• Denuvo 5.6 (used in Metro Exodus) got cracked in 5 days
    187 replies, posted
you gonna continue being vague cuz I think someone already came out and asked what you think they're being supported with when you pirate I think most of those companies would argue otherwise, but it'd be a relief to hear when I've been pirating games I've actually been supporting the devs
But I literally said that I do buy it once I get the money, so what difference does it make? It makes absolutely no difference in how it will affect the company.
your pirating then buying it later has more of an effect than someone not pirating or playing it at all infact, in the positive way
On an unrelated note - Far Cry: New Dawn with all the wrapped up DRM shit was cracked as well.
Games are specifically not a consumable by my logic. To be clearer, the distinction is the copyright of the item vs the physical good. The pattern for designer clothing is copyrighted so the pattern would be included in the discussion, but the physical shirt or something like a stone sculpture would not be. Notice what i've said so far about paintings, i havent said that anyone should just be able to grab a painting in it's frame and run, i specifically talked about looking at a painting. You can look at it or reproduce it without destroying it for other people. Imagine someone takes a photo of a painting or sculpture, copyright law says whoever takes the picture owns the copyright, but because the picture is of another copyrighted piece the picture becomes a derivative work and is then owned by the painter or sculptor, in modern copyright law. That's the level this discussion is even relevant to, comparisons to stealing clothing off shelves because they can be art are irrelevant and silly. Piracy is not going to a game-stop to steal disks. The only reason what im saying has any relevance is because this is the internet and art thesedays is mostly purely digital whether that be games, music, movies, etc. My point was that museams do have costs an entry ticket goes to other than the art itself, someone does need to pay for all that so entry tickets or gov funding makes sense there. The level of "piracy has zero cost" im talking about is very literal which i guess i didnt make clear enough. It is true that when you pirate something there is no cost, you're not downloading from their servers, you don't touch them at all, and the original cracker usually paid for their copy outside of edge case pre-release leaks. It's arguable that there are opportunity costs and indirect costs from lost sales (even though this too is unlikely), but it's never money flying out of the dev or publisher's pocket because one random person used their computer and internet connection to seed for another random person. It's not like stealing a game off a shelf at gamestop because someone did pay for that disk to be made. In that sense there's nothing really to prove. I think this section is the most meaningful point of disagreement. To summarize my main point in the first post, the ideal is art for everyone, but because art needs to be made, games need to be paid for and receive funding so that the people who fund them can enjoy them on reasonable terms. What is reasonable is surprisingly clear cut in this situation, the terms should just be exactly what's needed to play the game. If it's an MMO that means you can only play it by connecting to their servers, that is a reasonable term. If it's a competetive game including some level of intrusive anticheat is fairly reasonable. Games like world of tanks and other "mmos" that are just matchmaking lobbies wouldnt count here because they could just as easily function with a traditional server browser and self hosted matches. Any singleplayer games that are online only, include spyware like redshell, or include draconian DRM would be outside of what's needed to play the game and therefore be unreasonable. Should you need to go to one specific store because of some nonsense exclusivity deal? It's kind of individual, if someone considers that unreasonable it's pretty much fair game. Games don't need to be exclusive to perform their function outside of special console setups and peripherals like a nintendo DS or whatever. If a game is getting funded anyways, paying them more money goes to shareholders not better games, and they're incentivized to continue their business practices, those are all actual downsides. The people buying the game are getting shafted to some extent already. Something that does no damage and avoids rewarding unethical business models while filling whatever want you had for that monopoly before moving on doesn't really sound unethical to me. You certainly don't need a game to survive but human psychology includes social needs and for better or worse people can and do get set on having a particular cultural experience due to fear of missing out or peer pressure, it can seem like a need to people. Variety makes people healthier and happier, nobody should care if people with no money to buy things anyway pirate stuff to maintain sanity, poverty sucks. Lets consider the situations piracy would be unethical in. "I'm bill gates and i pirated this game and enjoyed it and didnt