Microsoft Starts New Ban Wave on LIVE Against Modified Firmwares

SubjectSean

F-Stop wrote: »

Don't they know that game publishers have to take the lost sales from pirating and add them into the price of the product?

They say they do. Along with the cost of their ferraris and coke habits. Anyhow how do they calculate how much to add on for invisible non-sales? There is no equation that says pirate A downloads and the price goes up. I bet if there was only one pirate in the world the games publishers would be moaning about lost revenues and using it to justify their theiving prices. Back in the day when the games industry was getting going there was no copy protection and there was just as much, if not more piracy per capita. In real terms games were much cheaper then and still the infant industry grew into a giant. Now the whole world wants to play games and the industry is taking the p**s by charging really high prices for something that's in really high demand. It's not on. Everybody's all whipped up and frothing about "stealing" but really in court it's called "copyright infringement" and there's a world of a difference between it and the legalised robbery the games and software publishers get away with. Anyhow I recorded a film off TV last night, now I won't have to buy the DVD, and because of this the poor studio execs might be a line of coke short when they're making their next wrong descision to charge everybody too much money for their mostly mediocre products, maybe somebody should turn me in. For ranting if nothing else:)

Vikings

Helix wrote: »

my point is not about illegalities here, everyone is saying "oh but the poor devs get no money if you download" im saying the poor devs get no money if you buy second hand

if your soul reason here is because its illegal grand, i wont lose any sleep over that. but dont be bringing up things like developers not getting money when you have no problem with second hand games

....

so please point out how i (me personally, not generic swashbuckling pirate who mugs grannies in your mind) has cost anyone money?

Stop trying to justify what you do by bringing up the second hand games market... The dev's and everyone else has already got their money when a game is bought second hand as it was bought new before that.

Everyone involved in making the game, and more importantly pricing the game, calculate the price on what money they need to make and how many copies they need to sell. They can only sell as many copies as they physically produce, they can not take into account second hand game sales and they probably do not care about this either. Once a game is bought for the 1st time they get all the money that they have expected to get from that game and are happy with that.

When you download a game they do not get that money. If you then dont like that game you will never buy it and they will never get that money, yet you still get their product for free. Just because you don't like it does not mean you should get it for free.

Roy Rogers

Vikings wrote: »

The dev's and everyone else has already got their money when a game is bought second hand as it was bought new before that.

Everyone involved in making the game, and more importantly pricing the game, calculate the price on what money they need to make and how many copies they need to sell. They can only sell as many copies as they physically produce, they can not take into account second hand game sales and they probably do not care about this either. Once a game is bought for the 1st time they get all the money that they have expected to get from that game and are happy with that.

When you download a game they do not get that money. If you then dont like that game you will never buy it and they will never get that money, yet you still get their product for free. Just because you don't like it does not mean you should get it for free.

Tbh I wouldn't really agree with you here, I think Helix makes a reasonable point. I buy all my games, seeing as I have the money, but my little brother can't afford new games so he mostly buys 2nd hand. He's still enjoying the games but the developers have never seen a penny from him. Instead, he's filling the coffers of those pricks at GameStop -- actually, seeing as they facilitate the trading of 2nd hand games, sometimes 2 or 3 times round, should they be done for piracy?

The provider of a pirate game purchased an original copy, therefore they got money. There's no way of proving that because 15 people dl'd it from him, that those are 15 sales lost.

As yer man said above, if your objection is because its illegal, fair enough, but I've never put much weight behind the 'lost sales' argument against piracy. I've downloaded an arseload of music over the years, and I'd only have purchased a very small fraction of that if it hadn't been available for free.

Helix

F-Stop wrote: »

I love these guys who support pirating, claim it's not stealing, claim it is the same as selling something second hand, then claim they might buy a game after stealing it, if they like it. That's the most illogical part. Don't they know that game publishers have to take the lost sales from pirating and add them into the price of the product? To download a game, and then buy it is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of - I'll steal it and then if I like it I'll buy it, and I'm willing to pay more for it than I should because of the fact that I started out by stealing it. Genius. Ignoring that moron, can anyone who steals downloads justify why they are making games more expensive for the rest of us?

nonsense, games arent more expensive because of allowance for piracy

why are ps3 games so dear?

its blatant price fixing is all

TheDoc

the point people are missing is so blatent im just laughing. All this defence for developers and stuff,

and go onto any other thread you see a moan a minute about gaming prices.

When you download music, and you all do dont lie...when you all download films..and you do dont lie.

You are also taking away money from the artists, actors, directors. But why dont you moan about this?

Because you think they are millionares and you dont care you feel they have enough.

And i bet you all have the idea that game developers are long haired, bearded bums who need every penny.

