Pirates Foiled by Deliberate Glitch in Batman: Arkham Asylum

[duragezic]

Haha funny. Only problem I see is idiots spreading around BS like the game is buggy even though its because they pirated it.

Whether it is worth $50... well it does seem like a fairly unique game and it got some killer reviews. I read nothing bad about the PC version so just because it's a port doesn't mean it's crap. Also from my understanding of BF1943 I think it is very unrealistic to expect a full high profile game like this to be anywhere near the price point of BF1943. I absolutely think $50 is a fair price for new PC games. Most games it doesn't take long to pay a lot less than that too.

 

[Dacalo]

Originally posted by: EricMartello
These days $50 a game just seems high. They'd sell more if the price was in the $30 or less range and the increased volume would most likely offset the reduction in price. With people able to download apps online for a few bucks, i.e Battlefield 1943 for $15 on Xbox Live and PS3 network, for $50 a game had better be damn good and I doubt another batman game is worthy of that big price tag.

WTH? Games cost $50-$60 15-20 years ago. Compared to that, games lately are cheaper.

I just finished the game (Batman AS) and I can say it's easily worth $52 I paid for.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: brblx
well, upon investigation (through reading, not pirating the game), it would appear that there are three or four game-breaking bugs hindering the pirated version, though they don't seem to affect everyone- the glide bug actually seems to be the least prominent. which, again, says to me that this is not an anti-piracy measure as much as just a general bug which eidos will either patch upon release, or fixed after the game way leaked (doubtful, i'm sure the game was gold long before the first pirated copy showed up).

there have been plenty of other threads where people have been blasted for posting a bug that exposed them as a 'pirate,' despite having paid for the game. makes me think these measures are never intended, they're just a way for the company to pretend there's a reason for their bad QA....

I'm gonna have to agree with that.

And if the Eidos was honest, I am even less likely to buy this game now.
"We deliberately fuck up our games"
??
Good for you buddy, you just lost an assload of sales. Theres already way too much bullshit going on with PC games today, do they seriously expect us to buy them when we know they are broken?

 

[Raduque]

Originally posted by: shortylickens

I'm gonna have to agree with that.

And if the Eidos was honest, I am even less likely to buy this game now.
"We deliberately fuck up our games for the people who pirate them"
??
Good for you buddy, you just lost an assload of sales. Theres already way too much bullshit going on with PC games today, do they seriously expect us to buy them when we know they are broken?

It's only broken if you stole it. Use a little critical thinking.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Reminds me of the FADE copy protection in Operation Flashpoint. The game would work normally for a while but your weapons would gradually become less and less accurate and enemies became more and more lethal that after the first few levels the game became unplayable. If FADE was activated on your pirated copy then the splash screen would display the words "Real games don't FADE" or something like that. I always got a good chuckle out of that.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: shortylickens

I'm gonna have to agree with that.

And if the Eidos was honest, I am even less likely to buy this game now.
"We deliberately fuck up our games for the people who pirate them"
??
Good for you buddy, you just lost an assload of sales. Theres already way too much bullshit going on with PC games today, do they seriously expect us to buy them when we know they are broken?

It's only broken if you stole it. Use a little critical thinking.

Why should I when you clearly refuse to?


The game doesnt know if its stolen or not. Computers arent magic or psychic (yet) It only checks certain things that will probably not be there if it were stolen. That doesnt include all the folks who pay for it and want to run it without the disc, or folks who even use the disc but get fucked over anyway when they game messes up and doesnt recognize what its supposed to.

 

[PingSpike]

I just don't think this is a good way to prevent piracy. AyashiKaibutsu basically explained why. You're going to get a buzz that the game is buggy. Whether that buzz is coming from pirates or legit players will just get lost in the noise, the end message will just be "People say its buggy".

I understand the idea, you beat the crackers by making it look like they succeeded at first play...then the internet gets flooded with pirated versions that are all fucked up. It basically allows you to poison the source. But collateral damage is going to end up falling back on you and your company, and I doubt those people were going to buy your game anyway unfortunately.

 

[flashbacck]

I still remember Ultima 7 pt 2, if you failed the copy protection manual quiz, every npc would start oinking at you. Good times.

I don't think this is a big deal or will prevent sales at all. The majority of people who pirated were never going to buy the game anyway. I doubt their opinions on how buggy the game is will matter. The game already has spectacular scores from reviewers, and a couple of them have commented on how bug free it is.

