Do you think pirating is changing PC gaming?
- Thread starter emblem
- Start date
- Nov 30, 2005
- 50,231
- 118
- 116
Well considering the crap that is the majority of DRM; yeah, it is, because if there were no piracy, companies would not feel the need to place DRM on their products, or so I would hope.
KT
KT
pontifex
Lifer
- Dec 5, 2000
- 43,804
- 46
- 91
there's been piracy since day 1. there will always be piracy. i say just deal with it and don't treat us legit players and buyers like criminals.
bioshock was one of the biggest DRM uproars i've seen. i'd like to see the numbers of legit sales compared to numbers of pirated copies. i wonder if pirated copies is more?
bioshock was one of the biggest DRM uproars i've seen. i'd like to see the numbers of legit sales compared to numbers of pirated copies. i wonder if pirated copies is more?
In short, I haven't noticed a big difference in PC gaming between the time that pirating wasn't as popular to now. If I had to make a guess though, I would say that pirating has made gaming a more popular hobby. Perhaps the sales figures that big companies are seeing today would be much less if games weren't available to pirate for free back when that hobby was just gaining some serious popularity? Free stuff often hooks people resulting in more money being spent in the future. I'm just speculating of course. Who knows?
Yeah, there are tons of factors to consider and pontifex sums it up nicely. People have been pirating games on computers for as long as people have been making games for computers. Hell, I remember "Pirate's Chest" getting copied all over the place in middle school for Apple IIe games back in middle school in around '83 or '84 so we could all pass around copies of Lode Runner and Ultima III: Exodus. Bet that'll cause some flashbacks with the other 30-somethings on here. 
Anti-piracy measures can be more of a sales deterrent than a piracy deterrent, also. If the anti-piracy protections become too burdensome, then people just won't buy the game. On the other hand, people can download pirated versions of games that are buggy and don't work quite right, and so they end up buying the game at full price anyway.
Also - this is tripping up my English teacher spidey-sense. Is this for some kind of position paper? Give us a bit more on your angle and we can try to flesh things out a bit more.
Anti-piracy measures can be more of a sales deterrent than a piracy deterrent, also. If the anti-piracy protections become too burdensome, then people just won't buy the game. On the other hand, people can download pirated versions of games that are buggy and don't work quite right, and so they end up buying the game at full price anyway.
Also - this is tripping up my English teacher spidey-sense. Is this for some kind of position paper? Give us a bit more on your angle and we can try to flesh things out a bit more.
Oh no, it's not for any kind of essay. It's just a topic I saw on a different message board and I just happened to be thinking about it so I thought I'd ask here.
Probably not. - there is a lot of money flowing through pc gaming - the problem is that publishers (not developers) are inducing a HUGE amount of overhead coupled with corporate greed.
In the old days publishers were small entity in the game to market path.
Anyways the above is an opinion as I do not have numbers to prove it (other than there really is a large amount of $$$ flowing in pc games).
In the old days publishers were small entity in the game to market path.
Anyways the above is an opinion as I do not have numbers to prove it (other than there really is a large amount of $$$ flowing in pc games).
I believe the pirating has changed PC gaming for the worse. I often avoid buying PC games, just out of fear of what the DRM will do, or just the hassle that I know it will bring when I try to install or play the game. The game has to be really good for me to consider buying it, just because it wouldn't be worth dealing with the DRM if it isn't. This hassle keeps many people from buying unknown PC games, which keeps innovation down in the industry.
Games with no DRM should advertise that they include no DRM because it would make people like me more willing to give them a try when walking by them at a store.
Games with no DRM should advertise that they include no DRM because it would make people like me more willing to give them a try when walking by them at a store.
Ahh, ok. Just curious.
Personally, I think piracy ends up more or less a wash as a lot of people will end up buying a game after using a pirated version as a demo if the game is worthwhile, and many people who pirate a game simply wouldn't buy it otherwise. It can also help generate favorable internet buzz to help sell more games.That said, I'm still very much ambivalent about it, especially in the case of the few companies that actually make good games and are absolutely entitled to the returns on their work. It just becomes a problem when the cure is worse than the disease, as is often the case with piracy. Pirates will spend a bit of time to torrent and crack a game, then have it up and running more or less flawlessly, while the people who buy the game honestly end up with a completely ridiculous hassle trying to run a game simply because the DRM doesn't like a particular program they've got installed for one reason or another.
As things stand now, we're right on the cusp of a lot of this changing because of more widespread digital distribution. I think stuff like Steam (ideally a less invasive version of it) and Gametap as well as direct distribution by the developer, will become much more common and this opens up a lot more channels for game developers as they can sell their stuff directly to consumers without having to deal. People will experiment with the model a bit more, but it can potentially save everyone a good bit of money over the long haul, as well as help clean up all the waste and costs of shipping and packaging.
Buy a game, the game checks the servers real quick to see if you're registered, then you're good to go. A relatively simple and painless process. The end user gets a working game, the developers get paid for their hard work, everybody wins. Although my biggest frustration with this sort of setup is the inability to play offline. That's the next big hurdle I see for that distribution model; as connected as everyone is now, there are still lots of times we'd love to play a game but don't have any internet access.
