Apathy and refunds are more dangerous than Piracy

pcslookout

Lifer
Mar 18, 2007
11,959
157
106
http://tommyrefenes.tumblr.com/post/45684087997/apathy-and-refunds-are-more-dangerous-than-piracy

A good read by the developer of Super Meat Boy

Apathy and refunds are more dangerous than Piracy.

I think I can safely say that Super Meat Boy has been pirated at least 200,000 times. We are closing in on 2 million sales and assuming a 10% piracy to sales ratio does not seem unreasonable. As a forward thinking developer who exists in the present, I realize and accept that a pirated copy of a digital game does not equate to money being taken out of my pocket. Team Meat shows no loss in our year end totals due to piracy and neither should any other developer.

For the sake of argument, some of those people that did pirate Super Meat Boy could have bought the game if piracy didn’t exist but there is no actual way to calculate that lost revenue. It is impossible to know with certainty the intentions of people. With the SimCity fiasco and several companies trying to find new ways to combat piracy and stating piracy has negatively affected their bottom line I wonder if they’ve taken the time to accurately try to determine what their losses are due to piracy.

My first job outside my parents cabinet shop was at KMart. KMart, like countless other retailers, calculates loss by counting purchased inventory and matching it to sales. Loss is always built into the budget because it is inevitable. Loss could come from items breaking, being stolen, or being defective. If someone broke a light bulb, that was a calculable loss. If someone returned a blender for being defective, it wasn’t a loss to KMart, but a calculable loss to the manufacturer. If someone steals a copy of BattleToads, it’s a loss to KMart. All loss in a retail setting is calculable because items to be sold are physical objects that come from manufacturers that have to be placed on shelves by employees. You have a chain of inventory numbers, money spent and labor spent that goes from the consumer all the way to the manufacturer. A stolen, broken, or lost item is an item that you cannot sell. In the retail world your stock is worth money.

In the digital world, you don’t have a set inventory. Your game is infinitely replicable at a negligible or zero cost (the cost bandwidth off your own site or nothing if you’re on a portal like Steam, eShop, etc). Digital inventory has no value. Your company isn’t worth an infinite amount because you have infinite copies of your game. As such, calculating worth and loss based on infinite inventory is impossible. If you have infinite stock, and someone steals one unit from that stock, you still have infinite stock. If you have infinite stock and someone steals 1 trillion units from that stock , you still have infinite stock. There is no loss of stock when you have an infinite amount.

Because of this, in the digital world, there is no loss when someone steals a game because it isn’t one less copy you can sell, it is potentially one less sale but that is irrelevant. Everyone in the world with an internet connection and a form of online payment is a potential buyer for your game but that doesn’t mean everyone in the world will buy your game.

Loss due to piracy is an implied loss because it is not a calculable loss. You cannot, with any accuracy, state that because your game was pirated 300 times you lost 300 sales. You cannot prove even one lost sale because there is no evidence to state that any one person who pirated your game would have bought your game if piracy did not exist. From an accounting perspective it’s speculative and a company cannot accurately determine loss or gain based on speculative accounting. You can’t rely on revenue due to speculation, you can’t build a company off of what will “probably” happen. Watch “The Smartest Guys in the Room” and see how that worked out for Enron.

Companies try to combat piracy of their software with DRM but if loss due to pirated software is not calculable to an accurate amount does the implementation of DRM provide a return on investment? It is impossible to say yes to this statement. Look at it as numbers spent in a set budget. You spend $X on research for your new DRM method that will prevent people from stealing your game. That $X is a line item in accounting that can be quantified. Can you then say “This $X we put into research for our DRM gained us back $Y in sales”? There is no way to calculate this because it is not possible to quantify the intentions of a person. Also, there’s no way of accurately determining which customers would have stolen the game had there not been DRM.

To add to that, the reality of our current software age is the internet is more efficient at breaking things than companies are at creating them. A company will spend massive amounts of money on DRM and the internet will break it in a matter of days in most cases. When the DRM is broken is it worth the money spent to implement it? Did the week of unbroken DRM for your game gain you any sales from potential pirates due to the inability to pirate at launch? Again, there is no way of telling and as such cannot be used as an accurate justification for spending money.

