Piracy? or Try before you buy? - General

[QUOTE=wholegamer;40427012]Piracy is piracy, no matter what perspective you look at it. Technically it is also robbery, robbing the company of the funds they are entitled to. Want to try a game? Get the public demo.[/QUOTE] Most of the time there isn't a demo.

[QUOTE=kmlkmljkl;40432307]Most of the time there isn't a demo.[/QUOTE] OK. Then you don't get to try it.

[QUOTE=David29;40430333]Newsflash: the ability to try a product before you buy it is a privilige - not a right.[/QUOTE] I never said otherwise. I'm just saying all they're doing is encouraging me to torrent it because they can't be assed to remove 80% of the content and add an end-screen or something. [editline]26th April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40438462]OK. Then you don't get to try it.[/QUOTE] So I get to waste $40+ on a game I'm [I]hoping[/I] is good? Yeah, that's not happening. I've got far more important things to spend it on right now. [editline]26th April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Antdawg;40427123]Did you check my link above your post? World of Goo had a 90% piracy rate yet it had a demo. Why is that? Just because you would try the demo doesn't mean all pirates would. It won't stop pirates from being cheap and still pirating the game anyways. Trying before buying is a stupid concept used by pirates to justify what they do, a game having a demo doesn't necessarily cause piracy rates to decrease.[/QUOTE] Why would I give a fuck about what other people do? I'm voicing [I]my[/I] opinion. Beyond this point, I'll just leave. If I stay in these things they tend to be long and drawn out to the point where I lose any interest at all.

[QUOTE=gk99;40439092]So I get to waste $40+ on a game I'm [I]hoping[/I] is good? Yeah, that's not happening. I've got far more important things to spend it on right now. [/QUOTE] I see this point come up again quite frequently. The answer is yes. When you buy something, anything, there's the risk that you're going to regret that purchase and a lot of the time you won't be reimbursed. That's how it's been forever. It's up to the customer to do their research and make clever decisions, including critically thinking about what companies are advertising and filtering out the hyperbole; even if that means waiting a week or more after the launch day to suss out any problems that people report. The notion that digital media has to be a completely risk-free purchase before any money is put down, even to the point of experiencing the whole thing multiple times*, doesn't hold up. *because how will I know that I won't get bored of it after the third playthrough? I'll have wasted my money if it doesn't have infinite replay value.

[QUOTE=gk99;40439092]Why would I give a fuck about what other people do? I'm voicing [I]my[/I] opinion. Beyond this point, I'll just leave. If I stay in these things they tend to be long and drawn out to the point where I lose any interest at all.[/QUOTE] Hooray on dodging the question.

[QUOTE=gk99;40439092]So I get to waste $40+ on a game I'm [I]hoping[/I] is good? Yeah, that's not happening. I've got far more important things to spend it on right now.[/QUOTE] So I get to waste $4 on pasta sauce I'm [I]hoping[/I] is good? Yeah, that's not happening. I've got far more important things to spend it on right now. You can say the same exact thing about any product ever.

Most of the problem that comes from 'try before you buy' pirating is that with programs like Steam, there's no way to return it if you don't like it. The vast majority of PC games are sold through Steam, but it offers no refund service. I would much rather pirate a game to try it than to risk my own money on something I am on the fence about, knowing I won't be able to get it back. If the developers don't offer some form of demo (which is fine, not a lot of companies do demos anymore) then I have no way of knowing if I'll enjoy the game. If it's a fairly new game then all I'll really have to get an idea of what the game is like is through gameplay videos. My only options then, are: Buy the game for X dollars and risk not enjoying it, don't do anything at all, or pirate it and try it firsthand. I guess my point is that if it was easier to get a refund, a portion of the reason to pirate games would disappear. [QUOTE=Jabberwocky;40439264]I see this point come up again quite frequently. The answer is yes. When you buy something, anything, there's the risk that you're going to regret that purchase and a lot of the time you won't be reimbursed. That's how it's been forever.[/QUOTE] "That's the risk you take when you buy something" isn't at all justified in relation to video games. I could take any video game I own a hard copy of and take it back to the store I bought it from for at least a partial refund; hell, I could take it to a Gamestop right now and sell it as a used copy. The only place you [I]don't[/I] get refunded is through digital media, and it should not be that way. Nobody likes waiting for charge-backs on their credit card but I'd rather have that than spend sixty bucks on a AAA blockbuster that I don't end up enjoying.

[QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40443273]So I get to waste $4 on pasta sauce I'm [I]hoping[/I] is good? Yeah, that's not happening. I've got far more important things to spend it on right now. You can say the same exact thing about any product ever.[/QUOTE] Then simply don't buy it. Don't steal it just because you consider it overpriced*. *Bear in mind that 'overpriced' is purely a matter of opinion. Furthermore, I wonder how often you conduct extensive research into how much it cost to make the game before you brand it as 'overpriced'.

[QUOTE=Doomish;40443931]"That's the risk you take when you buy something" isn't at all justified in relation to video games. I could take any video game I own a hard copy of and take it back to the store I bought it from for at least a partial refund; hell, I could take it to a Gamestop right now and sell it as a used copy. The only place you [I]don't[/I] get refunded is through digital media, and it should not be that way. Nobody likes waiting for charge-backs on their credit card but I'd rather have that than spend sixty bucks on a AAA blockbuster that I don't end up enjoying.[/QUOTE] Why would you even buy from it then if you know that you might be dissatisfied? That is not a justification to pirate. Just buy a hard copy if you want a refund.

[QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40450758]Why would you even buy from it then if you know that you might be dissatisfied? That is not a justification to pirate. Just buy a hard copy if you want a refund.[/QUOTE] Did you even read? My entire point was that [I]you cannot get a refund through digital services unlike hard-copy media and that is wrong.[/I]

[QUOTE=Doomish;40450896]Did you even read? My entire point was that [I]you cannot get a refund through digital services unlike hard-copy media and that is wrong.[/I][/QUOTE] And I am saying that that is not a reason to complain because you can just buy a hard copy. What you consider right or wrong is irrelevant because you aren't the one selling the product. Is it bad business? Maybe. Maybe it's good business. Who knows? That's not really the discussion though.

[QUOTE=Doomish;40450896]Did you even read? My entire point was that [I]you cannot get a refund through digital services unlike hard-copy media and that is wrong.[/I][/QUOTE] Why do you even deserve a refund? My point was that a risk-free purchase isn't a right. If it even exists, it's a privilege. If you buy a physical copy and don't like it, should the store reimburse you for the time and effort you spent going to the store and buying it? Refunds have always been a goodwill gesture.

[QUOTE=Jabberwocky;40451076]My point was that a risk-free purchase isn't a right. If it even exists, it's a privilege. [/QUOTE] It's a massive dickmove to the customer to not offer it though, and a dissatisfied customer is not a loyal customer. Offering refunds is a matter of trust, it's proving to the customer that your product is good enough that if you're not satisfied then they have not done their job properly. If you don't offer your customer refunds, then your customer has a lot less reason to trust the quality in your product. If the customer can not expect a refund, and they are not offered to try before buy... well then you're untrustworthy enough as a supplier that you should not be surprised when your customer takes other measures to try out your product before deciding to buy, if the customer even thinks you're worth the money with such poor service.

[QUOTE=Simski;40453516]It's a massive dickmove to the customer to not offer it though, and a dissatisfied customer is not a loyal customer. Offering refunds is a matter of trust, it's proving to the customer that your product is good enough that if you're not satisfied then they have not done their job properly. If you don't offer your customer refunds, then your customer has a lot less reason to trust the quality in your product. If the customer can not expect a refund, and they are not offered to try before buy... well then you're untrustworthy enough as a supplier that you should not be surprised when your customer takes other measures to try out your product before deciding to buy, if the customer even thinks you're worth the money with such poor service.[/QUOTE] OK then. Like I said, maybe it's a bad business practice. That doesn't offer an excuse to pirate the game.

