What's the baseless argument I was making?
So why does piracy and used games NOT hurt devs?
- Thread starter sn00zer
- Start date
What's the baseless argument I was making?
Let me give you an example. My friend is a huge pirate and downloaded tons of DS games with flash cart. However there is no way for him to do that on 3DS and he got about 20 games already. They include sequel to some of his favorite games like 999 and Mario Kart. He will continue to buy games but as soon as there is a flash cart he will stop buying them.
Hm? Steam offers free weekends for full-price games every few weeks. Defiance and Chivalry just last weekend.
Edit: In case you mean the part how pirated games are "free", yeah, they are basically free to pirates.
You don't have any numbers to back your stance up. It's all just assumptions.
HarryHengst
Member
Who cares if it hurts game devs? Do you care about the manufacturer of a tv or a fridge when you buy it used? Hell no, you are happy to get a product you want for less money. Devs who try to get rid of the used games market need to be sued to hell for attacking consumer rights.
Piracy is a different beast im not touching.
GlamFM
Banned
Very ignorant.
I mostly agree, but lets not dress this argument up as if it's cut and dry.
Goldenroad
Member
I thought we were talking about piracy. Yes, free weekends on Steam are free...no argument here, free games are free. Games that people are charging money for are not free. Unless the developer/publisher decides to make the game free, it is not free. I don't even understand why I need to make such a redundant comment, but I guess people can find a way to justify anything.
Almost noone who pirates would ever buy the game even if DRM was perfect. If anything the small amount of people who use piracy as a "demo" and then buy games they like more than offsets this. Obviously it depends on how hard it is to pirate, if it's a click of a button? More piracy. Physical mod on a console? Less piracy.
If used games hurt devs it doesn't matter. They have no fucking right to one god damn cent to a used game. At that point you might as well argue buying a game on sale or not buying a game at all is hurting the dev. Fuck off and I hope you lose your job if that's your attitude.
If used games hurt devs it doesn't matter. They have no fucking right to one god damn cent to a used game. At that point you might as well argue buying a game on sale or not buying a game at all is hurting the dev. Fuck off and I hope you lose your job if that's your attitude.
HarryHengst
Member
No. Either the used market for everything should be made illegal, or game devs should stop crying and make a product people want to pay full price.
No. Pirated games are basically free to pirates. Doesn't matter if it is actually free or not. It's free entertainment to them. They don't have to pay money for it. That's free right there.
You're kinda splitting hairs.
Duallusion
Member
Exactly this.
GlamFM
Banned
You asked why you should care if devs are hurt.
I called you ignorant.
I stand by my statement.
Because GameStop still sells a lot of physical copies of new games that probably wouldn't have been sold as digital copies. And no, they can't match the average retail price of a physical copy when pricing digital copies. There are a lot of additional costs to shipping physical product, not to mention the fact that bringing a third-party retailer into the mix ends up diluting profits because they need their cut, too.
That's entitlement on their end. Would we have this problem were there no stores shoveling in used game sales? But the people making devs and publishers money can't be blamed, so WE get blamed.
It's really that simple.
HarryHengst
Member
But devs arent hurt? They are dumb because they blow 100 million on a tomb raider game, and thus are crying about used sales to distract attention from the real problem.
Yup. Beautiful post. This is the same argument as game rentals in the 90's. This industry does not want to assume responsibility that they are the problem. Not the pirates, used games, or their customers.
Such threads always feel like we are in the middle of the end. I know Neogaf is primarly a american forum, where customer tend to be, excuse my choice of words, fucked by companies. But I don´t want american standards. I want ownership. I want power to the customer. But yes, customer with rights are hurting companies. That is why Microsoft/ Nintendo and Sony keep ignoring privacy rights. Fuck with our copyrights. They violate every right we have as much as they can. And yeah, if we intend to do them a favor, we give up our ownership rights. They are setting the standards. In EU there is the right even to resell your digital copies. Do they care? Nah. They have to be forced to accept our rights. But we, we rather question these rights. Our rights. Its feels like we are in the middle of the end.
Goldenroad
Member
Same with all thieves then. Defending these criminals is worse than being one yourself. Just because someone does not feel like paying for paint from my store, or "wouldn't use it if they did have to pay for it", does not give them any right to walk out of here with paint without paying for it. It's criminal logic and only the scummiest people on earth adhere to the logic that "if I don't feel like paying for it it's free".