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: EricMartello
These days $50 a game just seems high. They'd sell more if the price was in the $30 or less range and the increased volume would most likely offset the reduction in price. With people able to download apps online for a few bucks, i.e Battlefield 1943 for $15 on Xbox Live and PS3 network, for $50 a game had better be damn good and I doubt another batman game is worthy of that big price tag.

Well said, I generally won't buy a game that costs over $30 anymore. Prices will drop eventually, and I can wait.

 

[JoshGuru7]

Originally posted by: tk149
I don't think they're going to generate many sales from this either.

This is the really important issue in my opinion.

There are three categories of people playing any given PC game:

1) Purchased the game because it was lower cost to them then piracy and they wanted to acquire this specific product. There's no doubt that the availability of a cheaper substitute hurts demand for a product, however, piracy often isn't cheaper. Pirates have to spend time searching for the torrents, bandwidth acquiring the torrents, and then time cracking the executables so they work. Much more importantly, they also incur the large risk of acquiring a trojan or virus that their AV program misses or having the program still not work correctly after they've incurred that risk. You can also add a moral hazard cost for the posters on these threads who say that they don't pirate software simply because it's wrong to do so, but I think it's a smaller factor than most believe.

2) Pirated the game because piracy was lower cost and they wanted to acquire this specific product. Fred wanted to play game X specifically and would have purchased it at some point but instead pirated the game because it was cheaper.

3) Pirated the game because it was a low cost entertainment substitute and would not pay for it if piracy was not an option. This is the vast majority of pirates. They acquire the game because it's the latest torrent posted under "PC Games", but if the torrent was never posted they would simply play the next thing posted.

When people talk about the impacts of piracy in terms of numbers, they often ignore this third group, yet the size of this group compared to the second group is very important for discussing the effects of any DRM strategy. DRM generates sales from moving group 2 to group 1, but if the majority of pirates are in group 3 then it's of limited value.

 

[brblx]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: shortylickens

I'm gonna have to agree with that.

And if the Eidos was honest, I am even less likely to buy this game now.
"We deliberately fuck up our games for the people who pirate them"
??
Good for you buddy, you just lost an assload of sales. Theres already way too much bullshit going on with PC games today, do they seriously expect us to buy them when we know they are broken?

It's only broken if you stole it. Use a little critical thinking.

how do you know? the game isn't out yet.

again, this is all pretty moot to me until the game gets to retail and we see if it is indeed magically 100% bug free.

 

[masterxfob]

yay, another pissing contest...

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: JoshGuru7

Originally posted by: tk149
I don't think they're going to generate many sales from this either.

This is the really important issue in my opinion.

There are three categories of people playing any given PC game:

1) Purchased the game because it was lower cost to them then piracy and they wanted to acquire this specific product. There's no doubt that the availability of a cheaper substitute hurts demand for a product, however, piracy often isn't cheaper. Pirates have to spend time searching for the torrents, bandwidth acquiring the torrents, and then time cracking the executables so they work. Much more importantly, they also incur the large risk of acquiring a trojan or virus that their AV program misses or having the program still not work correctly after they've incurred that risk. You can also add a moral hazard cost for the posters on these threads who say that they don't pirate software simply because it's wrong to do so, but I think it's a smaller factor than most believe.

2) Pirated the game because piracy was lower cost and they wanted to acquire this specific product. Fred wanted to play game X specifically and would have purchased it at some point but instead pirated the game because it was cheaper.

3) Pirated the game because it was a low cost entertainment substitute and would not pay for it if piracy was not an option. This is the vast majority of pirates. They acquire the game because it's the latest torrent posted under "PC Games", but if the torrent was never posted they would simply play the next thing posted.

When people talk about the impacts of piracy in terms of numbers, they often ignore this third group, yet the size of this group compared to the second group is very important for discussing the effects of any DRM strategy. DRM generates sales from moving group 2 to group 1, but if the majority of pirates are in group 3 then it's of limited value.

Most pirates are like #2/#3 or want to play a certain game, but won't buy it anyway. Most people who pirate things... I would say at least 95% are not going to buy it unless the game has great multiplayer and you can only play on tons of servers by buying the game... Like Call of Duty 4. You can play on lots of cracked/hamachi servers on CoD4, but that's a pain in the ass and you only have a few good ones. Where as if you owned the game you could play on thousands. That's about the only reason to buy that game if you are #3/#2.