I read up on a game prior and post release and when it hits the market i watch part one of a youtube lets play / walkthough of which there is always at least 1. I haven't made a purchase in recent years that i have regretted thanks to that. So in my own opinion, Outside of the 'can I run it' argument, i really can't see a legit reason for pirating a game outside of just wanting something without paying. Now the cost of games is something that's got out of hand I agree but that cost can be avoided by simply waiting for a sale or a price drop.

[QUOTE=Ninja Pirate;40287464]Not going to go through 18 pages and read all replies, but here is my opinion on things. Games cost too much to buy every single title that comes out. Here is how I would price games at launch. Multiplayer Only: $15 USD max Singleplayer Only: $30 USD max Singleplayer+Multiplayer: $40USD - $45 USD max And I emphasizes on the "max." I do not have that much money to spend on video games all of the time. I believe if companies really wanted any money from me, I assume they would just lower their prices. This is my attitude towards big companies who are already in the green 10 times over and are just trying to milking the lower class for everything they are worth. (I know games are optional purchase, but just bear with me.) I fully support smaller companies and indie developers. That being said, they usually have realistic prices anyways, so refer to what I posted before about having the willingness to buy affordable games. tl;dr If you want my money big companies, lower your prices. If not, na na na na boo boo, I will pirate from you.[/QUOTE] $15 for a game you might put 50+ hours into? $30 for a game that, even if you only play through once, will last anywhere from eight to twenty (or more) hours? Seriously? Have you looked at the price of movie tickets per-hour? Or music? Hell, have you ever been to a bar? And then you go on to say that companies have enough money already and can deal with it. Wow. Here's a fun tidbit of information, AAA games cost literally millions of dollars to produce, and if they don't recoup that the company goes out of business. Game developers go bankrupt all the time, or if they're lucky they get bought up by a publisher like Activision or EA. One failure can literally end a developer. It is absolutely not a lucrative industry that would exist with prices being halved. And come on, 'if companies really wanted any money from me, I assume they would just lower their prices'? Oh, I guess if this store didn't want me stealing their products, I assume they would lower their prices. I'm really cheap but still feel like I deserve everything I want, so it's their fault if I take their merchandise without paying. Makes sense. So congratulations, [b]you[/b] are the reason why developers pursue ever more draconian DRM schemes that screw over everyone else. Your sense of entitlement and lack of understanding of how the industry works show that no matter how convenient developers can try to make their games while still remaining profitable, even if they have no DRM and include a demo, there will [i]still[/i] be people who think a multi-million-dollar game should cost less than a decent meal and will pirate it if they can.

[QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40456804]OK then. Like I said, maybe it's a bad business practice. That doesn't offer an excuse to pirate the game.[/QUOTE] Actually that's exactly what it does. The business does not provide the service the customer needs to feel safe buying their product, but pirating does. Why is it not a good excuse? • We can't say it's a bad excuse because you're taking advantage of the supplier, because you can prove neither that the pirate would buy the product if they couldn't pirate it for free, or that the pirate didn't buy the product after pirating it and felt satisfied with its quality. A pirate is not the equivilent of a lost sale. Therefor, the number of people that pirate a product is not an accurate indicator for how many people would have bought it if they couldn't pirate it. • We can't say it's a bad excuse because it's dishonest, because morals are subjective and differ from person to person. • We can't say it's a bad excuse because it's selfish, because that would be hypocritical when holding back on services that would make your customer feel safer buying your product. You get loyal customers by offering good products, good service and availability, and reasonable prices. You get pirates as a result of failing to gain your customers trust. If you aren't loyal to your customer, you can't expect the customer to be loyal to you.

