Southern Piracy

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: BladeVenom

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
[
How do you know that Columbia doesn't have a similar law? For all you know, pirating PC games might be legal in that country because of certain conditions, such as the inability to buy it in the first place.

It isn't about the legal aspects, it is the moral ones.

Intellectual property laws are all about legality, not morality. There's nothing immoral about copying a good idea if it's legal.

Not talking about just an idea. If you worked for several months designing a new product and someone came in when you were gone, took a picture then used your work to make a product, you would not see that as immoral ?

It really is simple. Are you benefiting from someone else work without their permission ?
If you play a pirated game, then you are getting the benefit of that persons work without their permission and without them receiving any compensation for the work.

If you watch a movie that a studio has released with the idea that they want money in order for people to watch that movie. Who are we to say that because we think they are charging too much , or we don't like how they market the movie, that we should get to watch it anyway ? Where do you draw the line where what they want for their work doesn't matter I can just take it ?

What if you're the film-maker and you want people in South America to see your film, but your distributor won't screen it down there?

That could be a totally different thing.
All depends on what you agreed to with the publisher. If you took money from the publisher and agreed to their terms, then it wouldn't be right to do an end run around them if they held up their end. If they screwed you over or something then its up to the film maker.

 

[mindcycle]

I for one think the article is pretty relevant to what is happening today. The piracy rate is higher in poorer countries, which makes sense. In the US, the piracy rate is rather small compared to other countries. It shows that piracy is higher in places that don't have lots of disposable income. Charging more for gaming systems and games, like mentioned in the article, also adds to the problem.

http://www.nationmaster.com/gr...e-software-piracy-rate

Digital distribution is already helping. The problem is that lots of (if not most) games are still released regionally on different dates.. So if you're in a region that doesn't get a game you've really been looking forward to for months after the US or UK release, what are your options? You either wait it out, import the game for lots of extra money, or pirate it. Morality aside, many will simply choose the third option because it's the easiest.

The solution is to make games available everywhere on the release date. If the option to purchase the game exists and is easier than the effort it takes to pirate it, you will generate more sales. It's just common sense. So make it easy, available, and maybe even throw in some extra incentives for a purchased copy, like free multiplayer, extra content, etc..

My stance has always been, less road blocks, greater incentive. So instead of bitching about piracy (a problem that isn't going away), and throwing on draconian DRM, staggered release dates, regional release dates, etc.. publishers should focus on ways to make their products have greater availability and be more appealing than pirated copies.

 

[4537256]

That article is rather amusing in that its no different than any other. if its not available in their country, then their not entitled. All piraters have one thing in common...excuses.

an excuse to justify their reason for not paying for somethings thats marketed for sale. a fundemental breakdown of economic purpose and a complete lack of respect for the gaming industries hard work along with lack of forethought for the POSSIBILITY that publishers may stop making any games whatsoever for the PC platform or any heavily pirated platform or at least continue with R&D of drm, which can only get worse btw.
its always, "i'm poor, its not for sale in my country, its just for demo purposes, i'm paranoid of DRM, i dont like EA, they make millions anyway ...etc.
the sorry excuses never ends. if your going to pirate, why not just be completely honest with how it really is and say your just a greedy cheap azz, you want something for nothing and you have no respect for the pc gaming industry. its there for free so you take it with no realization that those big corporate mega million profits do go back into bigger and better games and 3d engine technologies. Now Crytek/ID..etc are going console and no longer interested in pushing technology, good job, give yourselves pats on the back and always blame the publishers who put a gun to your head and force you to download for your own greedy enterntainment.

i dont like drm or treatment from publishers on pc platform either, thats why i play mostly console titles now. i rent or buy and at least i'm contributing back in appreciation for the entertianment they provide me.
some will note that Publishers are the greedy ones...well all competitive business's have to be, just remember that they are providing something in return, its called entertainment, sequals and future endevours, piraters contribute nothing, thats 100% pure greed there.

 

[Barfo]

Originally posted by: 4537256
if your going to pirate, why not just be completely honest with how it really is and say your just a greedy cheap azz, you want something for nothing and you have no respect for the pc gaming industry.

The article is about the people who can't afford the games or they aren't available in their region so your point is moot, and that coupled with your poor writing makes you look like a moron.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

My position is different from a lot of gamers. I work with developers whenever I have to do in game cinematics, or textures or models. I hear a lot of them saying they don't want to support the pc anymore because it is not worth the trouble. I have been trying for the past couple years to argue with them that the pc is worth supporting , but it is getting harder to make my case.