Why do people have to pay $50 for a game that they have not even tried? It's taking a huge risk. When I played console games I would always rent them. I rarely bought them because they were not worth the $30 or $40 that it would cost. I could rent the game for 5 days for about $5 and I would have played that game as much as I would have ever.

Oh, and pirating games... Really, if you wait a few months after the game comes out then it will probably take only the download time, normal install time, and then copy and pasting a crack... It really takes no time at all to pirate a game a few months AFTER it comes out... The guys who crack all these games usually have fucked up cracks during the first few weeks because they haven't ironed out the bugs.

 

[mindcycle]

Pretty funny. Seems like a creative way to stop pirates from playing the game before the release date and before a tested crack makes it playable without bugs. Make them work for it.. haha

The one thing that bothers me is even though they implemented this "bug" protection scheme, they still felt the need to include SecuROM. http://hellforge.gameriot.com/...sylum-is-still-SecuROM

I mean, is that really necessary? The disc based version won't have online activation (which is good), but if you buy it off Steam it will.. Does that even make sense? You purchase it off Steam but you still have to activate it through SecuROM. I don't get that at all.

Also, someone mentioned Titans Quest a few posts back. That's an interesting comparison since I know that the game got a bad rap from pirate versions crashing in specifics places. The problem was that people equated that with the game just being buggy and didn't know it was intentional. The game was already buggy, but that just made things worse for them. At least it's known that Batman AA has deliberate bugs. That was where Iron Lore failed, they didn't inform the public. We'll see how it goes for this game.

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

Originally posted by: JoshGuru7

Originally posted by: tk149
I don't think they're going to generate many sales from this either.

This is the really important issue in my opinion.

There are three categories of people playing any given PC game:

1) Purchased the game because it was lower cost to them then piracy and they wanted to acquire this specific product. There's no doubt that the availability of a cheaper substitute hurts demand for a product, however, piracy often isn't cheaper. Pirates have to spend time searching for the torrents, bandwidth acquiring the torrents, and then time cracking the executables so they work. Much more importantly, they also incur the large risk of acquiring a trojan or virus that their AV program misses or having the program still not work correctly after they've incurred that risk. You can also add a moral hazard cost for the posters on these threads who say that they don't pirate software simply because it's wrong to do so, but I think it's a smaller factor than most believe.

2) Pirated the game because piracy was lower cost and they wanted to acquire this specific product. Fred wanted to play game X specifically and would have purchased it at some point but instead pirated the game because it was cheaper.

3) Pirated the game because it was a low cost entertainment substitute and would not pay for it if piracy was not an option. This is the vast majority of pirates. They acquire the game because it's the latest torrent posted under "PC Games", but if the torrent was never posted they would simply play the next thing posted.

When people talk about the impacts of piracy in terms of numbers, they often ignore this third group, yet the size of this group compared to the second group is very important for discussing the effects of any DRM strategy. DRM generates sales from moving group 2 to group 1, but if the majority of pirates are in group 3 then it's of limited value.

False. Group 3 is actually a much larger problem and needs to be dealt with even if were smaller then groups 1&2. It actually does more damage by artificially inflating the supply of entertainment. In group one and two, you lose 100% of one sale. Group three devalues your entire product line, those of your competitors, and those in related industries.

Any DRM which prevents a pirate in group 3 from stealing a single game prevents some of this widespread problem, and thus is every bit as valuable as preventing someone in group 1 or 2. Realistically, group 3 needs to be dealt with on a society wide basis as they're a far greater threat to the economy then the others.

Which is exactly why we have things like the DMCA, though I imagine nothing short of criminalization will be a sufficient deterrent.

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: PhatoseAlpha

Originally posted by: JoshGuru7

Originally posted by: tk149
I don't think they're going to generate many sales from this either.

This is the really important issue in my opinion.

There are three categories of people playing any given PC game:

1) Purchased the game because it was lower cost to them then piracy and they wanted to acquire this specific product. There's no doubt that the availability of a cheaper substitute hurts demand for a product, however, piracy often isn't cheaper. Pirates have to spend time searching for the torrents, bandwidth acquiring the torrents, and then time cracking the executables so they work. Much more importantly, they also incur the large risk of acquiring a trojan or virus that their AV program misses or having the program still not work correctly after they've incurred that risk. You can also add a moral hazard cost for the posters on these threads who say that they don't pirate software simply because it's wrong to do so, but I think it's a smaller factor than most believe.