So what should developers do to make sure people don’t steal games? Unfortunately there is nothing anyone can do to actively stop their game from being pirated. I do believe people are less likely to pirate your software if the software is easy to buy, easy to run, and does what is advertised. You can’t force a person to buy your software no more than you can prevent a person from stealing it. People have to WANT to buy your software, people have to WANT to support you. People need to care about your employees and your company’s well being. There is no better way to achieve that than making sure what you put out there is the best you can do and you treat your customers with respect.

Lets loop back to what’s going on with SimCity. I bought SimCity day one, I played it and experienced the same frustrations that countless others are experiencing. For total fairness, I know the always on DRM isn’t the main issue, but I can’t help but think that the server side calculations are a “wolf in sheep’s clothing” version of DRM. I won’t claim to know the inner workings of SimCity and this isn’t a Captain Hindsight article because that is irrelevant. EA and Maxis are currently facing a bigger problem than piracy: A growing number of their customers no longer trust them and this has and will cost them money.

After the frustrations with SimCity I asked Origin for a refund and received one. This was money they had and then lost a few days later. Applying our earlier conversation about calculable loss, there is a loss that is quantifiable, that will show up in accounting spreadsheets and does take away from profit. That loss is the return, and it is much more dangerous than someone stealing your game.

In the retail world, you could potentially put a return back on the shelf, you could find another customer that wants it, sell it to them and there would be virtually no loss. In the digital world, because there is no set amount of goods, you gain nothing back (one plus infinity is still infinity). It’s only a negative experience. A negative frustrating experience for a customer should be considered more damaging than a torrent of your game.

Speaking from my experience with SMB, I know for a fact we have lost a lot of trust from Mac users due to the Mac port of SMB being poor quality. I could go into the circumstances of why it is the way it is but that is irrelevant…it’s a broken product that is out in the public. We disappointed a good portion of our Mac customers with SMB and as a result several former customers have requested and received refunds. I’d take any amount of pirates over one return due to disappointment any day.

Disappointment leads to apathy which is the swan song for any developer. If people don’t care about your game, why would people ever buy it? When MewGenics comes out, I doubt many Mac users are going to be excited about our launch. When EA/Maxis create their next new game how many people are going to be excited about it and talking positively about it? I imagine that the poison of their current SimCity launch is going to seep into potential customers thoughts and be a point of speculation as to “Is it going to be another SimCity launch?”.

This is not a quantifiable loss of course, but people are more likely to buy from distributors they trust rather than ones they’ve felt slighted by before. Consumer confidence plays a very important role in how customers spend money. I think its safe to say that EA and Maxis do not have a lot of consumer confidence at this point. I think its also safe to say that the next EA/Maxis game is going to be a tough sell to people who experienced or were turned away by talk of frustration regarding SimCity.

As a result of piracy developers feel their hand is forced to implement measures to stop piracy. Often, these efforts to combat piracy only result in frustration for paying customers. I challenge a developer to show evidence that accurately shows implementation of DRM is a return on investment and that losses due to piracy can be calculated. I do not believe this is possible.

The reality is the fight against piracy equates to spending time and money combating a loss that cannot be quantified. Everyone needs to accept that piracy cannot be stopped and loss prevention is not a concept that can be applied to the digital world. Developers should focus on their paying customers and stop wasting time and money on non-paying customers. Respect your customers and they may in turn respect your efforts enough to purchase your game instead of pirating it.
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,270
103
106
Good read, and I think he's spot on. The market has shown that people are willing to pay reasonable prices for good products provided in a convenient way. There will always be pirates, but if you take draconian measures to combat piracy, they will inevitably hurt legitimate buyers, and losing legitimate buyers is much more dangerous than a pirate stealing a game.

This really isn't rocket science, but somehow the folks like EA have a hard time with these concepts. This latest debacle at EA with simcity just reinforces why I'll never buy an EA product.
 