It is obvious that the pc is losing ground as a gaming platform; however, rather than viewing this as a consequence of the piracy levels that the companies are being subjected to, I would argue that they are actively engineering this shift towards consoles.

However, perhaps we are both being unduly pessimistic: as the big companies focus more and more attention on consoles, this may create a gap in the market that could be filled by other developers.

Optimism aside, in the immediate future we will undoubtedly continue to be assailed by poor quality console ports, games released whilst still in the beta stage and shoddy after-sale support.

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: BladeVenom

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
[
How do you know that Columbia doesn't have a similar law? For all you know, pirating PC games might be legal in that country because of certain conditions, such as the inability to buy it in the first place.

It isn't about the legal aspects, it is the moral ones.

Intellectual property laws are all about legality, not morality. There's nothing immoral about copying a good idea if it's legal.

Not talking about just an idea.

Ideas are patentable and are intellectual property.

If you worked for several months designing a new product and someone came in when you were gone, took a picture then used your work to make a product, you would not see that as immoral ?

Breaking and Entering, and industrial espionage are both already crimes.

Clean room design happens all the time. As long as they follow the letter of the law, they can steal other people's ideas. All good ideas are copied. Where would Microsoft, or any software for that matter, be today without copying other people's ideas and concepts.

It really is simple. Are you benefiting from someone else work without their permission ? If you play a pirated game, then you are getting the benefit of that persons work without their permission and without them receiving any compensation for the work.

People copy from Shakespeare all the time without compensating his heirs. The copyright has long since expired. If you want to copy Tolkien, then you have to pay his heirs. It's all a matter of legality.

If you really believe it's a matter of morality, have you tracked down Shakespeare's heirs and paid them for all the media you've watched that stole from Shakespeare?

If you watch a movie that a studio has released with the idea that they want money in order for people to watch that movie. Who are we to say that because we think they are charging too much , or we don't like how they market the movie, that we should get to watch it anyway ? Where do you draw the line where what they want for their work doesn't matter I can just take it ?

The line is drawn with copyright laws. The copyright on Night of the Living Dead has lapsed, so you can watch that for free.

If you believe that it's a matter of morality, then maybe you should write Romero a check if you've watched the film recently. Are you really going to do that?

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom


If you believe that it's a matter of morality, then maybe you should write Romero a check if you've watched the film recently. Are you really going to do that?

The difference is that Romero agreed to those terms, I'm not trying to make an end run around him to take what belongs to him or making up my own rules with excuses. If the movie was just released and I was watching it without paying for it, that would be wrong.


The same with a game developer. He set the rules for how he wanted to be paid for his work. If he upheld his part and provided the game and set the rules of , "I want $50 for anyone to play it", you have two choices. Not pay it and walk away, or pay it and play the game. Anything else is wrong.

How would you feel if you worked for a days labor with the understanding that at the end of the day you would get $100 for your work, then the employer tells you he decided not to pay you, then tells you to get lost ?

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Red Irish


It is obvious that the pc is losing ground as a gaming platform; however, rather than viewing this as a consequence of the piracy levels that the companies are being subjected to, I would argue that they are actively engineering this shift towards consoles.

Consoles are a funny thing. They work on a cycle of being the best tech out there then slowly decline in capability till the next hardware release. If you look back to the super nintendo that was about the time that the pc started to develop as a gaming system.

Some years the pc would lead gaming, other years if there was a new console release, it would lag behind. Now though we have a different problem. Gamers are no longer willing to accept simple games. They want acting, storylines, awesome graphics, soundtracks, multiplayer, and all those other things. So now it becomes a problem of manpower and not as much technology.

However, perhaps we are both being unduly pessimistic: as the big companies focus more and more attention on consoles, this may create a gap in the market that could be filled by other developers.

I really wish the market was filled with more indie developers. It is just the problem I mentioned above with manpower that is making it hard. I remember when people would get together with 2 or 3 friends and make a great game. Now you have companies like ubisoft with teams so large it is insane. For assassins creed 2 , they have a team of 450 people, working on that one title. There is no way for the small guy to compete like before.

Optimism aside, in the immediate future we will undoubtedly continue to be assailed by poor quality console ports, games released whilst still in the beta stage and shoddy after-sale support.

I think the pc would make a killer gaming platform if they could overcome the DRM issues and standardize the hardware a bit more. Companies like intel /nvidia/ amd are not helping things with the confusing naming schemes.