2) Pirated the game because piracy was lower cost and they wanted to acquire this specific product. Fred wanted to play game X specifically and would have purchased it at some point but instead pirated the game because it was cheaper.

3) Pirated the game because it was a low cost entertainment substitute and would not pay for it if piracy was not an option. This is the vast majority of pirates. They acquire the game because it's the latest torrent posted under "PC Games", but if the torrent was never posted they would simply play the next thing posted.

When people talk about the impacts of piracy in terms of numbers, they often ignore this third group, yet the size of this group compared to the second group is very important for discussing the effects of any DRM strategy. DRM generates sales from moving group 2 to group 1, but if the majority of pirates are in group 3 then it's of limited value.

False. Group 3 is actually a much larger problem and needs to be dealt with even if were smaller then groups 1&2. It actually does more damage by artificially inflating the supply of entertainment. In group one and two, you lose 100% of one sale. Group three devalues your entire product line, those of your competitors, and those in related industries.

Any DRM which prevents a pirate in group 3 from stealing a single game prevents some of this widespread problem, and thus is every bit as valuable as preventing someone in group 1 or 2. Realistically, group 3 needs to be dealt with on a society wide basis as they're a far greater threat to the economy then the others.

Which is exactly why we have things like the DMCA, though I imagine nothing short of criminalization will be a sufficient deterrent.

lol

Yes, #3 is going to ruin the economy...

Hear that guys? Economic down turn, why is it happening? Pirates.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Yes, #3 is going to ruin the economy...

Of the entertainment sector it is part of, absolutely. It already is doing it, rather rapidly too.

The price of entry to PC gaming is lower then it ever has been, even sub $100 cards can play the latest and greatest games- almost across the board- with pretty much everything maxed out. They aren't requiring significant cost on the hardware side and their price point has remained static for many years now reducing the real value needed to acquire them. The game industry as a whole has also seen staggering growth over the last decade, eclipsing numerous other forms of entertainment and rapidly approaching the point where it is in competition for the most popular form of entertainment. With all of these factors at play, PC gaming is in a freefall sales wise with nothing indicating any change of course is likely in the future.

You can see it in this thread, people are talking about how they won't pay $50 for a game anymore, most seem to think games should be closer to $30. The perception of value has changed, and it is considerably lower then what it was in the past. The third group of pirates is a major factor in the perception of reduced value. Even good people who wouldn't think of stealing a game have their perception of value reduced as they know that the game is freely available with a reduction in moral standards. This becomes a perception issue as people need to consider what is the monetary worth of their moral code. Not saying these people will be tempted to pirate the game, but they may see it as a case of they are not willing to pay the $50 because they refuse to become a crook.

For those that pirate simply because they don't want to pay (opposite those that do so because they can't pay, a distinct separation the idiots bemoaning pirating can't seem to decipher)

There is absolutely no difference whatsoever between them. Both of them feel that they are entitled to something they have absolutely no right to. If the second group honestly believes that their lack of currency makes it OK for them to steal, they should instead consider spending the time they would have spent with their stolen IP instead working to increase the amount of discretionary funds at their disposal. Laziness is never a good reason to steal.

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Yes, #3 is going to ruin the economy...

Of the entertainment sector it is part of, absolutely. It already is doing it, rather rapidly too.

The price of entry to PC gaming is lower then it ever has been, even sub $100 cards can play the latest and greatest games- almost across the board- with pretty much everything maxed out. They aren't requiring significant cost on the hardware side and their price point has remained static for many years now reducing the real value needed to acquire them. The game industry as a whole has also seen staggering growth over the last decade, eclipsing numerous other forms of entertainment and rapidly approaching the point where it is in competition for the most popular form of entertainment. With all of these factors at play, PC gaming is in a freefall sales wise with nothing indicating any change of course is likely in the future.

You can see it in this thread, people are talking about how they won't pay $50 for a game anymore, most seem to think games should be closer to $30. The perception of value has changed, and it is considerably lower then what it was in the past. The third group of pirates is a major factor in the perception of reduced value. Even good people who wouldn't think of stealing a game have their perception of value reduced as they know that the game is freely available with a reduction in moral standards. This becomes a perception issue as people need to consider what is the monetary worth of their moral code. Not saying these people will be tempted to pirate the game, but they may see it as a case of they are not willing to pay the $50 because they refuse to become a crook.

