how amazing it is and convince friends to buy it. That's not what is likely to happen in my case at all.

[deanb]

Just to throw this one out there:

Witcher 2 came out in May

This news of the pirate crackdown comes now in December.

 

What on earth was your reasoning for pirating the game in the preceding 7 months before you even knew they were participating in a practice you dislike?

 

And no, as has been kinda clearly stated (many times) I buy the games I like. I try before I buy. I thought that was rather well known by now. I don't come up with some pansy reasoning to back up why I pirated a game. PC version of Arkham City was delayed time n time again. I gave up and cancelled my order. I didn't go "well clearly the developer doesn't respect PC gamers so I'll pirate it when it comes out".

 

Because, and I quote; I have SOME moral standards

[Johnny]

I initially tried The Witcher 2 because I was unsure if I'd like it or not. After a while I decided I did in fact not like it; there were too many issues with bugs and finicky controls and the difficulty curve for me to enjoy it. I decided not to buy it and just stopped playing.

 

Then the 2.0 patch came out and I tried that as well and decided that "ah, this is good stuff, they fixed my major problems, I'll put it on my to buy list" and was planning to pick it up in the christmas sale. Why wait for the christmas sale? Because I don't have money to shell out on games that aren't highly discounted.

 

I don't know why you're acting like I'm attacking you. I'm not. I was posing a complete hypothetical to illustrate that anyone who doesn't know me irl would have problems extrapolating how likely it is that my friends would pick up the game after I pirated it.

[Hot Heart]

p.s. Arkham City for GOTY. Yeah!

[Thorgi Duke of Frisbee]

I thought we had decided that piracy itself wasn't an immoral thing...

[deanb]

I'm not acting like you're attacking me, or at least not meaning to. Does somewhat seem like you ignored my last two posts though when you lumped me in with Cyber. He n Fuchikoma are making somewhat separate points to mine, I was just latching onto the "positive side effects of piracy" thing (from a consumer stand-point. Another thing to pick up: I'm pro-consumer).

 

I do find it extreme silly, (so silly that it needs to be said in the style of John Cleese), that you'd enjoy the game, you'd had enough interest in the game and franchise to even give it a second chance. And you've decided you'll purchase it. And then one snippet of news and you'll decide that it's not worth your custom at all.

 

Just feels like it's scraping the barrel a bit. I've never really been one for the whole "this company makes shitty ports/uses too much DRM/tests its games on animals, thus I'll pirate their games" camp. Seems a bit silly. I just don't buy them. Seems simple enough.

[Johnny]

I didn't suddenly decide to pirate it because of this. I can't change what's been done months before. I initially intended to buy it, as I've stated. My intent to buy it has then changed because I think what CD Projekt is doing is comparable to blackmail. I think it is INSANELY wrong. And I can not with good conscience pay for a game where the money goes to developers who do that.

 

I find it funny that what CD Projekt is doing seems to be fine with people because they made a good game, but I'm figuratively speaking on trial for not wanting to give them money for it.

[MasterDex]

I missed out on all this discussion but I think it's important to distnguish between CDProjekt and CDProjekt RED. The latter is the development studio while the former is upper management. CDPR were the ones that make the decision to get rid of securom and after they did, without informing Bandai Namco that they were going to do that, CDProjekt, the upper management, had to step in and make amends. This is really what this is here. Bandai Namco got scared at the thought of no DRM across all versions and backed CDProjekt into a corner. Backtracking and adding bac in the securom protection wasn't going to work so what alternative are they left with?

 

Regardless of our views on copyright, piracy, etc, I think we all have to accept the fact that businesses DO have a vested interest in protecting their copyright, or at the least, being seen to do so. I have to agree with the others here in thinking that denying money to the developers that you've said yourself you felt they deserved until this point seems to be scraping the barrell for reasons not to hand over money for the game.

 

By now, people have had enough time to decide whether or not the game was worth their money. Although what CDP is doing is heavy-handed, it's not entirely unmeritted and regardless of that, it's something that plenty of recording companies, movie studios, etc have done - and at much greater levels. Considering all that, I don't see the justification for denying CDPR the money that they deserve.

 

A line has to be drawn somewhere in regards to piracy. You can't use practices you don't agree with to always make a case for piracy. Sometimes, like in life, you've just got to take the good with the bad.

[Thursday Next]

@Johnny: The reason people are taking issue with you is because you say that you disagree with the practices that the company engage in, but you still use their products. If you're going to make a moral stand against a company's practices then you ought to carry that through and boycott their products altogether.

 

Personally, I simply do not get this concept that you have a right (or as it seems sometimes a duty) to consume everything that every developer puts out there. Would it have been so difficult to say "These guys suck, they and their products can all go to hell."?

 

It would make your argument seem more like righteous indignation and less like jumping on the first flimsy reason you find to get an already reasonably priced title for free.

[Cyber Rat]

@Johnny: The reason people are taking issue with you is because you say that you disagree with the practices that the company engage in, but you still use their products. If you're going to make a moral stand against a company's practices then you ought to carry that through and boycott their products altogether.

 

Exactly. I can get behind pirating a game for demoing purposes, but playing the game, deciding to buy it and then changing your mind after a scare-tactic? People are supposed to believe your self-righteous reasons after that?

[Thorgi Duke of Frisbee]

@Johnny: The reason people are taking issue with you is because you say that you disagree with the practices that the company engage in, but you still use their products. If you're going to make a moral stand against a company's practices then you ought to carry that through and boycott their products altogether.

 

Exactly. I can get behind pirating a game for demoing purposes, but playing the game, deciding to buy it and then changing your mind after a scare-tactic? People are supposed to believe your self-righteous reasons after that?

You're implying that he's fibbing to get games for free. While I do not like it when someone decides to play through a game to completion and then not pay the creator, Johnny's hardly the kind of person that would lie to make his actions appear to be justified. He may do something that I don't like, but he's not going to be dishonest about it.