I'm also looking forward to PCG format games that boot directly from the bios to the dvd drive, completely bypassing the hard drive OS install. That will give the pc the closest to a console experience possible while using the pc extra hardware.

 

[4537256]

Originally posted by: Barfo

Originally posted by: 4537256
if your going to pirate, why not just be completely honest with how it really is and say your just a greedy cheap azz, you want something for nothing and you have no respect for the pc gaming industry.

The article is about the people who can't afford the games or they aren't available in their region so your point is moot, and that coupled with your poor writing makes you look like a moron.

which is an excuse....just like i freaking said, it was the entire point i made and mentioned all the other related excuses along with it. The article discussed someone with an excuse, my post was about excuses...cripes, read next time.

 

[coloumb]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

In the story about the boy in Colombia I'm surprised nobody mentioned that while he complained about the price of consoles, he had no problem affording a pc with enough ram, video card, cpu , dvd , internet access, to pirate games.


It is just another case of someone trying to justify a reason to pirate. There is no justification for it, it isn't a right you are born with, games are not something you have to have to live.

What if PC components are readily available but PC games are not? [ie: Dad has a high end computer for work - but junior uses it to play games.] This is what I gather from the article - if you want a pc game, you either drive a long distance to the nearest city or a friend sends/gives it to you.

"The first inconvenience was that traveling to Bogotá alone is not something any 12 year old aged child can do and however if you were older you had to be really dying for a particular game in order to travel just for that. The other inconvenience was that you simply couldn?t find the game there either."

"However the availability of games is still a limited and the costs are still higher so piracy still exists in part for these same reasons."

"In general it is called a Digital Distribution Platform. People will still be able to pirate games, but the opportunities given for people wishing to buy a game a increased a lot."

This boils down to nothing more than lack of patience - not greed.

If the game was available and at a reasonable cost - junior [or his parents] would [probably] buy it. This is where DRM needs to address the cost and availability issue - offer the game on or around the same day as everyone else and at a lower cost than retail [I'm not paying for a box, cd, manual - so a retail version of the game that costs $49.00 should sell for $39.00 via DRM]

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Consoles are a funny thing. They work on a cycle of being the best tech out there then slowly decline in capability till the next hardware release. If you look back to the super nintendo that was about the time that the pc started to develop as a gaming system.

???
Computers were used as gaming platforms well before that. Commodore's marketing line was "why buy just a video game?" and they marketed it against the Atari 2600. Shatner and the Vic 20. He's right too, the Atari was a piece of shit compared to my Commodore 64. I even had more C64 games than NES games.

I think the pc would make a killer gaming platform if they could overcome the DRM issues and standardize the hardware a bit more. Companies like intel /nvidia/ amd are not helping things with the confusing naming schemes.

The main downfall, in my opinion, was when everything shifted from CPU to GPU. Up until Quake, you could take a computer game and it would run on any computer that had a certain processor or better. Games like Doom and Rise of the Triad would say 386 required, 486 recommended, and that was it. If your grandma's computer was a 486, you could run that game on her computer. Now it's not like that. You could get a top of the line Intel i7 with 12gb of ram and it will still run like dog shit. Why? Because OEM computers do not come with video cards. On top of that, OEM computers also have shitty power supplies. You can't just put a video card in a Dell computer and expect it to work; it will black screen due to a lack of power. This pretty much restricts PC gaming to people who build their own computers, which is an extremely small percentage of people.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Consoles are a funny thing. They work on a cycle of being the best tech out there then slowly decline in capability till the next hardware release. If you look back to the super nintendo that was about the time that the pc started to develop as a gaming system.

???
Computers were used as gaming platforms well before that. Commodore's marketing line was "why buy just a video game?" and they marketed it against the Atari 2600. Shatner and the Vic 20. He's right too, the Atari was a piece of shit compared to my Commodore 64. I even had more C64 games than NES games.

Yes I know they were, I owned a Vic 20.
The thing was it wasn't something most people knew about. It was extremely expensive and computers in the home were rare. The companies that exist now like activision, I think one of the oldest, were not interested in computer games at the time. I used the SNES as a point in time because that is about the time that you started seeing games like Mechwarrior, descent , and others that started to make people think the pc was a viable platform. The 286 cpu had some games but nothing really great, about the time of the 386/486 is when things started to take off.