Believe me most gaming developement companies live a very comfy life. I know alot of them and their point of view is they really dont care.

They feel if people are playing their game, they are getting recognised, and further developements and projects will have a following.

At the end of the day copied games for consoles have drawbacks as the original topic of this thread shows, and a small percent of overall players play on cracked illegal versions.

if it was perfectly working and beneficial we would all do it.


Why do you give a **** about a game developer who gets a nice pay packet, when you could save yourself €70.

If you feel so badly about the loss to developers, why dont you price up the music and films you have downloaded and send a compensation packet to the millionare artists,actors because you feel bad.

Get real people, it happens, if it was a big deal more pressure would be put on the industry, you wouldnt see people in markets flogging of copied games and dvds.

For god sake ive seen garda on duty buying them in markets : /

Helix

[DM]-TheDOC- wrote: »

When you download music...

....You are also taking away money from the artists

sorry to be pedantic about this here, but artists make sfa from sales, its live shows and merchandise where they make their money

the_god_swan

I download xbox 360 games sometimes,
I jump on the luas without paying the fare sometimes,
The house i rent in gets free cable,
My friend sells eurovoxs and i flash them for him,
I haggle with shop owners with prices just for the craic,
I drink cheap beer..................

The slowdown in the economy and loss of developer jobs worldwide is my fault...... im sorry

Emmo

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Source to the exact law? Pretty sure its not that liberal and also think there is a law against circumventing copy protections.

Which jurisdiction?

Emmo

Hyzepher

The market of 2nd hand games is starting to hurt the industry much more than piracy. I have an inside track on this and games developers/publishers are getting very annoyed at retailers pushing 2nd hand games.

The way they see it is that pirates very rarely purchase the games they copy but a very large percentage of 2nd hand game purchasers would buy the game anyway - and this is compounded by the fact that the same game can be bought a number of times. So even tough there may be more pirates, the 2nd hand game buyer does reflect actual lost sales.

I dont condone piracy but it is becoming a secondary issue for the games industry. Some organisations are dying for the digital distribution to take off in a bigger way - not so much that they can get a larger percentage of the rrp but so they can actually get a larger number of sales by eliminating the resale market.

thefinalstage

Hyzepher wrote: »

The market of 2nd hand games is starting to hurt the industry much more than piracy. I have an inside track on this and games developers/publishers are getting very annoyed at retailers pushing 2nd hand games.

The way they see it is that pirates very rarely purchase the games they copy but a very large percentage of 2nd hand game purchasers would buy the game anyway - and this is compounded by the fact that the same game can be bought a number of times. So even tough there may be more pirates, the 2nd hand game buyer does reflect actual lost sales.

I dont condone piracy but it is becoming a secondary issue for the games industry. Some organisations are dying for the digital distribution to take off in a bigger way - not so much that they can get a larger percentage of the rrp but so they can actually get a larger number of sales by eliminating the resale market.

The second hand market exists because of over priced games.

ongarite

I made this point already but the cost of making a top PS3 or 360 game is huge these days. It costs several million dollars, more depending on complexity and take years of development and wages to pay.
They have to make some profit back on their return of there will be no new games for the future.

Hyzepher

thelastangryman wrote: »

The second hand market exists because of over priced games.

Nope - the second hand market exists because retailers realised that they could make more profit from it. If they got more profit from new games they wouldn't sell the 2nd hand ones.

Helix

lads, the second hand market exists because people will always sell things when theyre finished with them. simple as that

Hyzepher

Helix wrote: »

lads, the second hand market exists because people will always sell things when theyre finished with them. simple as that

That's true. But it's one thing little joey selling his game by himself to whoever and quite a different thing for retailers to be selling 2nd hand games on the shelf next to new games.

Don't get me wrong - the 2nd hand game market is great for the gamer and you would want to rethink your actions if you choose a new game over a 2nd hand one. But dont think the retailers are in it to do you a favour.

My point is that the Games Indistry is not going to be able to sustain the levels of 2nd hand purchases and something will be done about it sooner rather than later.

Helix

was in gamestop today, €59.99 for a second hand game

anyone who pays that deserves a slap

event

ongarite wrote: »

I made this point already but the cost of making a top PS3 or 360 game is huge these days. It costs several million dollars, more depending on complexity and take years of development and wages to pay.
They have to make some profit back on their return of there will be no new games for the future.

gears of war has sold over 2 million copies. Roughly €50 worldwide average for a game id say:

2 million * €50 = €100,000,000

halo 3 made $170 million in its first 24 hours

in america alone, pro evo 5 and 6 sold 8 million units. again, maybe €50 per unit

8 million * €50 = €400,000,000

now its not as if they had to build pro evo and halo from scratch, they were basically updates of older games. I know they are big games, some of the bigger sellers, but they are more than making enough money. Dont try and kid yourself that they are scraping by

Hyzepher

Apart from the top few developers, a lot of the games industry are struggling. Games can get into the top 10 without actually selling that many copies. It's widely known that most companies need every sale to keep them afloat. Remember it's only the bigger boys who can afford to have more than 2-3 titles coming out per year. Most have 1 or 2 at most and are dependent on it selling to keep in business.