[QUOTE=Simski;40463963]Actually that's exactly what it does. The business does not provide the service the customer needs to feel safe buying their product, but pirating does. Why is it not a good excuse? • We can't say it's a bad excuse because you're taking advantage of the supplier, because you can prove neither that the pirate would buy the product if they couldn't pirate it for free, or that the pirate didn't buy the product after pirating it and felt satisfied with its quality. A pirate is not the equivilent of a lost sale. Therefor, the number of people that pirate a product is not an accurate indicator for how many people would have bought it if they couldn't pirate it.[/QUOTE] Except pirating [b]does[/b] equate to lost sales. A sale is defined as: "sale [seɪl] n 1. (Business / Commerce) the exchange of goods, property, or services for an agreed sum of money or credit" Since you have taken benefit of the game but not provided the agreed sum of money in return, no sale has taken place. Therefore it is a lost sale. [QUOTE=Simski;40463963]• We can't say it's a bad excuse because it's dishonest, because morals are subjective and differ from person to person.[/QUOTE] But some things are universally agreed to be immoral. One of these is theft. It's like if I tried to argue that murder isn't immoral because I say that morals are subjective and I believe I can justify it. [QUOTE=Simski;40463963]• We can't say it's a bad excuse because it's selfish, because that would be hypocritical when holding back on services that would make your customer feel safer buying your product.[/QUOTE] Then, likewise, we can't criticise developers and publishers for plastering their games with shitty DRM. That's the problem with the 'an eye for an eye' belief - you can't take the moral high ground. Besides, like it or not, the customer does not have a right to steal something if what is on offer does not meet his expectations. And this is what is annoying me the most about all these arguments, you talk as if piracy is the acceptable alternative. No - the acceptable alternative is not to buy it. Theft is never an acceptable alternative.

[url=http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/29/the-best-anti-piracy-measure-ever?abthid=517e3e9d10e870267a000002]Pirates get a taste of their own medicine in Game Dev Tycoon.[/url]

"After one day on sale, Greenheart says, 93.6% of players had downloaded the illegal version rather than buying it legally." And yet the game has a demo. I think this has proved that the argument of pirating just to try a game is a load of crap.

[QUOTE=David29;40464193]Except pirating [b]does[/b] equate to lost sales. A sale is defined as: "sale [seɪl] n 1. (Business / Commerce) the exchange of goods, property, or services for an agreed sum of money or credit" Since you have taken benefit of the game but not provided the agreed sum of money in return, no sale has taken place. Therefore it is a lost sale.[/quote] Except you can not prove that the pirate did not buy the product after trying it out, and therefor pirating it was a direct causation of one of the actual sales of the product. Neither can you prove that the pirate would have bought the product if it wasn't available for pirating, therefor just because the product was pirated does not mean that the person who pirated it was a potential customer. [QUOTE=David29;40464193]But some things are universally agreed to be immoral. One of these is theft. It's like if I tried to argue that murder isn't immoral because I say that morals are subjective and I believe I can justify it.[/quote] Except a large amount of people do not consider piracy theft, because you're not stealing the product, you're copying it. Likewise, many people see nothing at all wrong with trying out a product and paying if they feel it's worth the money and not paying if it's not worth their money. Morals are nor universal, and what one person consider justified is not neccesarily what another person consider justified. Guilt tripping pirates is a pretty shit strategy really, because it assumes the pirates feel what they're doing is wrong. They don't. Most of them feel it is what the supplier is doing that's wrong, they are paying evil unto evil. [QUOTE=David29;40464193]Then, likewise, we can't criticise developers and publishers for plastering their games with shitty DRM. That's the problem with the 'an eye for an eye' belief - you can't take the moral high ground. [/QUOTE] An eye for an eye belief is simply the reality of the situation. Perhaps it's not right, but it's the truth. It's how pirates work. If you fuck over your customer, the pirates will fuck you over in return. Either you're loyal to your customer, or you can't expect your customer to be loyal to you. By plastering your products with DRM, you're punishing loyal customers in shit attempts to make things harder for pirates, and usually pirates solve this by making pirates versions without the shitty drm. So DRM is something that often does more harm than good for trying to reject pirates. [QUOTE=David29;40464193]Besides, like it or not, the customer does not have a right to steal something if what is on offer does not meet his expectations. And this is what is annoying me the most about all these arguments, you talk as if piracy is the acceptable alternative. No - the acceptable alternative is not to buy it. Theft is never an acceptable alternative.[/QUOTE] Piracy is not theft. There is no proof that the pirate would buy the product if it couldn't be pirated, or that them pirating the product isn't a direct result of them buying the product. Likewise, you're not taking anything, you're copying it.