The difference that I have seen is that before pirating became popular, you saw a lot of new and inovative games. After pirating became popular, the many types of games just disappeared (like adventure games, 4X, or space shooters) and we saw a bunch of sequels. Companies were unwilling to take risks on different types of games, because profit margins may have gone down, and PC Gamers were unwilling to take a risk on different types of games, because the DRM is almost always a hassle, and if the game isn't that fun you would have to go through all that hassle just to install the game anyway.
InflatableBuddha
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2007
- 7,416
- 1
- 0
I don't think piracy is changing the industry as much as the response to pirating is (i.e. DRM, anti-copy protection, etc.). That is, the DRM schemes publishers are using are causing (hardcore) gamers to think more about their purchases.
Personally, I haven't played either Bioshock or Crysis because I don't want to infect my computer with SecuROM. (Otherwise I would definitely play them.) I don't want pirated copies because I am honest and I want to pay for my products, plus I worry about stability issues and possible viruses. Of course, casual gamers may not be informed of this issue or may not care, so this may have only a small negative effect on overall sales.
The increase in DRM schemes is actually unnecessary because the game industry is in a unique position to provide better value to its customers. Gamers shouldn't need to pirate. They only do it to get something for free (this will always exist for a small percentage) or as a political statement against DRM (which would be unnecessary if DRM didn't exist). Game demos are widespread - what other media type lets you "try before you buy", legally? It's not the same as if you could download part of a song or part of a movie as a "demo" - the experience would feel too disjointed. With a game, you can try one or two levels and that offers a complete sample. From there, you can make a more informed decision.
I also feel the game industry charges fairer prices for its products than either the music or movie industries. There is no way in hell I want to pay $28 for the DVD of the latest crap Hollywood put out, or $22 for a CD that is 5 years old. However, I can often find 2 year old hit games for $20 or less. As for newer titles, I love the Orange Box, and it is an outstanding value for the amount of gameplay it offers.
So yes, piracy is changing PC gaming, but not as much as it is affecting movies and music. Moreover, piracy should have even less impact on the game industry than it does now.
Personally, I haven't played either Bioshock or Crysis because I don't want to infect my computer with SecuROM. (Otherwise I would definitely play them.) I don't want pirated copies because I am honest and I want to pay for my products, plus I worry about stability issues and possible viruses. Of course, casual gamers may not be informed of this issue or may not care, so this may have only a small negative effect on overall sales.
The increase in DRM schemes is actually unnecessary because the game industry is in a unique position to provide better value to its customers. Gamers shouldn't need to pirate. They only do it to get something for free (this will always exist for a small percentage) or as a political statement against DRM (which would be unnecessary if DRM didn't exist). Game demos are widespread - what other media type lets you "try before you buy", legally? It's not the same as if you could download part of a song or part of a movie as a "demo" - the experience would feel too disjointed. With a game, you can try one or two levels and that offers a complete sample. From there, you can make a more informed decision.
I also feel the game industry charges fairer prices for its products than either the music or movie industries. There is no way in hell I want to pay $28 for the DVD of the latest crap Hollywood put out, or $22 for a CD that is 5 years old. However, I can often find 2 year old hit games for $20 or less. As for newer titles, I love the Orange Box, and it is an outstanding value for the amount of gameplay it offers.
So yes, piracy is changing PC gaming, but not as much as it is affecting movies and music. Moreover, piracy should have even less impact on the game industry than it does now.
Originally posted by: Scrimmy
Ahh, ok. Just curious.
That said, I'm still very much ambivalent about it, especially in the case of the few companies that actually make good games and are absolutely entitled to the returns on their work. It just becomes a problem when the cure is worse than the disease, as is often the case with piracy. Pirates will spend a bit of time to torrent and crack a game, then have it up and running more or less flawlessly, while the people who buy the game honestly end up with a completely ridiculous hassle trying to run a game simply because the DRM doesn't like a particular program they've got installed for one reason or another.
As things stand now, we're right on the cusp of a lot of this changing because of more widespread digital distribution. I think stuff like Steam (ideally a less invasive version of it) and Gametap as well as direct distribution by the developer, will become much more common and this opens up a lot more channels for game developers as they can sell their stuff directly to consumers without having to deal. People will experiment with the model a bit more, but it can potentially save everyone a good bit of money over the long haul, as well as help clean up all the waste and costs of shipping and packaging.
Buy a game, the game checks the servers real quick to see if you're registered, then you're good to go. A relatively simple and painless process. The end user gets a working game, the developers get paid for their hard work, everybody wins. Although my biggest frustration with this sort of setup is the inability to play offline. That's the next big hurdle I see for that distribution model; as connected as everyone is now, there are still lots of times we'd love to play a game but don't have any internet access.