KojiKnight
Member
Mmm so much hyperbole on both sides... but this statement was just mm mm mm exquisite.
GlamFM
Banned
Popular assumption I guess. Nobody can prove it right of course.
In PSOne and SNES era... even in PS2 one... we had A LOT more piracy (A LOT MORE... I never had an original PSX and PS2 game) and we had second hand games too.
BUT developers made a lot of money either way.
What changed? Two things.
First, big publishers make more expensive games, without knowing their markets (Square Enix is the best example).
Second and most important... GAMES WERE FAR BETTER BEFORE (Square Enix, again, is the best example).
Goldenroad
Member
Hyperbole is sometimes the only way to get a point across to people who actually think that stealing is ok. Nice contribution you made though.
I can't vouch for piracy, but with used games, there's a whole ecosystem there that in turn benefits the developer. Value from used games are often going toward a new game purchase. There's also the potential purchase of DLC for used game. No used games = no purchase of console, for some. No purchase of console = no potential purchase of a new game. Furthermore, policies like this help encourage piracy more than anything, because value(or lack there of) becomes a bigger issue than ever.
I believe these policies will be like introducing a foreign invasive species into a thriving ecosystem to handle a particular problem. In the beginning, it seems to be a solution to the specific problem, then gradually this species turns out to be devastating horror, as it reeks havoc on the entire ecosystem.
I believe these policies will be like introducing a foreign invasive species into a thriving ecosystem to handle a particular problem. In the beginning, it seems to be a solution to the specific problem, then gradually this species turns out to be devastating horror, as it reeks havoc on the entire ecosystem.
I don't see myself defending them. I'm just trying to paint the picture that not everyone of them would buy the game thus not every pirated copy is a lost sale.
KojiKnight
Member
Why stop there though? Why not take it further? Tell him that him supporting pirates is what's going to drive the apocalypse. His support of piracy is aligning him with Hitler! Go big! Bigger than big!
My point was simply that if you can't argue rationally, then maybe you shouldn't bother arguing. If you think telling him the truth about something isn't going to change his mind, then why do you assume exaggerating the truth will?
You have perfectly good honest points to use, if he isn't listening to him, then no matter what you say will convince him. Keep it grounded in reality and your side looks far better than if you stoop to low tactics just to try and win an unwinnable argument.
This is pretty important. I'd buy half the games I buy at $60 if I couldn't sell/trade them to recoup some of the cost.
I just read these posts again and I don't see anyone defending copyright infringement. I just see people arguing about its economic implications.
TheLaughingStock
Member
There's no causal relationship between piracy/used games and how much money ends up in the developer's pocket. Reduction or elimination doesn't necessarily entail studios remaining open, higher sales, higher profits, etc. It's questionable whether your measures offset the losses that you'll incur.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
I agree.
marjo
Member
What a bizarre question. Let me try one:
"Can someone tell me how not having everyone in the world send me $20 is not hurting me."
Clearly, everyone not sending me $20 IS hurting me in that I would be better off if everyone did send me $20.
Still, some might argue that that doesn't give me the right to expect it to happen*.
* Although if anyone wants to send me the money, send me a pm.
"Can someone tell me how not having everyone in the world send me $20 is not hurting me."
Clearly, everyone not sending me $20 IS hurting me in that I would be better off if everyone did send me $20.
Still, some might argue that that doesn't give me the right to expect it to happen*.
* Although if anyone wants to send me the money, send me a pm.
Maximus.
Member
2. Bullshit. If someone has the full game, very rarely would they purchase it to get the same experience.
4. It's not your right to buy and sell. Before the digital age there was no other options. With digital goods, companies can change that rule, as much as it sucks for the consumer to get their money back. Not all goods you consume are resellable anyways. You aren't legally allowed to resell a bus pass, you can't return certain foods to grocery stores, etc. If these tech companies want to go all digital or stop used sales, that's their choice to benefit their company. Consumers don't have a right to be able to resell goods they bought. They have the CHOICE to buy or not buy in that situation.
Wickerbasket
Member
No one was defending them, they were just pointing out how wrong your initial premise was.