 

[WildW]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
The main downfall, in my opinion, was when everything shifted from CPU to GPU. Up until Quake, you could take a computer game and it would run on any computer that had a certain processor or better. Games like Doom and Rise of the Triad would say 386 required, 486 recommended, and that was it. If your grandma's computer was a 486, you could run that game on her computer. Now it's not like that. You could get a top of the line Intel i7 with 12gb of ram and it will still run like dog shit. Why? Because OEM computers do not come with video cards. On top of that, OEM computers also have shitty power supplies. You can't just put a video card in a Dell computer and expect it to work; it will black screen due to a lack of power. This pretty much restricts PC gaming to people who build their own computers, which is an extremely small percentage of people.

For a while I've been thinking that a more standardized "PC" is the way forward for PC gaming. . . you could even do it with a console. The point of PC gaming is not necessarily that the PC is a versatile machine that can also surf the web and do email . . . "PC" gaming is the ability to sit at a desk, in front of the screen, with a keyboard and a mouse. It lends itself to entirely different games than a console - see how badly real-time strategy titles and FPS games have always worked on consoles compared to the PC. It's nothing to do with the hardware, it's the mouse+keyboard+monitor that does it all. That's really the only way the PC gaming scene differs from consoles.

I would happily buy a "console" with fixed hardware that would play the same type of games as a PC plays, with a mouse and a keyboard and a monitor. The games would come on a disc and just work when I put it in the console. And the crazy thing? This console exists ALREADY. The XBox 360 can be attached to a monitor, it has USB ports for a keyboard and a mouse, it has headsets for voice comms, and it plays the latest games. But nobody makes "PC" games for it, they're stuck in the big-TV-and-sofa world with joypads.

Imagine all the people who want to buy Sims 3 on PC and are wondering how well it would run. . . and the million forum threads they'll post, and the number of them that will bug you beloved PC enthusiasts with inane questions as to how well Sims 3 will run on their old Dell Pentium 4 box or integrated-graphics laptops. Wouldn't you love to tell them "Buy it for XBox, plug it into a monitor and plug your USB mouse in, it'll be much better than on your old PC."

The next XBox should be a PC games console, not a living-room console. Microsoft have tried to do it with their Vista "performance rating" scheme, but it's too vague and not adopted widely enough, particularly when you come to things like different screen resolutions and such.

Edit: AND it would give console levels of copy protection, so the software houses could quit whining about piracy and make good games again.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: WildW
I would happily buy a "console" with fixed hardware that would play the same type of games as a PC plays, with a mouse and a keyboard and a monitor. The games would come on a disc and just work when I put it in the console. And the crazy thing? This console exists ALREADY. The XBox 360 can be attached to a monitor, it has USB ports for a keyboard and a mouse, it has headsets for voice comms, and it plays the latest games. But nobody makes "PC" games for it, they're stuck in the big-TV-and-sofa world with joypads.

This already exists to some degree with the XIM. http://www.xim360.com/

I have one and it works pretty well. It's not a 100% replacement for gaming on the PC, but it's about as close as you can get. You do have to mess around with config files to get games to work properly with your particular mouse, but it's worth it IMO.

I would also like to see kb/mouse support built in by default to the next xbox, but I don't think they'd ever drop the controller completely. There is just too much tied up into the idea that you play a console from the couch. People wouldn't be comfortable with KB/mouse only, so that's why i'm saying give us both!

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Consoles are a funny thing. They work on a cycle of being the best tech out there then slowly decline in capability till the next hardware release. If you look back to the super nintendo that was about the time that the pc started to develop as a gaming system.

???
Computers were used as gaming platforms well before that. Commodore's marketing line was "why buy just a video game?" and they marketed it against the Atari 2600. Shatner and the Vic 20. He's right too, the Atari was a piece of shit compared to my Commodore 64. I even had more C64 games than NES games.

Yes I know they were, I owned a Vic 20.
The thing was it wasn't something most people knew about. It was extremely expensive and computers in the home were rare. The companies that exist now like activision, I think one of the oldest, were not interested in computer games at the time. I used the SNES as a point in time because that is about the time that you started seeing games like Mechwarrior, descent , and others that started to make people think the pc was a viable platform. The 286 cpu had some games but nothing really great, about the time of the 386/486 is when things started to take off.