Murloc

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2008
5,382
65
91
he's right, also providing excellent online gameplay is an automatic way to reduce piracy. Just think age of empires II HD.
 

ShadowOfMyself

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2006
4,227
2
0
As a forward thinking developer who exists in the present, I realize and accept that a pirated copy of a digital game does not equate to money being taken out of my pocket. Team Meat shows no loss in our year end totals due to piracy and neither should any other developer.

Amazing how hard it is for some people to grasp this concept (even around here)

It is exactly as he says... Im pretty sure most people who get pirated copies of games wouldnt buy the original anyway, so there is no loss whatsoever

There was a Ted talk recently about the whole "making people pay" for a product, specifically music in that case, but I think it works for most "small" things

Its been proven again and again either by bands doing this or whatever, that if they put out a good product for free, they will end up getting even more money from people wanting to support them, than they would by forcing people to pay a set price (its also why the MMO industry has been switching completely to F2P/Micro-transaction, its much more profitable, unless you are Blizzard with millions of followers)

So yeah, Im looking forward to see what happens in the industry in the next 20 or so years
 

Ancalagon44

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2010
3,274
202
106
Disappointment leads to apathy which is the swan song for any developer. If people don’t care about your game, why would people ever buy it? When MewGenics comes out, I doubt many Mac users are going to be excited about our launch. When EA/Maxis create their next new game how many people are going to be excited about it and talking positively about it? I imagine that the poison of their current SimCity launch is going to seep into potential customers thoughts and be a point of speculation as to “Is it going to be another SimCity launch?”.

I think he is completely right, except for this.

The average consumer is just too stupid for such negative experiences to impact sales of future titles.

UbiSoft introduced always online DRM, didnt stop their games from selling well. Blizzard followed up with SC2, was a cluster*$&*, didnt stop Diablo III from selling well. Every single always online DRM game has been a cluster *&(*, without exception, yet that did not stop people from pre ordering SimCity like it would be literally unavailable 2 weeks after launch.

UbiSoft showed rare insight by stopping the always online DRM thing, but they are alone in this. And was it actually because of low sales? I dont know. The other major publishers have all had launch day disasters, and yet people still pre order their games knowing they have always online DRM. This is why we must continue to put up with always online DRM - because consumers are too stupid to stop themselves from clicking the Pre Order button on the latest Shiny Thing (tm).

And then whining about it afterwards when, inevitably, the game is unplayable for 2 weeks after launch. Really? You didnt see that one coming?
 

Cuda1447

Lifer
Jul 26, 2002
11,757
0
71
God damn he's right. People need to learn to embrace and love piracy, because it's the way of our world. You can't stop it and if you treat it correctly, it won't hurt you, or at least not nearly as much as you think it will.
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
I read it but of course it's not "impossible" to have some insight into how many pirated copies would have been purchases. One way to figure it is with polls. Not perfect, but not completely blind as he seems to imply.

It goes without saying among anybody with a brain though that 200,000 pirated copies almost certainly is not 200,000 lost sales. This is something the recording industry pretends is not the case.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
I read it but of course it's not "impossible" to have some insight into how many pirated copies would have been purchases. One way to figure it is with polls. Not perfect, but not completely blind as he seems to imply.

It goes without saying among anybody with a brain though that 200,000 pirated copies almost certainly is not 200,000 lost sales. This is something the recording industry pretends is not the case.

agreed. its insane.

Same with the RIAA.

this article was great. i also agree with him
 

xeledon20005

Senior member
Feb 5, 2013
300
0
86
The way I see is, if you like the product enough you will spend the money on it. Piracy comes to those not willing to go to the movies, because movie theatres think its okay to charge 11.50 for 1 movie ticket and popcorn for $8 for a small popcorn and the movie industry wonder why people pirate. Same theory i guess for video games. I personally think if movie tickets were to be cut in half maybe to $5 then you would see a ton more people going there instead of pirating, and perhaps they could charge little less on the snacks.
/tougheconomicaltimes.
 

xanis

Lifer
Sep 11, 2005
17,571
8
0
Awesome read. I think he's right on the money. :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:

Broheim

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2011
4,587
3
81
Awesome read. I think he's right on the money. :thumbsup:

this.