Just because someone pirated a game, doesn't mean they would have bought it.
Someone even gave you an example of that legally happening, someone trying a free weekend game on Steam and not buying it, no lost sales there either.
MrBambinoDent
Member
It does hurt them and in fact it's a crime. No different from theft.
scar tissue
Banned
Used games may or may not hurt devs, but how can this be used as a justification to ban it?
You can literally sell every other piece of physical property, why not games? Ridiculous.
You can literally sell every other piece of physical property, why not games? Ridiculous.
That's why I said it was my opinion. I stand by it. I think a lot of pirates *would* pay if there was no other way to get the games they want to play.
Anyway, in the scenario where piracy is impossible (one can dream!) who gives a shit what game thieves do? Worst case they become a zero factor rather than a negative drain. Best case they turn the corner, pay for their content like everyone else and actually start to contribute something to their hobby.
Coffee Dog
Banned
Piracy and used games seem like they impact devs until you ask for evidence.
And personally, I'm on the side of the evidence.
Not expecting an answer, but prove it.
And personally, I'm on the side of the evidence.
Not expecting an answer, but prove it.
Actually, as an aside, I would like to see some research into this, because I do wonder if that setup disproportionately favours the big blockbuster model; whether *those* are the games that are bought new and in doing so bring a bunch of smaller titles disproportionately into the used market.
Not that I think curbing used games is a good solution to that, I'm just not sure we've got the whole story.
KojiKnight
Member
What I get from this thread is it's down into two camps...
1. The camp that thinks publishers are exaggerating or using piracy as a scape goat for their problems.
2. A group that think humanity is only held in check by gun point and that the game industry would collapse if it weren't for DRM keeping the public in check.
In reality, it's a mixture. Publishers put higher and higher budgets on their games and they demand more and more sales to make up for it. When those sales don't happen, they blame pirates or used games because it's convenient and they don't have to examine their budgets or other things to figure out what's wrong.
Most gamers will buy games whether there is DRM or not, but there would be a greater subset who'd pirate instead of it was easier.
The real problem is when #1 meets #2 and the result is that paying customers are now suffering and paying for the crimes of #2... which will cause people to stop buying games. Whether that drives them to pirate games or not is another issue all together.
(edit) To expand... This goes for used game sales as well. Honest paying customers who buy games second hand are being punished because the developers are expecting greater sales at $60, something that is NOT the paying customer's fault. That is a fault in game budgets, marketing, and game quality.
1. The camp that thinks publishers are exaggerating or using piracy as a scape goat for their problems.
2. A group that think humanity is only held in check by gun point and that the game industry would collapse if it weren't for DRM keeping the public in check.
In reality, it's a mixture. Publishers put higher and higher budgets on their games and they demand more and more sales to make up for it. When those sales don't happen, they blame pirates or used games because it's convenient and they don't have to examine their budgets or other things to figure out what's wrong.
Most gamers will buy games whether there is DRM or not, but there would be a greater subset who'd pirate instead of it was easier.
The real problem is when #1 meets #2 and the result is that paying customers are now suffering and paying for the crimes of #2... which will cause people to stop buying games. Whether that drives them to pirate games or not is another issue all together.
(edit) To expand... This goes for used game sales as well. Honest paying customers who buy games second hand are being punished because the developers are expecting greater sales at $60, something that is NOT the paying customer's fault. That is a fault in game budgets, marketing, and game quality.
It's interesting how most people are speaking from a third person perspective, as if they know the motive of each and every person who pirates and/or buys used games.
As someone who has pirated games in the past, I did it because it was free, and convenient. That combination was important, because at that point in my life I couldn't be bothered to head down to my local games store to buy a new game I wanted. And let's be clear here. I wanted new games, and free was better than not free.
Fast forwarding to my life now, several factors have influenced my decision to stop pirating, and also buy games new.
First and foremost was my wife getting a job as a software engineer in the gaming industry. At her first company (EA, no less) her team was shuttered due to underwhelming sales of the game. There were no clear metrics about the effect of piracy or used games on the lack of sales, but regardless it made me keenly aware of what I was or wasn't doing to actively support my wife's career.