I guess I see your point, but I'm thinking more in terms of raw numbers. The Commodore 64 sold as many units as the Atari 2600 - roughly 30 million. That also puts it on par with the Xbox 360. The Commodore 64, Amiga, and NES even shared a lot of the same games. If you look at this video title 100 Commodore 64 games in 10 minutes, you might recognize a lot of those were for the NES as well. We didn't have Zelda or Mario, but we did have Maniac Mansion, Zak McKracken, Bubble Bobble, Hillsfar (worst game ever), Turrican, and many others. It might not be Activision or EA making these games, but somebody was porting them.

I would happily buy a "console" with fixed hardware that would play the same type of games as a PC plays, with a mouse and a keyboard and a monitor. The games would come on a disc and just work when I put it in the console. And the crazy thing? This console exists ALREADY. The XBox 360 can be attached to a monitor, it has USB ports for a keyboard and a mouse, it has headsets for voice comms, and it plays the latest games. But nobody makes "PC" games for it, they're stuck in the big-TV-and-sofa world with joypads.

I know it's cliche, but I blame Microsoft. MS has successfully strong armed video card companies into strictly adhering to DirectX standards when releasing video drivers. If it doesn't 100% stick to the DirectX standard, it doesn't get "WHQL" certified. Logically MS could apply that exact same tactic to Xbox games and say "you can't make this game unless it works with a keyboard/mouse as well", but no, they don't do that. It's a shame too since I really like the idea of the Xbox 360.

Nintendo made that same mistake with the Wii. They don't require games to have full support for the "classic controller" (sort of looks like a SNES controller with analog sticks), so naturally a lot of games can't use that.

 

[Pelu]

1. piracy cant be killed...
2. piracy helps hardware sales... (there is plenty of people that invest a lot of cash in hardware to see their pirate software... lol... but this is ironic)
3. why pay if we can get it for free... (no way to change that in people mind, give up trying.. really)
4. pirates doesnt care about what other people think about piracy if is right or not... justify or not... download and play thats it... dont waste time arguing with no piracy arguments because is.... plain.... fruitless... or futile...)
5. thepiratebay.com is going down (and already they have a circumvent way to avoid damage to the pirate sea, too bad for the ones who expend 8 millions buying it.... lol that is what happend if you try to face the piracy)

 

[way2fast91]

Originally posted by: Pelu
1. piracy cant be killed...
2. piracy helps hardware sales... (there is plenty of people that invest a lot of cash in hardware to see their pirate software... lol... but this is ironic)
3. why pay if we can get it for free... (no way to change that in people mind, give up trying.. really)
4. pirates doesnt care about what other people think about piracy if is right or not... justify or not... download and play thats it... dont waste time arguing with no piracy arguments because is.... plain.... fruitless... or futile...)
5. thepiratebay.com is going down (and already they have a circumvent way to avoid damage to the pirate sea, too bad for the ones who expend 8 millions buying it.... lol that is what happend if you try to face the piracy)

I agree for the most part. It's like trying to eliminate murder. Never going to happen.

 

[way2fast91]

Food for thought:

1. Didn't your parents/preschool teacher teach you to SHARE?

2. Why is it in America that someone as noble as a teacher or police officer makes $30k-$60k a year and meanwhile a pro athlete convicted of illegal drug use or adultery continues to make Millions of dollars a year to play a game?

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: way2fast91
2. Why is it in America that someone as noble as a teacher or police officer makes $30k-$60k a year and meanwhile a pro athlete convicted of illegal drug use or adultery continues to make Millions of dollars a year to play a game?

Same reason the Wii has so many terrible games - people are willing to pay for them. If football was watched by a small group of people, similar to something like curling, then football players wouldn't get paid so much.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: way2fast91
2. Why is it in America that someone as noble as a teacher or police officer makes $30k-$60k a year and meanwhile a pro athlete convicted of illegal drug use or adultery continues to make Millions of dollars a year to play a game?

Because people will always flock to something that's rare. Police officers and teachers are definitely more noble, but those occupations are more common and thus often taken for granted. On the other hand, professional athlete's and movie stars aren't people you see on the streets everyday, you see them on the "magical" TV screen, so we tend to idolize them because most people won't ever meet them or even see them in person.

I don't really think this has anything to do with piracy, but that may just be me. Pirates aren't idolized for the most part. Maybe by a few nerds who can't crack games on their own but respect that ability, but most people either don't care or detest them for what they are.

Video game piracy exists because it's easy and usually turns out to be a better product than a purchased copy. Until that changes it's going to continue in large numbers.