That was a good read. I would also add that one of the major reasons certain game titles sell a lot is due to popularity of their predecessors and the trust that gamers have about a particular developer and their ability to make a solid fun game. If you are a new developer then pirating can be a fantastic way to break that barrier of getting a good name for yourself and some of your titles out there. Afterwards, you can watch the lines grow during the midnight releases of the sequel.
The only people piracy has ever truly effected are the execs who care nothing about the gaming business and only care only about the "projected profits" vs the "real profits" and then consider what the projected vs real profits would be if piracy didn't exist. They don't realize that those figures are only estimates which do not take into account how piracy can actually help their sales since such things cannot be translated into numbers easily. It is much easier to translate the number of pirated copies of a game into an estimated loss in profits no matter how inaccurate it might be.
Remember the key phrase when it comes to business execs folks:
"Perception is reality"
While I agree with you on the problems with Securom and Starforce, and specifics like that, but even the average joe gets annoyed by having to type in a 30 digit code to install his freshly bought game, along with having to swap in the CD/DVD anytime he wants to play it. I know that I will want to play an old game from time to time, but I don't because I don't feel like the going through the hassle of trying to find the orginal manual so I can get the 30 digit code just to install the game again. Or when I want to play an old game that I have installed, I often have to rifle through my stuff to find the CD which I will often give up before I find it.
Mem
Lifer
- Apr 23, 2000
- 21,476
- 13
- 81
Not really,the problem with gaming is game developers are running out of original ideas when it comes to new games etc,piracy will always be around whatever happens.
As a gamer its occupational hazard when it comes to copy protected games (ie Starforce,TAGES,SecuRom) etc and yes I have them all installed,you could say I'm a die hard gamer and won't let any copy protection stop me playing my legit games regardless of what copy protection is used.
As always the legit buyers of games always get the short end of the stick when it comes to their games and copy protection,will there be a simple solution?..who knows since game companies have been trying different things for years,unfortunately so have the pirates out there,never ending battle between the two.
InflatableBuddha
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2007
- 7,416
- 1
- 0
Good points, although I think you're now dealing with an "ease of use" issue, which is not really related to piracy. PC gaming by nature is less user-friendly than console gaming, as you often need to tinker with drivers, graphics and sound settings, etc. None of that is a problem with console gaming, so many people find that easier.
With many games moving to content delivery systems such as Steam (and you can add older games to Steam as well), the issue of tracking down CDs and swapping discs is disappearing, so that aspect is becoming easier than console gaming.
InflatableBuddha
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2007
- 7,416
- 1
- 0
Yep, the consumers end up losing in the end. It would be better to have law enforcement going after pirating rings, cutting the problem off at the source and confiscating proceeds of crime, rather than enforcing DRM. Most consumers are honest enough to see the good value of gaming and pay for it anyways. Eliminating DRM would convince even more consumers to pay for games, since the games would be more stable.
As someone who's really bad about losing CDs for my games, this is actually one of the cooler innovations with something like Steam. You get flagged for a game and you own it, so you can just download it any time you need it instead of having to worry about keeping track of things.
Just the other day, for example, I had a craving to break out Warcraft III, but I couldn't find the first CD or the jewel box with the ID on it. So if I want to play it again, I need to buy a whole new game. If it were on Steam, I could just download it again and be all set. This is also great for disks that are broken and such, as well, and eliminates another reason for piracy: trying to get games working when you own the game but the CDs are lost or broken.
That is a good point about digital downloads making the process much easier. I love playing games from Stardock Central. It makes the whole experience so much easier. I'm not really a fan of Steam, but if they update it to be close to what Stardock has done, I would appreciate it.
I love digital downloads. I hope that all games and media entertainment becomes digital as the most popular standard soon. I hate dealing all types of disks even the latest and greatest blu ray/hd dvd and the like. I am just waiting for ISPs like Verizon FIOS and their speeds to become the norm so the issues of waiting forever to download gigabytes to play a movie or game is much less of a problem.
pontifex
Lifer
- Dec 5, 2000
- 43,804
- 46
- 91
the only thing i don't like about digital downloads is that you can't sell a game if you don't like it or get bored with it.
that and for me (3mb DSL), download speeds aren't fast enough, especially with bigger and bigger games.
another thing, the game devs/publishers need to work more on creating a non-buggy, crap game than putting in DRM. I wonder how much time is gets shifted from actually working on the game to making sure the DRM works? Or are those completely separate parts?
that and for me (3mb DSL), download speeds aren't fast enough, especially with bigger and bigger games.
another thing, the game devs/publishers need to work more on creating a non-buggy, crap game than putting in DRM. I wonder how much time is gets shifted from actually working on the game to making sure the DRM works? Or are those completely separate parts?
After hanging out in a bunch of game message boards during their development, it seems that the two are completely seperate, and that the publisher often just adds the DRM after the fact (After the game goes gold). So I don't think that DRM development is taking away from the developers resources.
Exactly. They often completely skip the whole QA process with the DRM combined with each game because they are promised that the DRM software will not do anything it shouldn't do to negatively effect the end user. Ya...bullshit.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter