[QUOTE=halflife_123;40032865]People could wait for reviews from trusted publications to see if the game is worth buying. Plus demos are a thing of the past because they don't usually represent the game very much and it's a bit of a hassle to actually put one together.[/QUOTE]
except we have more than enough proof that "trusted" publications undergo both review embargos and heavy bribing.
[QUOTE=Roger Waters;40033058]except we have more than enough proof that "trusted" publications undergo both review embargos and heavy bribing.[/QUOTE]
That is why you should stick to good publications and not the likes of IGN. Indie reviews are also useful.
[QUOTE=halflife_123;40033143]That is why you should stick to good publications and not the likes of IGN. Indie reviews are also useful.[/QUOTE]
Well from what understand from my favorite trusted reviewers. IGN has sign's a contract when getting alot of previews that require them to only publish positive's. I wouldn't go as far as to say that they're bribed but games journalism and games criticism is pretty bad at the moment. The question's asked by them are stupid and they're willing to give up integrity for some front seats.
To me, piracy is simply part of a free internet. for me, the free internet is similar to free speech.
If you want a completely free country with complete freedom of speech, you must tolerate racists, sexists, people who abuse, offend and talk about anything. If we want to have a country where there is TRUE freedom of speech, these things MUST be tolerated. I.e. you cannot be punished for saying them, though they may be frowned upon.
I use this argument for a free internet. If we want a true FREE internet, we have to tolerate things like piracy, otherwise it basically becomes another form of censorship, make it not a free internet.
[QUOTE=Robertbrownlo;40056408]To me, piracy is simply part of a free internet. for me, the free internet is similar to free speech.
If you want a completely free country with complete freedom of speech, you must tolerate racists, sexists, people who abuse, offend and talk about anything. If we want to have a country where there is TRUE freedom of speech, these things MUST be tolerated. I.e. you cannot be punished for saying them, though they may be frowned upon.
I use this argument for a free internet. If we want a true FREE internet, we have to tolerate things like piracy, otherwise it basically becomes another form of censorship, make it not a free internet.[/QUOTE]
I don't even...
[QUOTE=Robertbrownlo;40056408]To me, piracy is simply part of a free internet. for me, the free internet is similar to free speech.[/QUOTE]
A free country doesn't mean free stuff, [I]except for welfare.[/I] :dance:
Internet material is property. When you sell a game online you are selling property. Private property is something to be protected by the government.
EA/Maxis is handling piracy pretty bad tough (SimCity). They pretty much ruin the legitimate customers experience to stop Piracy.
I have to agree with the original poster on this. While games may not seem that expensive (at least if you have a job), it's still nice to know what you're getting before you get it. I torrented Skyrim either during the Steam Summer Sale or Steam Winter Sale of 2011 just to see if my computer would run it properly. I didn't have a good computer at the time, and I was skeptical of buying any new video game when I should instead put my money towards a new computer. I saw that Skyrim actually ran decently, so what I did was deleted the torrent and purchased Skyrim twenty minutes later.
I'm not going to get any deeper into my pirate history because to do so would probably be a violation of the rules, but I can see what the original poster is saying by his post. I think companies should offer a demo, either with reduced features or full features for a limited time. This actually helps them out more.
Now, offering a demo of course doesn't mean that it will stop piracy. People will still want to do whatever they can to not pay such a small amount for a game. But demos would still lower the piracy rate of a game somewhat.
[QUOTE=Drachen;40061821]Now, offering a demo of course doesn't mean that it will stop piracy. People will still want to do whatever they can to not pay such a small amount for a game. But demos would still lower the piracy rate of a game somewhat.[/QUOTE]
Do you have any sources to back that up? You can't say that it's common sense because a game, World of Goo, which was released with a demo had a piracy rate estimated to be around 90% ([url]http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2008/11/acrying-shame-world-of-goo-piracy-rate-near-90/[/url]).
I mean, I agree with you in theory and I believe developers and publishers are partly responsible for piracy because of certain things they do or not do, but you can't just say it [I]would still lower the piracy rate of a game somewhat[/I]. Maybe with the assumption of ceteris paribus, but that's impossible and would be a silly assumption to make.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;40062790]Do you have any sources to back that up? You can't say that it's common sense because a game, World of Goo, which was released with a demo had a piracy rate estimated to be around 90% ([url]http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2008/11/acrying-shame-world-of-goo-piracy-rate-near-90/[/url]).
I mean, I agree with you in theory and I believe developers and publishers are partly responsible for piracy because of certain things they do or not do, but you can't just say it [I]would still lower the piracy rate of a game somewhat[/I]. Maybe with the assumption of ceteris paribus, but that's impossible and would be a silly assumption to make.[/QUOTE]
Well if you think about it, just as I said, some people pirate to try before you buy. If they don't like it, they won't keep the torrent. If it can't run on their computer, they won't torrent it. If there is a demo to begin with, you reduce the need to torrent it.