TheDoc

I have never bought a second hand game, ever.

If you do go buy second hand games you deserve a slap. As shown above the price of second hand games is a joke.

look at the end of the day, there is a way to get games cheaper and legally, its called ebay and region free

and i think we should all get on that bandwagon.

And also digital downloads soon coming into effect ( tests beginning next year with xbox) will see the end of gamestops etc, fact

those places are going to shut down...they will just turn into second hand shops.

And dont turn around and say " yeah but people will still buy the physical disc to save time and effort"

From my source, from a top developement company....will not be selling physical discs ever again.

Helix

so theyre gonna have infinitely sized harddrives?

F-Stop

Irrational's Martin Slater on the Bioshock copy protection: “We achieved our goals. We were uncracked for 13 whole days. We were happy with it. But we just got slammed. Everybody hated us for it. It was unbelievable… You can’t afford to be cracked. As soon as you’re gone, you’re gone, and your sales drop astronomically if you’ve got a day one crack.” So, yeah, stealing games is cool, makes you cool, and has no impact on the people who are trying to create them. Hey, they want you to take their work for free. And it makes you cool.

Helix

13,000,000 xbox 360s have been sold

how many do yis honestly reckon have been modded?

250,000? 500,000?

The Sparrow

I see it this way... I never buy new games so all the games I buy are second hand and therefore none of my money is going to developers and it is perfectly legal and not frowned upon by most ppl.

So if I was to download a game, what is the difference? Just like the original buyer of the secondhand game I assume that somebody originally bought the game thus giving the developers their cut. So if they crack it and I download it then really the only person losing out is Gamestop or Xtravision or whatever and I really don`t care about the middle-man.

Now the argument about it costing millions to make a game is also flawed imo. Lets look at a comparable form of entertainment such as movies. Off the top of my head, I chose Die Hard 4. It cost $110 million to make and to date it has generated about 377.5 million worldwide. So that means that the studios have recouped three times there initial outlay on making the movie.

Ok so lets take a really popular game, for instance Halo 3. It cost $60 million to make and in its first week alone it made $300 million worldwide. So whereas Die Hard 4 has made about 3 times its cost back in the five months since its release in June, Halo 4 made a whopping 5 times its value back in just one week of its release.

So why does Die Hard 4 cost me about €25 euros or so upon its dvd release and Halo 3 costs around €70?? Ok not all games will be that successful, but neither will every movie be that succesful either. Waterworld was a complete financial disaster for the movie studios yet it still probably only cost about 20 quid when it was released.

BTW all of the sources for the figures listed are wikipedia and the la-times for halo 4's weekly take. Oh and I have a 360 but its not modded (yet!)

coolhandc

to everyone saying how expensive games are,i look at it like this
you pay €70 or whatever the price of the game is.it all depends how much time your going to spend playing the game but average person comes home from work and will play for 2 or 3 hours one or two days during the week,and then will play for a few hours over the weekend.but its cheap entertainment when you think about how much fun your going to get out of it.i look at it this way,im going to play the game for maybe 50/60/70 hours over the course of the next year or so.Its therefore costing me €1 an hour for some good fun?
i dont know why a dvd which would cost the same to make would be cheaper than a game,but one theory could be that there is a bigger market for a dvd as not everybody has an xbox.also your going to get more fun out of a game,then you would for a dvd.if you watch a dvd 5 times over the year (which you probably wont)thats about 10 hours.your getting 5/6/7 times the entertainment from a game,hence the reason to pay 5/6/7 times the price...

ongarite

woooo232 wrote: »

I see it this way... I never buy new games so all the games I buy are second hand and therefore none of my money is going to developers and it is perfectly legal and not frowned upon by most ppl.

So if I was to download a game, what is the difference? Just like the original buyer of the secondhand game I assume that somebody originally bought the game thus giving the developers their cut. So if they crack it and I download it then really the only person losing out is Gamestop or Xtravision or whatever and I really don`t care about the middle-man.

Now the argument about it costing millions to make a game is also flawed imo. Lets look at a comparable form of entertainment such as movies. Off the top of my head, I chose Die Hard 4. It cost $110 million to make and to date it has generated about 377.5 million worldwide. So that means that the studios have recouped three times there initial outlay on making the movie.