For those that pirate simply because they don't want to pay (opposite those that do so because they can't pay, a distinct separation the idiots bemoaning pirating can't seem to decipher)

There is absolutely no difference whatsoever between them. Both of them feel that they are entitled to something they have absolutely no right to. If the second group honestly believes that their lack of currency makes it OK for them to steal, they should instead consider spending the time they would have spent with their stolen IP instead working to increase the amount of discretionary funds at their disposal. Laziness is never a good reason to steal.

lol... It's not stealing.

http://www.devtopics.com/wordp...8/piracyisnottheft.jpg

And your words will not change ANYONE'S actions.

So, what is the point of your argument? (I rather not even point out all the flawed logic, but whatevaah)

 

[BenSkywalker]

2. to appropriate (ideas, credit, words, etc.) without right or acknowledgment.

It is by definition stealing- that goes for the English definition and also the legal one.

And your words will not change ANYONE'S actions.

So, what is the point of your argument?

Degenerates should be called out and their exceedingly poor attempts to rationalize their stealing should be exposed for what it is. They have lesser moral standards then a proper functioning society demands and they should be reminded of it.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: PhatoseAlpha

Originally posted by: JoshGuru7

Originally posted by: tk149
I don't think they're going to generate many sales from this either.

This is the really important issue in my opinion.

There are three categories of people playing any given PC game:

1) Purchased the game because it was lower cost to them then piracy and they wanted to acquire this specific product. There's no doubt that the availability of a cheaper substitute hurts demand for a product, however, piracy often isn't cheaper. Pirates have to spend time searching for the torrents, bandwidth acquiring the torrents, and then time cracking the executables so they work. Much more importantly, they also incur the large risk of acquiring a trojan or virus that their AV program misses or having the program still not work correctly after they've incurred that risk. You can also add a moral hazard cost for the posters on these threads who say that they don't pirate software simply because it's wrong to do so, but I think it's a smaller factor than most believe.

2) Pirated the game because piracy was lower cost and they wanted to acquire this specific product. Fred wanted to play game X specifically and would have purchased it at some point but instead pirated the game because it was cheaper.

3) Pirated the game because it was a low cost entertainment substitute and would not pay for it if piracy was not an option. This is the vast majority of pirates. They acquire the game because it's the latest torrent posted under "PC Games", but if the torrent was never posted they would simply play the next thing posted.

When people talk about the impacts of piracy in terms of numbers, they often ignore this third group, yet the size of this group compared to the second group is very important for discussing the effects of any DRM strategy. DRM generates sales from moving group 2 to group 1, but if the majority of pirates are in group 3 then it's of limited value.

False. Group 3 is actually a much larger problem and needs to be dealt with even if were smaller then groups 1&2. It actually does more damage by artificially inflating the supply of entertainment. In group one and two, you lose 100% of one sale. Group three devalues your entire product line, those of your competitors, and those in related industries.

Any DRM which prevents a pirate in group 3 from stealing a single game prevents some of this widespread problem, and thus is every bit as valuable as preventing someone in group 1 or 2. Realistically, group 3 needs to be dealt with on a society wide basis as they're a far greater threat to the economy then the others.

Which is exactly why we have things like the DMCA, though I imagine nothing short of criminalization will be a sufficient deterrent.

I absolutely agree with this. A lot of people on this forum talk about group #3 as though they are doing nothing wrong because they wouldn't or couldn't buy the game anyway. When there's something I want that I can't afford, I don't buy or steal it simple as that. It shouldn't make a difference if that product is physical or stored as a stream of bits on a disk, and I'm sick and tired of these people that believe they're entitled to the latest entertainment products regardless of whether they can afford them. Enough with this entitlement mentality.

Edit - I'd also like to add Group #0 to the list which includes people like me, for whom pirating would be substantially cheaper, easier and quicker but who are willing to pay full price for PC games because we support the developers and want to see the industry thrive.

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

2. to appropriate (ideas, credit, words, etc.) without right or acknowledgment.

It is by definition stealing- that goes for the English definition and also the legal one.

And your words will not change ANYONE'S actions.

So, what is the point of your argument?

Degenerates should be called out and their exceedingly poor attempts to rationalize their stealing should be exposed for what it is. They have lesser moral standards then a proper functioning society demands and they should be reminded of it.

