Piracy is a controversial argument.
pro/cons or the like usually tend to make an enormous list of why it should/should not be done.
pirates first and foremost reason is not being willing to spend money to play games. why spend 80 euros/dollars/counterparts in pounds or pesos or whatever, when you just need a 20 euro/month internet connection with high speed to download anything?
consider this, you can either, in the course of a year, made of 12 month, buy games for market values (considering buying them when they do come out, and not after six/seven months) around the 60 to 80 euros (i'm considering italian videogames prices nowadays) especially if the game has been really hyped, it gets an awful lot more costly.
now immagine a "good year" (like this one) how many "good" (hyped) games came out? twelve? fourteen? let's go with the average.
13*70=130*7=910 euros+obviously the monthly internet fee of 20 euros, so it's 20*12 240+910=1150 euros of yearly cost in games.
as a "pirate" you would only have payed the internet connection, or in case of a free wifi zone, not even that.
second reason, which is usually used as an excuse instead of the first one: "how can i know the game is good if i don't try it? and if it doesn't run? or if it runs badly? or if it's bugged?" you see, if this were truly the principal reason, it would or at least it should shine a light, if companies release games to earn money, they should at the very least make a good and attractive product. if a heart surgeon doesn't do a top-notch heart transplant, the patient dies. and he gets sued to death.
if the game company doesn't make a good game, 1) it patches it. 2) it re-patches it, 3) it adds new update to balance it 4) it adds dlc, on payment. really? not only you sold me this thing at a high price, you also want me to pay you more money to have additional content? which you could have implemented in the game but didn't? REALLY? how can you release dlcs on the same day of the game, and not include them in it? while i wouldn't give a rat about a new hat, or a different skin, if you release additional HISTORY content then i do get pissed. You make a game not to sell, but to make a story.
Would anyone here be happy to read a book and discover that unless he/she pays 30 euros, he won't read chapter 7? or that (since dlc usually aren't main quest necessary) a long range of paragraph are missing?
while demos are released, the question always always remain until the game is out: "is this the real deal? is the demo really the game or just the best parts of it? and what about the "new engine amelioration" of last minute? what if now the game is unplayable, but then when it's released i could actually play it?"
Third reason: anti piracy measures make people pirates. "i would have bought it, but always on internet connection? i live in a mountain/forest/place where internet comes and goes, i can't even get to the checkpoint that i'm kicked out of the game i bought because EA SERVERS went for a coffee break. seriously?" once upon a time, you only needed the DISK in the disk-reader, it was the only thing needed, (and for some games it wasn't even necessary).
Now you must pray the internet connection works and their servers don't go down.maybe you're about to discover the assassin, and bam, out of the game, because yeah, server update folks.
fourth reason: because it's easier than going to the store. I mean, gasoline, fatigue of walking, having to wear something different and being at the very least not "stenchy" ? in the end this could still go under the first reason, the money issue. but some people have the money and still download it, why?
fifth reason: the thrill of doing something against the law/state/anything. The feeling "robin hood"
and i want to leave you with something to think:
do you know who ACTUALLY buys the games? the hackers themselves.
astonishing rigth? but if they didn't buy them, how could they crack them open? you see, that's the point, the best companies buyers, are the crackers/hackers of their safety measures.
than obviously there are those whose family members where involved in making the game, maybe their friends, but in any case, the point remains:
is it right or wrong?
it's actually an infringement of copyright, or a theft?
when a buyer buys a game, he plays it, for singleplayers and multiplayers.
when a pirate downloads a game, he plays only the singleplayer, and has to wait for the crackers groups to actually crack it, and then to upload the patches (them also cracked). he loses the multiplayer part of the experience, however, in some games, (noobtubers of modern warfare anyone?!) it might even be a nerve safer.
to "break a lance" in their favour, how many could be able to play "king of dragon pass" if somebody hadn't uploaded it to the net?
how many could play star wars old rpg game without an uploader? modern game stores don't bother to keep outdated stuff. How can you find a copy of the first of monkey island, if you don't have someone who uploaded it first?
you can say "Gog.com" or "steam!" but the What if it doesn't work? it's just 5 bucks, but still it's my five bucks. what if my pc is too modern, and it doesnt play?
i'm going to come out on a fact:
i downloaded Vampire the Masquerade bloodlines, from the pirates den.
(any who look at my blog will know the why, how, or anything else)
it wasn't for money, heck, firstly i had the game loaned by a friend, but the patch, the official one didn't help.
so i looked. on the den i found the solution "ultimate bloodline" with compatibility patch and unofficial patches (of Federation) that i downloaded and that i played.
i'm not going to pass for a saint who says "i only downloaded that" or "i didn't even know it existed before".
point is, you can buy a game if it's good, or you expect a lot from it and are not deluded.
i have lots of games, civilization, bioshock, rise of nation, excetera, i have a bookshelf of games for pc which i still keep and occasionally play, but still, the point remains.
piracy is there because, no matter what, it's useful.
it can be harmful, it can be compared to stealing, it can be anything someone who hates piracy wants it to be, but it's there and it will prosper. because unless games are made to be good, really good, and not to stress gamers who actually buy them, or otherwise, they won't go far.
the solution is easy.
you make a nice game, which requires internet ONLY to apply patches automatically, who adds regularly new content every time, and which once bought is free to play for how much you wish. without senseless dlc.
guild wars anyone? if you can point out a pirated version of guildwars you'll earn a penny.
world of warcraft has free shards around, but not guildwars. Why is it?
hackers/crackers won't touch a drm.free game with no security. because it's NOT a "challenge to their skills", people will buy it and play it, and keep it because new contents will be freely added as long as the game keeps being bought, by maybe people who heard of how good it is.
it's utopistic. but you certainly won't find dwarf fortress on the pirate "den" (it's free obviously, most probably its the reason XD )
this were my two cents, i'm not pro or against. maybe its a "necessary evil" maybe its a really bad thing or maybe it' a good thing, i am noone to decide it, but sometimes, when you are playing a drm-to the brim game which you bought, and realise it's a badly ported version of a console game, and fill a little bit...you know, edgy, you mutter curses and swear revenge.
Author
Topic: [Article]Industry heads claim up to 90% of games are pirated versions (Read 4696 times)