[QUOTE=Simski;40465098]An eye for an eye belief is simply the reality of the situation. Perhaps it's not right, but it's the truth. It's how pirates work. If you fuck over your customer, the pirates will fuck you over in return. Either you're loyal to your customer, or you can't expect your customer to be loyal to you. By plastering your products with DRM, you're punishing loyal customers in shit attempts to make things harder for pirates, and usually pirates solve this by making pirates versions without the shitty drm. So DRM is something that often does more harm than good for trying to reject pirates.[/QUOTE] How do you explain games that are released without DRM being pirated then? I've been using this example for my past few posts but no one seems to be taking notice, World of Goo has an incredibly high rate of piracy despite being DRM free, having a demo, being reasonably priced, offered on numerous services and it's not a piece of shit as it has a Metacritic score of 90% etc. Hell, people even pirate the Humble Indie Bundles despite the fact they can pay just 1 cent and it would no longer be pirating. [url]http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2008/11/acrying-shame-world-of-goo-piracy-rate-near-90/[/url] [url]http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/05/Saving-a-penny----pirating-the-Humble-Indie-Bundle[/url] [editline]30th April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Simski;40465098]Piracy is not theft. There is no proof that the pirate would buy the product if it couldn't be pirated, or that them pirating the product isn't a direct result of them buying the product. Likewise, you're not taking anything, you're copying it.[/QUOTE] Just because nothing tangible (physical) was stolen doesn't mean it isn't theft. You can still steal intangible assets, and that is copyright infringement (or in the case of trademarks, then trademark infringement). Would it be ok for me to launch my own digital distribution service and use Valve's Steam logo? Hey, I'm not physically stealing something, I'm only copying it! It's a similar thing for games. You are breaching the copyright of the game, just as I would be breaching the trademark of the logo. Both instances deal with the misuse of an intangible product.