Mkay... I think pirates are all good with being called degenerates and uhm... people with "lesser moral standards." I don't think they care

Piracy is not a big new thing, btw... It's been around for a long time. If the industry was to ever fail, it would have failed years ago.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Mkay... I think pirates are all good with being called degenerates and uhm... people with "lesser moral standards."

Why is lesser moral standards in quotes? It is a point of fact, as is calling them degenerates. If they care or not is actually a larger issue, it is encouraging to see some governments are starting to put pirates in jail, hopefully that trend ramps up significantly in the coming years.

Piracy is not a big new thing, btw... It's been around for a long time. If the industry was to ever fail, it would have failed years ago.

Based on what logic? Sales are trending down as piracy trends up, at a certain point it will cause a collapse if it continues. Will we reach that point? I certainly hope not, but when you have 0 people buying games and millions of people pirating them collapse is absolutely certain for PC gaming.

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Mkay... I think pirates are all good with being called degenerates and uhm... people with "lesser moral standards."

Why is lesser moral standards in quotes? It is a point of fact, as is calling them degenerates. If they care or not is actually a larger issue, it is encouraging to see some governments are starting to put pirates in jail, hopefully that trend ramps up significantly in the coming years.

Piracy is not a big new thing, btw... It's been around for a long time. If the industry was to ever fail, it would have failed years ago.

Based on what logic? Sales are trending down as piracy trends up, at a certain point it will cause a collapse if it continues. Will we reach that point? I certainly hope not, but when you have 0 people buying games and millions of people pirating them collapse is absolutely certain for PC gaming.

Music industry, piracy, sales still fine... Bad economy, shitty games, lower sales, and I see no evidence of higher piracy rates.

Gaming industry will collapse when all it releases is shitty games, and the economy goes into an extreme nose dive.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Music industry, piracy, sales still fine

Really?

Overall music sales have continued their years-long slide. Total industry sales were about $10 billion last year, down from $14 billion in 2000, according to the Recording Industry Association of America.

Down $4Billion dollars isn't fine. Link

Bad economy, shitty games, lower sales, and I see no evidence of higher piracy rates.

PC gaming has been on a sales decline for close to a decade now, the market being reduced by ~50% in the US(prior to the recession starting btw, to eliminate that line of argument) outisde of MMOs(something the pirates can't hack fully).

Gaming industry will collapse when all it releases is shitty games, and the economy goes into an extreme nose dive.

No, the PC gaming industry would collapse instantly if everyone pirated their games. It already is in a rapid state of decline. Because piracy exists, devs have no reason to so much as question the quality of their games, particularly not when they can check out how many torrents are going for their games to get a good idea how many people are playing them versus how many bought them.

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Music industry, piracy, sales still fine

Really?

Overall music sales have continued their years-long slide. Total industry sales were about $10 billion last year, down from $14 billion in 2000, according to the Recording Industry Association of America.

Down $4Billion dollars isn't fine. Link

Bad economy, shitty games, lower sales, and I see no evidence of higher piracy rates.

PC gaming has been on a sales decline for close to a decade now, the market being reduced by ~50% in the US(prior to the recession starting btw, to eliminate that line of argument) outisde of MMOs(something the pirates can't hack fully).

Gaming industry will collapse when all it releases is shitty games, and the economy goes into an extreme nose dive.

No, the PC gaming industry would collapse instantly if everyone pirated their games. It already is in a rapid state of decline. Because piracy exists, devs have no reason to so much as question the quality of their games, particularly not when they can check out how many torrents are going for their games to get a good idea how many people are playing them versus how many bought them.

Yeah, because Apple has iTunes and you can buy the songs you want for .99 cents or now 1.29... Same for Amazon. You don't have to buy a whole album like you had to with a CD. CD prices are also inflated compared to online. Same article says sales are only going to shrink by 4% by 2013. There are also subscription services that have you pay <$20 a month for unlimited amounts of songs where as you would have to pay a lot more to get all that.

Where are you pulling this stat? Console gaming is very popular. It's a lot easier for people to just pop in a DVD and play a game than install it and worry about their computer being able to actually play it. People also enjoy playing games on their TV and not on a small monitor.

Cracked MMO servers are around... Illegit WoW servers have been around for a while. You can make one on your own computer and host it. People play MMOs and pay the subscription because of the experience. It also costs too much money to host a good server.