I know plenty of people who only pirate games to get around DRM bs, they'll happily pay for games without any such restrictions.
 

xanis

Lifer
Sep 11, 2005
17,571
8
0
this.

I know plenty of people who only pirate games to get around DRM bs, they'll happily pay for games without any such restrictions.

This is pretty much how I feel about it. Leave out the DRM, make it convenient to get, and you'll be getting my money all day long.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
He's not completely wrong. He's partly wrong.

First he starts with a softball number on piracy - 10%. So it's pretty painless to discuss the issue with that low a number. Other publishers - I remember Apogee - placed it at 90% of all copies in use.

His point that not all pirated copies would be bought - maybe most - and that it's not just the same issue as theft of physical goods is correct - but that only partially addresses the issue.

One thing I'll note - because a lot of people want to hear that 'piracy is no big deal'. a publisher has a lot to gain in PR by tell telling them what they want to hear.

It's like the different between one politician telling the crazies who think the government is going to send black helicoptors after them they[re wrong, while another politician says they're right to get their vote.

One issue he ignores is the issue of simply 'it's wrong' for all the pirates who pirate instead of buying the pirated or other games. Oops.

A fallacy he makes is that the partial reduction of the harm he treats like it totally removes it.

The only argument he makes that can stand up much is the one about the practical issue that if piracy can't be prevented more than the protection loses in sales, it might be better to just take the loss.

And write some editorials pandering to the piracy apologists to get their loyalty.

In principle, DRM is very legitimate. In practice there are questions. Questions this article doesn't raise especially well but touches on.
 

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,656
6,532
126
i agree 100% with him. it's funny though when you hear people on these forums try to counter a lot of the points he makes.

i have seen numerous times on this forum how people compare piracy to stealing, like how he does in the article with stealing at kmart vs piracy. how at kmart they are out a physical product (X - 1) but with piracy, they aren't out any actual product (infiniti - 1). and i agree with that argument 100%.

does it make piracy ok? no i'm not saying that. i'm simply saying they are different and it's not "lost money/product" when someone pirates, just as stated in the article.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
1
0
I don't care how much people try to rationalize theft. It's still theft.

I don't care if the person wouldn't have paid for it anyway. If they weren't willing to pay for it, they have no right to get any enjoyment out of it.
 

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,656
6,532
126
I don't care how much people try to rationalize theft. It's still theft.

I don't care if the person wouldn't have paid for it anyway. If they weren't willing to pay for it, they have no right to get any enjoyment out of it.

who in the article, or the thread, is trying to rationalize piracy as being good? nobody is so stop acting like you are all high and mighty because you think it's theft and bad. no one is disagreeing with that aspect.
 

Markbnj

Elite Member <br>Moderator Emeritus
Moderator
Sep 16, 2005
15,682
14
81
www.markbetz.net
I don't care how much people try to rationalize theft. It's still theft.

I don't care if the person wouldn't have paid for it anyway. If they weren't willing to pay for it, they have no right to get any enjoyment out of it.

You seem to have a very myopic view of this issue. The author is not trying to rationalize theft. He's saying that the losses from theft can't be quantified, therefore no ROI can be calculated on theft-prevention methods for software that has been copied. However, the ROI on losses due to customer dissatisfaction can be quantified. Therefore it is smart business to minimize those losses. We get that you detest IP thieves, and I don't blame you, but there is also no ROI on vengeance.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
1
0
Who said anything about vengeance?

First, my issue with the author is that he's just flat wrong. It is true that some percentage of people who pirate software would not have purchased it, but that percentage is not 100.

Whether he wants to admit it or not, he is losing money because of pirates. He's not losing as much as a company that has a physical product that is stolen, but he's losing out on revenue that he would have received if people were honest.

Second, the inability to quantify something doesn't mean it is non-existent.

