Widescreen Gaming Forum

Cygnus, it is a shame it has to come to this. I opened this topic for discussion. What you do is not discussing. Please refrain from using argumenta ad hominem and read an argument and try to reply to that, rather than replying in a way it is not applicable to the current statement.

I'd like to re-emphasize here that piracy is not theft. Copyright infringement and theft are fundamentally different concepts. The issue is two-fold, though the folds are related. First, making a copy of something (see: game piracy and downloading) does not eliminate a copy from inventory. No one has suffered any concrete losses. Stealing a physical copy from a store, however, will result in losses for the store. Secondly, any works that are copyrighted and can be stored on a computer, as a rule, lack scarcity. These are infinitely reproducible copies. As opposed to theft, it is very much associated with an entirely different set arguments.

Now, to mention an actual "merit" of piracy, as there are some that exist, there is "try before you buy" mentality. This is an actual, realistic, and justifiable reasoning to promote piracy in some cases, and stems from demo releases becoming more infrequent. Here's a scenario. Sam wants to get Guns of Gears 5, the latest and hottest game on the PC. But Sam isn't sure if he can justify dumping 60 dollars on a game he doesn't know will be good or not. As well, none of Sam's friends have a copy and he can't seem to find access to it anywhere. So Sam decides to do something silly, and go to TPB to acquire an illegitimate copy from the Internet. Now, here's where we have a world-sharding event. In world A, Sam loves the game and thinks it's very much worth 60 dollars. He then proceeds to buy a copy and, bam, new sale! But in world B, he discovers the game has many flaws that reviewers avoided mentioning. He thinks it has potential but needs to be polished up to be worth playing, and for a price drop to happen. He deletes the game and waits for it to cost 30 dollars, then buys a copy. Lastly, we have world C, where the game is total and utter garbage. Sam deletes the game immediately and tries to rid himself of the cursed memory that it was.

This system functions as a buffer to protect the person from making a poor purchase when the information would otherwise be difficult to acquire. In that, the consumer has a right to be aware of what they're purchasing. Yet it's become common practice to deny that right to consumers even in a world that's grown to be saturated in games that are many shades of mediocre.

The emphasis, again, is the cost-value relationship as this dictates all purchase decisions.


P.S. I forgot to note, silly me, that Sam would not have purchased the game at all had the option to acquire it illicitly not been available. Piracy, sometimes, opens the potential for new sales.

Which is my point. There are benefits to developers sometimes. The benefits come particularly to crappy developers/development studios/publishers that don't wish to release a demo. People try their game that wouldn't have had a chance otherwise.

_________________
(imagination not allowed in signature)

If one does not see my points as meeting your [ or indeed wikipedia's ] requirements for discussion that's not my concern.

Any discussion on piracy becomes personal since if it is discussed with honesty it touches ethics.
It is personal when you deny someone their rights, the fruits of their work.
Many people have a blind spot when it comes to realizing the personal effects. That's why I mentioned them living in a bubble that tends to burst when they have something to lose themselves.

To those who say infringing copyright is not 'theft', in bare legal terms you are correct. Technically they come under different laws. However I have no interest in legal terminology.

As someone who has worked in the independent sector of adventure game development and music ever since the heady days of the ZX81/Spectrum, I'm fully aware of the personal cost to people who see their hard work 'shared' without permission. Watching new musicians have their album sales ruined by being 'shared', adventure games that cannot even afford copy-protection shamelessly 'shared', or actor friends being denied a royalty because someone can get their one Film/TV appearance for free through 'sharing'. It makes a real difference to real people.

And even if you are just being selfish and could not care less about the personal cost to others, it's counter-productive to those who claim to be gamers, music or movie lovers.

Every single person I have known who has been involved in these industries [ especially true for the small scale developers/musicians ] has had to make a choice pretty early on in their life. Do I stay on and try to make a living at this, or get a 'real' job, where whether I get paid or not is not dependent on the whims of the entertainment market.
Every pirated product is not necessarily a lost sale, some would never dream of spending a huge amount on the latest fps, but for the games that cost less - for the independents and one-man band developers - a decision to pirate and not buy ends up dictating the life choice of another. Do what you love, never be rewarded enough to keep doing it, so give up. Or do what you love, be rewarded for your efforts and survive. The small companies I worked for could have margins of as low as 3%. Loans were dependent on how much they sold. A loss of 3% of potential sales mattered.

As you can see, it IS personal for those who work in the field. And for me, a discussion of piracy's merits is like standing watching while muggers discuss what they are about to take from you.

So feel free to continue discussing amongst yourselves by whatever definition you prefer. Discussing ways to protect games in a different thread is a positive one I could engage in.

But I'm out now of steam [ no pun intended ] when it comes to this one and piracy's 'merits'.

Apart from some minor statements, this is discussing, this is giving arguments and be engaged. I appreciate that a lot.
In concern to the topic;
Especially musicians- How do they honestly get their exposure if it isn't for piracy partially? Would Game Dev Tycoon get their media exposure if it WEREN'T for the pirates?, look where they are now. Featured on steam, greenlit. That would have never happened just by their sole means of selling the game through their dev website.
Thus I think, for Indie's especially, piracy is more good than bad. In terms where it does hurt sales is in cases like Far Cry Blood Dragon. That game has enough exposure on its own, and the people pirating that do it indeed to avoid the purchase.
In terms of TV, Game of Thrones, the explanation is done for me: http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/8/460276 ... warner-ceo
Emilia Clarke (Daenarys) has gone from being a mediocre guest actress, to widely known. Instead of applying for a job as a guest role in a single episode, she has to turn down offers.