Ok so lets take a really popular game, for instance Halo 3. It cost $60 million to make and in its first week alone it made $300 million worldwide. So whereas Die Hard 4 has made about 3 times its cost back in the five months since its release in June, Halo 4 made a whopping 5 times its value back in just one week of its release.

So why does Die Hard 4 cost me about €25 euros or so upon its dvd release and Halo 3 costs around €70?? Ok not all games will be that successful, but neither will every movie be that succesful either. Waterworld was a complete financial disaster for the movie studios yet it still probably only cost about 20 quid when it was released.

BTW all of the sources for the figures listed are wikipedia and the la-times for halo 4's weekly take. Oh and I have a 360 but its not modded (yet!)

Sorry man, that arguement is completely insane.
So you believe that if you never EVER buy a game new its perfectly legal and OK to pirate a game just because one person has bought the game before. Now that game is shared to hundreds of thousands of people. And you still think thats OK and the developer is happy with this.

Then you're comparing a film that cost €110 to make BUT has captive audience of 1.5 billion to a video game that cost probably €60 million with captive audience of 13 million.
The film then has sales of DVDs of millions after many many millions see it around the world.

TheDoc

i dont ever see gaming in that way of "cutting the cost over a long period of time".

Its an imediate purchase that eventualy you will stop playing.

And you should only think like that for big purchases, minimum a console

thinking like that for games??? your really cheap :P

coolhandc

i find it hilarious that someone who doesnt pay any money for their games is calling me cheap!
i am merely trying to justify the cost of the games as some people are complaining that they are too expensive.

and looking at your profile i see that you spent over 100 hours playing world of warcraft...
no doubt you enjoyed it...which is fine, but if you were to have paid the €50 or whatever it costs,that would have been a very cheap form of entertainment...

The Sparrow

ongarite wrote: »

Sorry man, that arguement is completely insane.
So you believe that if you never EVER buy a game new its perfectly legal and OK to pirate a game just because one person has bought the game before. Now that game is shared to hundreds of thousands of people. And you still think thats OK and the developer is happy with this.

Well I just don`t see how it is different to buying a second hand game? The developer gets paid once and then all the other ppl that buy it contribute nothing to the developers. I don`t download games because I don`t have a modded 360, but if I did I would the see the second hand game market as a perfect justification to do so. If game shops are not required to pay anything to developers when they redistribute the game, why should I be if I download it? Its not my problem that it is a on a bigger scale.

Then you're comparing a film that cost €110 to make BUT has captive audience of 1.5 billion to a video game that cost probably €60 million with captive audience of 13 million.
The film then has sales of DVDs of millions after many many millions see it around the world.

As far as I know the Die-Hard take includes dvd sales so far and its been out for a little while so I assume the majority of its profit has been made. Unlike Halo which blew away Die Hard's profit margin in only one week. I just don`t think that games are that much more expensive to make than movies so I don`t understand why is is so much more expensive to buy a game. The movie studios may have a greater potential audience, but game companies have a captive audience of 13 million consumers who are willing to buy their games. (for the most part!)

And coolhandc I don`t think you can use the argument that you get more use out of a computer game because you spend 20 hours playing it as opposed to a couple of hours for a movie. That is not how economics work. The price of something is usually determined by how much it costs to make it and distribute it plus a profit margin. If you go by that logic, I use the cd player in my room much more than I use my 360 because it is on all of the time. So the cds that I listen to have been played for 100s of hours... should cds be 100s of times more expensive than computer games?

Helix

coolhandc wrote: »

i find it hilarious that someone who doesnt pay any money for their games is calling me cheap!

where did he say he didnt pay for games?

or are you just assuming here that anyone who is taking a sensible approach to this and looking at it realistically from all sides as opposed to regurgitating nonsense, doesnt pay for games?

how much a year do you spend on games, out of curiousity?

Helix

ongarite wrote: »

captive audience of 13 million

once again, how many of those 13 million do you honestly think have modded xboxes?

2%? 3%?

coolhandc

[DM]-TheDOC- wrote: »

And i think people that say they dont download or use free software when they shouldnt, are liars to be fair. Everyone does it.

Why go pay 250 euro for a piece of photo shop software when you can get it for free?

.

he is obviously saying he doesnt pay...he downloads them for free

Helix wrote: »

where did he say he didnt pay for games?

or are you just assuming here that anyone who is taking a sensible approach to this and looking at it realistically from all sides as opposed to regurgitating nonsense, doesnt pay for games?

how much a year do you spend on games, out of curiousity?

anyone defending the side of copying/downloading games/modded xbox etc doesnt pay for their games.because if they did pay,they would be hypocritical.

how much i spend on games?maybe buy 2/3 games a year.