[QUOTE=Simski;40465098]Except you can not prove that the pirate did not buy the product after trying it out, and therefor pirating it was a direct causation of one of the actual sales of the product. Neither can you prove that the pirate would have bought the product if it wasn't available for pirating, therefor just because the product was pirated does not mean that the person who pirated it was a potential customer.[/QUOTE] And neither can you prove that all pirates do go on to buy the game at some point. Since your statement was that piracy does not result in [b]any[/b] lost sales, it would require that in all instances of piracy the pirate would then go on to buy the game - regardless of weather they enjoyed it or not. If even just one person did not do this, then a sale would be lost and your statement would be incorrect. Also, any person who pirates a game was a potential customer. In order to pirate a game you must express a certain degree of interest in the game - regardless of how litte that might be - which makes you a potential customer. Based on this, a situation may well arise in the future where the price of a game is discounted or drops to a level where it is proportional to your level of interest. However, by pirating games you are circumventing this and sales that would have been gained when the game is cheaper are lost. [QUOTE=Simski;40465098]Except a large amount of people do not consider piracy theft, because you're not stealing the product, you're copying it.[/QUOTE] I have explained this before. That's like saying going for a haircut and not paying is not theft because you aren't physically taking anything. The general rule of thumb is thus: if you receive something from a business where you would normally provide monetary compensation - but don't - that is a form of theft. It is not physical theft, but it is steal theft as you are benefitting from someones labour without compensating them in acceptable manner. [QUOTE=Simski;40465098]Likewise, many people see nothing at all wrong with trying out a product and paying if they feel it's worth the money and not paying if it's not worth their money. Morals are nor universal, and what one person consider justified is not neccesarily what another person consider justified.[/QUOTE] Firstly, demos exist for that. No, not all games have demos but demos are not a right. There are also other perfectly good ways of seeing of how good a game is (reviews, videos, etc). Secondly, I have already proven that the 'pirating a game just to try it' is a load of bollocks in my previous post: [QUOTE]"After one day on sale, Greenheart says, 93.6% of players had downloaded the illegal version rather than buying it legally." And yet the game has a demo. I think this has proved that the argument of pirating just to try a game is a load of crap.[/QUOTE] Why was the piracy level so high if a legal demo existed? Clearly the pirates just wanted a free game. And this was an indie developer - a developer which hadn't shit on its customers like EA. There is literally NO 'justification' in this case. [QUOTE=Simski;40465098]Guilt tripping pirates is a pretty shit strategy really, because it assumes the pirates feel what they're doing is wrong. They don't. Most of them feel it is what the supplier is doing that's wrong, they are paying evil unto evil.[/QUOTE] Am I the only one who sees the hillarious irony in this? Pirates not recognising what they are doing as morally wrong, but getting butthurt because they feel developers/publishers are being immoral. My sides... [QUOTE=Simski;40465098]An eye for an eye belief is simply the reality of the situation. Perhaps it's not right, but it's the truth. It's how pirates work. If you fuck over your customer, the pirates will fuck you over in return. Either you're loyal to your customer, or you can't expect your customer to be loyal to you. By plastering your products with DRM, you're punishing loyal customers in shit attempts to make things harder for pirates, and usually pirates solve this by making pirates versions without the shitty drm. So DRM is something that often does more harm than good for trying to reject pirates.[/QUOTE] No, your just acting as bad as the very people you are trying to 'fuck over'. Furthermore, it just means that you will just encourage developers/publishers to carry on implementing DRM - and worse case scenario they will become even more desperate and the DRM will get worse. In the mean time, genuinely decent developers are losing money and honest folk - who make the mature and responsible decision of whether to buy the game or simply do without - are suffering at the hand of harsher DRM put in place to deal with the likes of you. [QUOTE=Simski;40465098]Piracy is not theft. There is no proof that the pirate would buy the product if it couldn't be pirated, or that them pirating the product isn't a direct result of them buying the product. Likewise, you're not taking anything, you're copying it.[/QUOTE] To summarise: 1. It is theft. 2. You don't need to physically take something to be commiting theft. 3. There is no proof that the pirate wouldn't buy the product at some point if it couldn't be pirated.