Here's a great video by Extra Credits which explains why demos aren't always a good thing.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QM6LoaqEnY[/media]
[QUOTE=halflife_123;40063655]Here's a great video by Extra Credits which explains why demos aren't always a good thing.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QM6LoaqEnY[/media][/QUOTE]
Despite my absolute disagreement with his love for microtransactions and pay-as-you-go games, I found that video to be informing. I personally don't operate that way, but I do believe the mass majority of gamers do.
[QUOTE=Drachen;40063460]Well if you think about it, just as I said, some people pirate to try before you buy. If they don't like it, they won't keep the torrent. If it can't run on their computer, they won't torrent it. If there is a demo to begin with, you reduce the need to torrent it.[/QUOTE]
No, what I'm going on about is that you're claiming that demos would definitely reduce piracy and not providing any sources to back up your statement, which goes against Mass Debate's rules.
[quote]If you're debating and state something as a fact - if challenged you need to produce proof. If you can't you get banned.[/quote]
Which is why I'm asking for you to provide proof to back up statements.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;40063951]No, what I'm going on about is that you're claiming that demos would definitely reduce piracy, which is making a statement of fact that goes against Mass Debate's rules.
Which is why I'm asking for you to provide proof to back up statements.[/QUOTE]
I never meant to state it as a fact. It's pure speculation.
[QUOTE=Drachen;40064009]I never meant to state it as a fact. It's pure speculation.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Drachen]But demos [b]would[/b] still lower the piracy rate of a game somewhat.[/QUOTE]
You're not choosing the best words in your statements then.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;40064041]You're not choosing the best words in your statements then.[/QUOTE]
Should have said could. My bad.
[QUOTE=MetalGear;36722520]I would like to say first. That my point is not to encourage piracy at all, but to look at it as, maybe a business opportunity. This is strictly opinion and probably would never happen, but I would like to hear others opinions about it.
Personally I think that if video game company really wants to sell video games, they should release the game, much like a demo, but more then that. Give us features that are true to your word, example being Todd Howard and his so called "features" that are explained in this video [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ic6dKnv3WdU&feature=player_embedded#[/url]! but some of them being interesting, and bragged about, never made it in the game. But that's a getting into something completely different, again just a small example.
So back to selling video games. Most companies do release some demos. Mostly through steam now. But how much of the content that they give you, is it that interesting?
That's when, in my opinion, people go to piracy because they want all the features and maps, weapons, whatever the game has. Why not put a lot of those things into the demos, maybe like a pre-install and unlock a lot of gameplay, and the game actually be like that through out. Most demos do sometimes show case "EPIC" moments, but it's one of the very few moments in the game, unless it's a triple AAA title like RRD. Which has no demo at all.
But that's not to say piracy is not all that bad. AND I DO NOT ENCOURAGE PIRACY. But for an example, let's say Joe Macaroni pirates a game, He likes the game, he likes the content of the game and he's convinced, so he buys the actual game. How many people actually buy the game because of piracy, what convinced them through piracy to actually buy the game? because they weren't convinced by the demo maybe? or simply by videos and words?[/QUOTE]
You know that piracy was one key element of Game of Thrones success.
That saved me from buying a game I thought was not worth it (Bioshock Infinite)
I am all for "Try before you buy"
Just saying, with piracy the developers almost never lose out on the money because the people that pirated the game or claimed it was try before you buy likely wouldn't have bought the game anyway
I was really into buying bioshock infinite, but was almost certain I could not run it on my computer. I torrented it for the benefit of the doubt, turns out it ran on very low settings at 25-30 fps. Played a little through it to make sure, bought it 2 days later when I went out. Everything and everyone said I wouldn't be able to run the game at all. Having a blast playing the game, I regret nothing. I try not to make a habit of it. I did the same thing with the release of metro 2033 on a different computer. I feel companies should release some sort of tech demo to see if the game would run on consumer's computers at least. Definitely wont stop pirating, but I'm sure it would be a help to anyone questioning if games would run on their computer without having to pirate the full game just to answer that.
[QUOTE=t-man;40177082] Definitely wont stop pirating, but I'm sure it would be a help to anyone questioning if games would run on their computer without having to pirate the full game just to answer that.[/QUOTE]
Alot of big market games in 2006-2009 did this, Bioshock, Fallout, etc.
It's only the small Indy developers that do it now, not the large ones. Bioshock Infinite for example did not while the original Bioshock did.
Here's an interesting video on that subject.
[video=youtube;hXaybWK_KT0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXaybWK_KT0&feature=player_embedded[/video]
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;40177596]Alot of big market games in 2006-2009 did this, Bioshock, Fallout, etc.
It's only the small Indy developers that do it now, not the large ones. Bioshock Infinite for example did not while the original Bioshock did.
Here's an interesting video on that subject.