Third, attempts to justify and rationalize stealing software and other IP are rampant on this forum. And already started even in this thread.

There's a difference between making a practical argument against DRM because it may do more harm than good, and people interpreting that argument to mean that their thievery is acceptable. It's not.
 

Markbnj

Elite Member <br>Moderator Emeritus
Moderator
Sep 16, 2005
15,682
14
81
www.markbetz.net
Who said anything about vengeance?

I did, because that honestly seems to be what you want.

First, my issue with the author is that he's just flat wrong. It is true that some percentage of people who pirate software would not have purchased it, but that percentage is not 100.

Whether he wants to admit it or not, he is losing money because of pirates. He's not losing as much as a company that has a physical product that is stolen, but he's losing out on revenue that he would have received if people were honest.

Second, the inability to quantify something doesn't mean it is non-existent.

This is why I think you're just too personally angry about this issue to have clear thoughts on it. You completely misinterpreted what the author said. He never implied that piracy didn't lead to real world losses. He stated, correctly, that those losses cannot be quantified, and in business if you can't quantify the cost of an issue, you can't determine whether attempts to fix it are providing a good return. He then contrasted that indefinable problem with the real and quantifiable problem of returns due to customer dissatisfaction.

You, apparently, read the piece and only saw "Pirates aren't so bad." This, of course, tripped your wire.
 

Broheim

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2011
4,587
3
81
This is pretty much how I feel about it. Leave out the DRM, make it convenient to get, and you'll be getting my money all day long.

convenient, effortless and reasonably priced is the formula for getting and keeping paying customers.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
64
91
but there is also no ROI on vengeance.

Well put. This should be in the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition ;)
There's a difference between making a practical argument against DRM because it may do more harm than good, and people interpreting that argument to mean that their thievery is acceptable. It's not.

Why do you insist on making this dumb strawman argument? Nobody has justified stealing in this thread.
 

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,656
6,532
126
Who said anything about vengeance?

First, my issue with the author is that he's just flat wrong. It is true that some percentage of people who pirate software would not have purchased it, but that percentage is not 100.

Whether he wants to admit it or not, he is losing money because of pirates. He's not losing as much as a company that has a physical product that is stolen, but he's losing out on revenue that he would have received if people were honest.

Second, the inability to quantify something doesn't mean it is non-existent.

Third, attempts to justify and rationalize stealing software and other IP are rampant on this forum. And already started even in this thread.

There's a difference between making a practical argument against DRM because it may do more harm than good, and people interpreting that argument to mean that their thievery is acceptable. It's not.

eyes ... you should try using yours to read the article.
 

SlitheryDee

Lifer
Feb 2, 2005
17,252
19
81
I agree with him. I do however think that some rudimentary DRM should come with games. Something like a serial number that must be used for multiplayer would be fine, or even online activation of the game so long as there is no activation limit. Just a tiny barrier against piracy that basically says, "No, we definitely don't approve of piracy, but we aren't going to punish paying customers any longer". At least then the process of hunting down the crack for the game and implementing it may actually be slightly harder than simply typing the serial number that came with the game for paying customers. The current situation, where some pirated games offer better experiences than legally purchased ones, has to end. I hadn't heard about the SimCity debacle. That's simply unacceptable.
 

xanis

Lifer
Sep 11, 2005
17,571
8
0
I agree with him. I do however think that some rudimentary DRM should come with games. Something like a serial number that must be used for multiplayer would be fine, or even online activation of the game so long as there is no activation limit. Just a tiny barrier against piracy that basically says, "No, we definitely don't approve of piracy, but we aren't going to punish paying customers any longer". At least then the process of hunting down the crack for the game and implementing it may actually be slightly harder than simply typing the serial number that came with the game for paying customers. The current situation, where some pirated games offer better experiences than legally purchased ones, has to end. I hadn't heard about the SimCity debacle. That's simply unacceptable.

Do you have a link to a decent article about the SimCity thing? I haven't heard anything about it, but I'd like to get a quick overview.