[QUOTE=Antdawg;40465329]How do you explain games that are released without DRM being pirated then? I've been using this example for my past few posts but no one seems to be taking notice, World of Goo has an incredibly high rate of piracy despite being DRM free, having a demo, being reasonably priced, offered on numerous services and it's not a piece of shit as it has a Metacritic score of 90% etc. Hell, people even pirate the Humble Indie Bundles despite the fact they can pay just 1 cent and it would no longer be pirating. [url]http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2008/11/acrying-shame-world-of-goo-piracy-rate-near-90/[/url] [url]http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/05/Saving-a-penny----pirating-the-Humble-Indie-Bundle[/url] [editline]30th April 2013[/editline][/QUOTE] Is there any proof that the people who pirates the game didn't also buy the game afterwards? Otherwise you can't exclude that possibility. The number of people that pirate a product does not tell how many of those people who never went ahead and got the real game afterwards. [QUOTE=Antdawg;40465329]Just because nothing tangible (physical) was stolen doesn't mean it isn't theft. You can still steal intangible assets, and that is copyright infringement (or in the case of trademarks, then trademark infringement). Would it be ok for me to launch my own digital distribution service and use Valve's Steam logo? Hey, I'm not physically stealing something, I'm only copying it! It's a similar thing for games. You are breaching the copyright of the game, just as I would be breaching the trademark of the logo. Both instances deal with the misuse of an intangible product.[/QUOTE] Really, pirates don't give a flying fuck about copyrights. Again, it's a matter of morals, and it's something pirates just don't give a flying fuck about. It's not theft to pirates, it's abstract definitions masquerading as theft. Like how the old anti-piracy "you wouldn't steal a car" is often mocked with "you wouldn't download a car". [QUOTE=David29;40465755]And neither can you prove that all pirates do go on to buy the game at some point. Since your statement was that piracy does not result in [b]any[/b] lost sales, it would require that in all instances of piracy the pirate would then go on to buy the game - regardless of weather they enjoyed it or not. If even just one person did not do this, then a sale would be lost and your statement would be incorrect.[/quote] I did not state that piracy doesn't result in ANY lost sales. I stated that there is absolutely no way of telling if piracy was either the cause of a sale or the loss of a sale. It's fucking impossible, and therefor calling pirates a "lost sale" is a moot point, because pirates can be both a sale and not a sale. You can't prove neither, therefor you can't call it either. [QUOTE=David29;40465755]Also, any person who pirates a game was a potential customer. In order to pirate a game you must express a certain degree of interest in the game - regardless of how litte that might be - which makes you a potential customer. Based on this, a situation may well arise in the future where the price of a game is discounted or drops to a level where it is proportional to your level of interest. However, by pirating games you are circumventing this and sales that would have been gained when the game is cheaper are lost.[/quote] This is not true. Just because you download something does not mean you WOULD buy the product eventually if you couldn't pirate it. You express your interest in it, but just because you're interested in something doesn't mean you would be interested in it if the price isn't right or the product turns out to be shit or if the service is terrible. [QUOTE=David29;40465755]I have explained this before. That's like saying going for a haircut and not paying is not theft because you aren't physically taking anything.[/quote] The product is already made. The developer doesn't redo all their hard work for every customer, they're only redistributing a digital copy. [QUOTE=David29;40465755]The general rule of thumb is thus: if you receive something from a business where you would normally provide monetary compensation - but don't - that is a form of theft. It is not physical theft, but it is steal theft as you are benefitting from someones labour without compensating them in acceptable manner.[/quote] Right, so it's only a matter of principle then? Fair enough. Good luck convincing pirates that they're bad people for not avoiding piracy out of principle though. [QUOTE=David29;40465755]Firstly, demos exist for that. No, not all games have demos but demos are not a right. There are also other perfectly good ways of seeing of how good a game is (reviews, videos, etc).[/quote] Demos don't show the full game. They are often only one level, and many of the features have been limited and cut down. People like pirating the full game to get the real taste of the full experience, so they know that they won't just have fun the first level and then the game suddenly takes a turn for the worst. [QUOTE=David29;40465755]Secondly, I have already proven that the 'pirating a game just to try it' is a load of bollocks in my previous post:[/quote] That doesn't prove shit, because it doesn't say how many of those pirates were among the people who bought it legally after trying the pirates version. Until you can prove that none of those pirates bought the game after trying it out, your argument doesn't mean squat. [QUOTE=David29;40465755]Why was the piracy level so high if a legal demo existed? Clearly the pirates just wanted a free game. And this was an indie developer - a developer which hadn't shit on its customers like EA. There is literally NO 'justification' in this case.[/quote] Demos are too limited. They don't show the whole game. I personally hate people who pirate indie games, but still, people rather try the whole game than just a small limited version. [QUOTE=David29;40465755]Am I the only one who sees the hillarious irony in this? Pirates not recognising what they are doing as morally wrong, but getting butthurt because they feel developers/publishers are being immoral. My sides...[/quote] Pirates probably do know what they're doing is in a way wrong, but if you're being an asshole against an asshole you feel less like an asshole. [QUOTE=David29;40465755]No, your just acting as bad as the very people you are trying to 'fuck over'. Furthermore, it just means that you will just encourage developers/publishers to carry on implementing DRM - and worse case scenario they will become even more desperate and the DRM will get worse. In the mean time, genuinely decent developers are losing money and honest folk - who make the mature and responsible decision of whether to buy the game or simply do without - are suffering at the hand of harsher DRM put in place to deal with the likes of you.[/quote] DRM is a direct cause of pirates. Many people pirate BECAUSE of annoying DRM that pirates can circumvent. Developers are fucking themselves and their customers over by using DRM. Focusing on pirates is a really fucking sure-fire way of challenging pirates to fuck you over in return. The developers who'll do fine are the ones who WON'T plaster their games with shitty DRM and focus on combating pirates, and instead focus on pleasing their customers. Pirates are simply a lot less inclined to pirate games from developers who are loyal to their customers more than they're obsessed with hunting pirates. [QUOTE=David29;40465755]To summarise: 1. It is theft.[/quote] Opinion [QUOTE=David29;40465755]2. You don't need to physically take something to be commiting theft.[/quote] Principle [QUOTE=David29;40465755]3. There is no proof that the pirate wouldn't buy the product at some point if it couldn't be pirated.[/QUOTE] And the exact opposite is true as well, which is why the number of people who pirate a game is NOT a reliable measurement of lost sales. Any of those can still have bought the game. It's a moot point. You can't call them a lost sale, because you don't know if they bought the product or not. [editline]29th April 2013[/editline] Now that I'm finally done with this bigass post... I'm gonna finish my goddamn icecream, which has now melted... you jerk