[video=youtube;hXaybWK_KT0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXaybWK_KT0&feature=player_embedded[/video][/QUOTE]
I wasn't really going towards demos- that video does make quite a bit of sense though. More so something more on the technical side, a simple stress test. There was a video test that came with lost coast if I recall. Bottom line, a way to more accurately test the base performance of the game (not how good the gameplay is) to see if it will even run on their build.
This would benefit more so consumers with budget computers such as myself who are wanting to buy games but really don't know how well the game would run/ if it would even start at all. It would be nice if big companies nowadays did this as they used to like you said, doubt it would happen though.
Sorry if I just basically repeat what I said in my previous comment, I'm getting tired
[QUOTE=t-man;40177979] doubt it would happen though.[/QUOTE]
Well it's not really profitable to do so, because of pirating. I also don't trust Demo's anymore because of Colonial marines.
Maybe a collaborative tool should be made then to more accurately judge computer specs for running the game at the bare minimum without getting 5 frames per second. A site where a combination of user and company data would tell this.
CanIrunit 9/10 times said there was no way I could run a game, yet on the lowest-medium settings it would still run fine.
[QUOTE=Zero Vector;36732045]I never buy games unless I absolutely have to to play them (uncracked multiplayer games). I think most of piracy is not for the purpose of trying the game before buying it, but just to get the game without paying for it. I actually bought Modern Warfare 2 on Steam, and later cracked it to play on AlterIWNet because the community was better.
I must add that $60 for a video game, to me, is completely outrageous.[/QUOTE]
Come to Australia, look at the prices of games over here. Modern Warfare 2 is $90 on Steam in Australia, bullshit for a game that old.
[QUOTE=h3inrich;40214057]Come to Australia, look at the prices of games over here. Modern Warfare 2 is $90 on Steam in Australia, bullshit for a game that old.[/QUOTE]
Well this is because Australians are willing to happily hand that much money over for a game. This price difference isn't because of stupid regulation like it is in other countries. It's the fault of greedy businesses and weak consumers.
Why is 60$ for a game too much? A new movie is like 20$, is only 2 hours max while many games will probably be used for dozens if not hundreds of hours. The average single player experience also seems to be about 6-8 hours [no statistics, just experience] so through the math the experience is worth it.
[QUOTE=t-man;40177082]I was really into buying bioshock infinite, but was almost certain I could not run it on my computer. I torrented it for the benefit of the doubt, turns out it ran on very low settings at 25-30 fps. Played a little through it to make sure, bought it 2 days later when I went out. Everything and everyone said I wouldn't be able to run the game at all. Having a blast playing the game, I regret nothing. I try not to make a habit of it. I did the same thing with the release of metro 2033 on a different computer. I feel companies should release some sort of tech demo to see if the game would run on consumer's computers at least. Definitely wont stop pirating, but I'm sure it would be a help to anyone questioning if games would run on their computer without having to pirate the full game just to answer that.[/QUOTE]I believe that you are thinking of a demo/trial.
EDIT:
I mean you can use a demo/trial/beta to serve the purpose of benchmarking.
I always purchase all my indie games, for those AAA blockbuster games or in general games made by big developers i hang towards pirating it, a lot of times it happens i really enjoy the game and then i buy it from Budgetgaming for like 20-30 euro (on release), i always want a physical box..
Found this post on /v/, it brings up a lot of good points.
Extreme case: If everyone pirated games, no one would make games.
Realistic case: If a certain portion of sales are lost to piracy, then less money will be spent making video games. Piracy doesn't just take money from fatcats, it causes those fatcats to invest less money in games. Single-player PC games, especially. Piracy therefore makes games worse.
Many of you hate DRM policies, since they tend to harm honest customers. I get that. But many of you don't seem to consider the fact that piracy also (indirectly) harms honest customers. Failing to take that into account will cause you to systemically undervalue DRM policies.
So a DRM strategy that creates a minor nuisance for gamers could ultimately benefit them overall. It is no longer obvious that Always-on, for example, is harmful on the whole. I really have no idea how great the benefit is. It would be supremely arrogant of me to claim that I do. I don't trust my judgment to decide correctly whether any given DRM strategy is bad.
So who should decide? I think EA should. Not because they're nice. We've seen what happens to economies that rely solely on niceness. Rather, EA should decide because they have the incentive to choose correctly. If people cool-headedly vote with their wallets, and Always-on creates too big of a nuisance, EA's resulting loss in income will give them roughly adequate incentive to cease that strategy. On the other hand, if having to have a connection turns out to be not as big of an atrocity as people claim it is (I mean, we have no problem paying for multiplayer-only games, right?) and the reduction of piracy is large enough as to be beneficial for society, then EA will continue to implement it. Games will become better overall.
So basically, vote with your wallet or don't bother at all.
I don't know if that has been posted yet, but it's relevant:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBmJay_qdNc[/media]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