pay a cent for the starving indie dev team". Pretty much if you can afford to well, be a patron of the arts that you enjoy it's good to do so. To me it's just the whole "entitled" thing is so far in the favor of creators that we could stand to move back towards an understanding of graciosly receiving patronage rather than "fuck you plebs you don't understand my glorious art because you're racist here's lootbox gambling for kids to fund more "art" creation btw throw pirates in jail". I don't agree with fighting fire with fire in general, but i dont think that's an analogous situation. Lets assume that we both think piracy is unethical though, though as previously argued i don't. Even in that situation, for many people it becomes a question of two lesser evils. I usually have no problems just not giving a shit about games with shit publishers due to how many good games exist and the genres i like are very time intensive as is, but ultimately a lot of people dont have enough self control and that's not a human problem that will be solved just to help the video game market, nor can it be solved without making many marketing practices illegal or altering human psychology and education. With games having a monopoly on each of their unique experience and there being an entire topic in psychology dedicated to the "fear of missing out" coupled with predatory marketing practices and peer pressure, people will view games as culturally important to experience, something they need to do even if it's not really true. So it becomes a choice, buy the game which is unethical because it supports godawful business practices, or pirate the game we're assuming is also unethical for this paragraph. If these are the limited choices then piracy is a more ethical better option because at least it's not doing some wider damage, while rewarding bad practices can definetly cause some damage. (sorry for late reply, got super busy for a few days)
People literally use Denuvo as an excuse to pirate.
As everything it comes down to money and not having much if any disposable income. Most games are just too expensive, meaning if I wanted to buy them I would have to resort to using a third party reseller (which are mostly shady as fuck) so I only get a game from there if it's multiplayer so I can't pirate it. I do buy some games when they come out if I can afford it, which means I really only buy games for my switch if I want to own it instead of renting with GameFly, which I also do. I also buy games I've pirated in the past on steam sales if they were fantastic and I want to support the devs. Yes I'm getting something for free instead of paying for it, but piracy is that grey area where you aren't actually stealing anything. People can still buy the same product that I'm pirating with no actual detriment to the developer (at least in my case) because it isn't a physical product, I'm not taking something that could've purchased by someone else, and I wouldn't have been able to afford to buy it in the first place so they lose no money. I really don't see how this is a moral argument
Has any AAA publisher ever looked at a high piracy rate, concluded that it's a form of consumer protest, and decided they need to abandon DRM? Every time I've seen a game sell poorly but be massively pirated, the publisher blames pirates, and comes back with a more draconian DRM scheme next time around. If the goal is to convince them not to use DRM, pirating does the opposite. At least if a game doesn't sell and isn't pirated, they can't pretend that piracy is the reason for their failure.
Because additional layers of DRM like SecuROM ending up being fine, right? Yeah nah I'm not gonna take the risk of my games that have denuvo not working ten or so years into the future. I've already had one or two issues in the past where a Denuvo game couldn't connect to its servers.
DRM was never about stopping pirates, even Denuvo admits that DRM only works for a very short time. DRM exists to please the shareholders and investors. Publishers have to know that piracy barely (if at all) effects sales, but they have to at least appease shareholders and investors that think piracy harms sales figures. It costs them nothing compared to how much the game costs to develop but it keeps their share price up, and the people who hate DRM are the small minority anyways so they lose nothing at all.
This quote works really well in novels but unfortunately it has very little basis in the real world.
It does though? To have principles and upholding them could mean expulsion from the things you love, if not total disassociation from those who want to remain on the path. People knowingly whistleblow, refuse tasks or actively miss out on things they love all in the matter of principle. Those who sacrifice their livelihoods in bids to change the world, to make it a better place are the real heroes.
Yeah we aughta give people that don’t download games medals and a parade
you wouldn't download a medal
If that's your reasoning, why not buy the game and also torrent a cracked version?
Voting with your wallet. If you buy the game, you're allowing companies to keep putting DRM in everything.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.