Piracy is not theft in the traditional sense. This is due in part to the digital nature of computer software. But like any other product, there needs to be a team of people who envision the product, who create the product, who test the product for issues - companies like EA are no less of a business than Ford. It's much easier to acquire a cracked copy of Crysis 3 than it is to acquire whatever vehicular equivalent you can come up with. However you just cannot deny that there is still a significant amount of skilled labor that went into designing both Crysis 3 and, for example, a Ford Fusion. They're both products that are developed by a team of trained people. Just because it is easier for someone to acquire a working copy of Crysis 3 doesn't make copying Crysis 3 any more justifiable than copying a Ford Fusion. I don't like EA as a company more than I like Ford as a company, but that doesn't mean I'm going to acquire an illegal copy of either of their products. Why should anyone else?

Eh. I don't personally pirate anything but products I can't easily obtain by buying them (like new television series), but I still consider is a good way to market products and a good way for other people to ensure themselves of the quality of the product they want. I only buy games myself, but that's mostly because I'm too lazy to go through the whole torrenting/cracking/dealing with annoying ass bugs from pirating games. I had enough of that shit as a teenager, where I'll admit piracy was probably the only way I could afford to play games.

Yeah I was the same. Now I enjoy the thrill of hunting down a good deal, and I'm proud to say instead of pirating the two games, I bought Bioshock Infinite + Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon for a total of $25. But I'm also employed, which is admittedly a huge factor in piracy, and I still hold the opinion that if you can't afford to buy games, justifying piracy becomes a slippery slope.

I'm very lenient on people who pirate due to poverty, due to having been in that situation myself. I'm also perfectly alright with people who pirate due to the lack of availability (like country restrictions). I'm less respectful of people who pirate simply because they want things for free, or people who pirate low-priced games from indie devs.

[QUOTE=Simski;40469302]I'm very lenient on people who pirate due to poverty, due to having been in that situation myself. I'm also perfectly alright with people who pirate due to the lack of availability (like country restrictions). I'm less respectful of people who pirate simply because they want things for free, or people who pirate low-priced games from indie devs.[/QUOTE] This was pretty much what I was trying to say in my post a little while ago. If someone is in a dire position where they can't afford movies or games then I personally wouldn't hold it against them. If they can't afford them anyway then you can't say the developers have lost a sale. There is a huge difference between pirating something and stealing an item because the latter depletes the potential to make money from a sale by removing an item that could be sold. That definitely hurts the company who has made the product and hurts the retailer too. Neither theft or piracy are 'ok' and nobody is entitled to free movies, games, music etc but I wouldn't expect poor people to live in boredom either. Of course if only poor people pirated then piracy would not be such a problem...

Yeah I can't imagine a huge portion of pirates are impoverished. Tight on money maybe, but a $60 game purchase is no different than any other purchase and requires the same financial forethought. Again though, is it valid justification? Probably not. Do I really care? Not really. I just don't like the people who try justifying it with absolutely bullshit reasons when they clearly could get the software legally, and I think those people are, even by a small margin, the majority of people who pirate.