Secondly, buying new became more convenient than it ever has been. With the explosion of Amazon as an online games retailer, plus the advent of Steam and other digital distribution services, buying new games and having them delivered directly to me couldn't be more simple.
I think everyone has different reasons for why they buy new, used, or pirate, but I think it's silly to think that publishers aren't affected at all by used and pirated games. But the thing is, I don't think even publishers know how much it's affecting them, otherwise we would be seeing some hard numbers to support their claims. As others have said, piracy and used games does not equate to a 1 to 1 sale, so while some companies have given us details on how many copies were pirated, it's still not enough to know how much that has affected their bottom line.
Until there's a system that accurately portrays this information, all anybody can do is speculate.
As someone who has pirated games in the past, I did it because it was free, and convenient. That combination was important, because at that point in my life I couldn't be bothered to head down to my local games store to buy a new game I wanted. And let's be clear here. I wanted new games, and free was better than not free.
Fast forwarding to my life now, several factors have influenced my decision to stop pirating, and also buy games new.
First and foremost was my wife getting a job as a software engineer in the gaming industry. At her first company (EA, no less) her team was shuttered due to underwhelming sales of the game. There were no clear metrics about the effect of piracy or used games on the lack of sales, but regardless it made me keenly aware of what I was or wasn't doing to actively support my wife's career.
Secondly, buying new became more convenient than it ever has been. With the explosion of Amazon as an online games retailer, plus the advent of Steam and other digital distribution services, buying new games and having them delivered directly to me couldn't be more simple.
I think everyone has different reasons for why they buy new, used, or pirate, but I think it's silly to think that publishers aren't affected at all by used and pirated games. But the thing is, I don't think even publishers know how much it's affecting them, otherwise we would be seeing some hard numbers to support their claims. As others have said, piracy and used games does not equate to a 1 to 1 sale, so while some companies have given us details on how many copies were pirated, it's still not enough to know how much that has affected their bottom line.
Until there's a system that accurately portrays this information, all anybody can do is speculate.
Shalashaska
Member
I'm one perspective so I'm not claiming that I represent the masses. But I usually have bought games used for some of the smaller games I'm not sure whether I'll like or not, and if it turns out I like it, I end up supporting the franchise (if it gets turned into one) down the line. A good example for me was Demon's Souls, I would never have bought that game new. However, picked it up used to check it out, fell in love with it, got Dark Souls and will support From Software until those games start to suck (hopefully never!).
~Devil Trigger~
In favor of setting Muslim women on fire
Do libraries and Used-book market hurt the Book publishing industry?
RurouniZel
Asks questions so Ezalc doesn't have to
They hurt, but not as much as Pubs/Devs would like us to believe. They know full well that most pirates would never buy anyway and that lots of people (esp. children) trade in older games to afford/convince their parents to buy a new game at a reduced price.
Many bigger devs/pubs just don't want to acknowledge the fact that they did this to themselves. They pushed the industry in this direction. One reaps what they sow. And if they push this anti-used DRM as standard policy for their system... well, they'll make up another boogie-man to blame.
Many bigger devs/pubs just don't want to acknowledge the fact that they did this to themselves. They pushed the industry in this direction. One reaps what they sow. And if they push this anti-used DRM as standard policy for their system... well, they'll make up another boogie-man to blame.
Piracy hurts devs. Pirates can say whatever they want but that's a fact. Yeah, not everyone who copies a game would end up buying it if he wasn't able to copy it. But some would do - because otherwise they would have to stop gaming which they clearly don't want to do.
The thing with DRM is that it doesn't work properly. There will always be a work-around for those who don't want to pay. And the honest customers? They suffer from shitty DRM.
Used games are a totally different story. If devs feel like they need to make a so-called AAA game which last for like five hours and doesn't offer any replay value then they simply have to accept that people sell their game three days after the launch for $10 less or even more. Devs should try to make games people really love. This industry is partially really, really sick and now the execs are trying to blame the customers for that disease. But actually that disease is coming right form the execs with their bullshit Hollywood approach.
The thing with DRM is that it doesn't work properly. There will always be a work-around for those who don't want to pay. And the honest customers? They suffer from shitty DRM.