 

[way2fast91]

Interesting point of view mindcycle. I always like to see what others come up with that I may not have even thought of. However the link I was making to piracy is that the athlete makes the money they do because they sell tickets and the teacher and the police officer don't. Sure officer bring in a little money from tickets but that just goes back to the city to support social services (like trying to catch internet pirates lol!)

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: way2fast91
Interesting point of view mindcycle. I always like to see what others come up with that I may not have even thought of. However the link I was making to piracy is that the athlete makes the money they do because they sell tickets and the teacher and the police officer don't. Sure officer bring in a little money from tickets but that just goes back to the city to support social services (like trying to catch internet pirates lol!)

Ah, I see your point, thanks for clarifying. What some people don't realize (or conveniently choose to ignore) is that by not paying for games, you essentially stop supporting the industry and can't blame publishers and devs for calling it quits.

Using your sports example, lets make up a hypothetical situation that relates to football. So lets say a good majority of football fans start making fake tickets to get them into the stadiums to watch the games. Lets say some stadiums are then only making money off 1/3 of the people that show up and thus are having a hard time making a profit. Maybe the owners decide to focus on another "rival" industry, like basketball. Kind of like focusing on the 360 instead of the PC. The basketball thing turns the tides and they end up making money off 99% of the people at those games, so the football games either go away completely or just turn into a waste of time to go see.

On the flip side though, instead of getting rid of football teams entirely, they could raise ticket prices, put more security at the door, and upgrade their ticket scanners to catch more fake tickets. But lets say they did that for a few years and it didn't do anything to raise attendance. Would they keep doing that, or maybe try to raise attendance at games by offering more incentive to buy a real ticket? Like free food and drinks that come with a ticket purchase, upgraded seating, cheaper prices, etc..

I know it's a hypothetical situation that would never happen, but it's another way to relate to the challenges that the PC gaming industry is facing right now. The thing I don't get is why most publishers continue to put time, effort, and money into something that isn't working. DRM, limited installs, less features, (i.e. starcraft 2), etc.. to try and battle piracy (a battle they'll never win). In my example, if the football stadium upgraded their security, ticket scanners, etc.. but that did nothing to stop fake ticket holders from getting in, do you think they would keep going that route, or maybe stop all that nonsense and offer greater incentive to to get people in the door legitimately.. That's the real question the industry needs to face.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: mindcycleIn my example, if the football stadium upgraded their security, ticket scanners, etc.. but that did nothing to stop fake ticket holders from getting in, do you think they would keep going that route, or maybe stop all that nonsense and offer greater incentive to to get people in the door legitimately.. That's the real question the industry needs to face.

Based on the companies I've worked for, I'd say yeah they probably would stick to the original plan even when it doesn't work. Of course there are a lot of factors, but a lot of the time it comes down to 1 guy not want to admit his plan failed.

 

[4537256]

Originally posted by: mindcycle
The thing I don't get is why most publishers continue to put time, effort, and money into something that isn't working. DRM, limited installs, less features, (i.e. starcraft 2), etc.. to try and battle piracy (a battle they'll never win). .

cause they are not out to stop piracy, like you said, they can never win at that.
As for the lowering prices idea?

well heres an example:
All new $50 games slashed to $25

vs

All new $50 games slashed to 100% *Free plus no drm, no activations, unlimited installs

lol, how can you compete with that?
there is no incentive possible to compete with that.
what should they do exactly? offer free drinks and meals if they buy it? lol
all they do is video games, they cannot offer anything else for incentive. you cant offer free games if you buy it cause the pirates can get those for free too.
If they lowered prices, theres too far risk that sales would ramain the same...not to mention you have to sell twice as many if its half priced...and if you dont sell twice as many, your worse off in profits than before.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: 4537256
All new $50 games slashed to 100% *Free plus no drm, no activations, unlimited installs

lol, how can you compete with that?
there is no incentive possible to compete with that.
what should they do exactly? offer free drinks and meals if they buy it? lol
all they do is video games, they cannot offer anything else for incentive. you cant offer free games if you buy it cause the pirates can get those for free too.

You can absolutely compete with free if there is a greater incentive to buy the retail version. Some incentives could be.. easy to obtain game updates, DLC, multiplayer, better game manuals, collector's style content in the basic retail versions, etc.. Basically make it easier for legit customers to get extra stuff rather than more difficult to get only the basic game.

I understand that DLC and even multiplayer can be "pirated", but it's ease of use that will win people over. If it's going to take me a few hours to obtain a pirate copy and get all the DLC to work, or get setup to play on a hacked server, etc.. Then i'm more likely to buy it instead.