Used games are a totally different story. If devs feel like they need to make a so-called AAA game which last for like five hours and doesn't offer any replay value then they simply have to accept that people sell their game three days after the launch for $10 less or even more. Devs should try to make games people really love. This industry is partially really, really sick and now the execs are trying to blame the customers for that disease. But actually that disease is coming right form the execs with their bullshit Hollywood approach.
It's pretty much a non factor on consoles. The amount of work it takes to mod a Xbox is more then most people are willing to do.
Freezie KO
Banned
Piracy absolutely harms devs. I think companies should do what they can to stop piracy.
Used games is much more complex. Most people who trade in games use that store credit to buy more games. The more games in circulation also helps the industry as a whole grow as well as multiplayer communities. There's also an inherent consumer rights issue when trying to stop people from trading in their property that they bought.
Used games is much more complex. Most people who trade in games use that store credit to buy more games. The more games in circulation also helps the industry as a whole grow as well as multiplayer communities. There's also an inherent consumer rights issue when trying to stop people from trading in their property that they bought.
"Pirates probably wouldn't have bought the game anyway" has always stuck me as a bullshit argument because some of them definitely would have. The problem is that there is know way of knowing what that percentage is which makes it a pointless discussion because it basically comes down to a gut instinct on what you think the proportion of people who would buy more games if they couldn't pirate is and all interpretations are equally valid. Peronally I think it probably is a significant number but I have no way to justify that claim. I don't have a problem with companies trying to fight piracy as I do believe it is morally wrong, the problem is they ususally end up making the expienece worse for paying costumes.
As for used games, I think they probably do hurt devs significantly as well and I don't have problem with them trying to get a cut provided the buy/sell ratio doesn't go up. I don't know what it's like in other countries but in my experience retailers sell used games at roughly 3x the price you trade them in for or more. This is already way beyond what I'd consider reasonable so I doubt it will get worse with whatever system microsoft (and possibly sony) implement, so if it's basically just a way of stealing some of the retailer's cut then good for them. I'd rather get shafted by developers/publishers than retailers. Hell, it might even be better than what we have now if they let you trade in digital copies of games. Perhaps I am being slightly optamistic here
As for used games, I think they probably do hurt devs significantly as well and I don't have problem with them trying to get a cut provided the buy/sell ratio doesn't go up. I don't know what it's like in other countries but in my experience retailers sell used games at roughly 3x the price you trade them in for or more. This is already way beyond what I'd consider reasonable so I doubt it will get worse with whatever system microsoft (and possibly sony) implement, so if it's basically just a way of stealing some of the retailer's cut then good for them. I'd rather get shafted by developers/publishers than retailers. Hell, it might even be better than what we have now if they let you trade in digital copies of games. Perhaps I am being slightly optamistic here
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Piracy hurt them because 1 sold unit can turn into a million.
But used games is BS, a used game has gone through the channel and the developer/publisher has received payment for that copy and it doesn't turn into thousands or millions.
While the publisher does lose out on a sale it is more then likely the sale wouldn't exist anyway otherwise the consumer would have brought it new to begin with.
The publisher has received payment and has sold a single copy of that licensed product, when a consumer buys a product it includes the package and a single use of the license to the content and can not be copied and sold on, but they have the right to sell that on to another consumer/owner at any price they wish and that includes Gamestop.
Who in turn can sell it on s they have paid for itand the publisher has no claim to any profits as they have already received them through first sale.
But used games is BS, a used game has gone through the channel and the developer/publisher has received payment for that copy and it doesn't turn into thousands or millions.
While the publisher does lose out on a sale it is more then likely the sale wouldn't exist anyway otherwise the consumer would have brought it new to begin with.
The publisher has received payment and has sold a single copy of that licensed product, when a consumer buys a product it includes the package and a single use of the license to the content and can not be copied and sold on, but they have the right to sell that on to another consumer/owner at any price they wish and that includes Gamestop.
Who in turn can sell it on s they have paid for itand the publisher has no claim to any profits as they have already received them through first sale.
Mass Effect
Member
Yes we do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine (U.S.)
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/consumers/protection_of_consumers/l32022_en.htm
Of course some exceptions apply (the bus pass for example), and as far as the digital problem goes, our (U.S.) laws haven't caught up yet.
But I'm glad you're so easily willing to throw away your rights.