Holy Piracy Deterrent, Batman!

Kernel

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

Perhaps it was bugged to **** because reduced sales expectations due to rampant PC piracy resulted in a shorter development or Q&A period?

And piracy is responsible for the recession too I suppose.... No, it was bugged because they released the game according to a marketing driven schedule to maximise profits and increase shareholder dividends. I even bought the Elite Units version, and paid extra for units that would have been given free with the actual finished game if not for the new trend of developer greed.

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

I work in the industry, and aside from the issue of freetards effectively stealing my work, it's clear to me that piracy is resulting in less resources being directed to certain projects, especially niche or innovative titles.

You work in the industry, hence your bias. I suppose if you were an author you wouldn't like people loaning your book to a friend, since you'd rather they bought another copy. Even if they're only going to skim through the first chapter.

Kernel

noodler wrote: »

What if I stole a car I am never going to be able to afford?

I don't think you understand what I've said at all. Intellectual property is a different proposition altogether.

noodler

Kernel wrote: »

Bull****. Increasing profit margins through greed is the only thing driving up the cost of games. The industry makes more than the movie industry. Then they throw stuff like DLC and Episodes to increase the rip-off factor. It's digital ones and zeros, not a physical product like a sports car. The R&D might have cost money, but the product itself does not cost money to manufacture... since it's not real. And as I said, if I take the 1s and 0s for a test drive and decide (as in 99% of cases) that it's not even worth the space on my hard drive, and I wouldn't in a million years consider paying actual money for it, then I have done no harm to anyone at all.

There's a lot of moral high ground being taken by people here.

The physical costs, as in the DVD or Blu Ray are minimal, obviously the main proportion of the costs involved are in the R&D.

Let me see if I understand you straight, its okay to pirate things that can be got digitally becasue you aren't stealing the 30c worth of plastic that it usually comes on disc-wise?

Kernel wrote: »

You work in the industry, hence your bias. I suppose if you were an author you wouldn't like people loaning your book to a friend, since you'd rather they bought another copy. Even if they're only going to skim through the first chapter.

Awful example, what you should have said is would the author mind printing up a few thousand copies and lending hem to potential customers to read and then hope that they decide to buy it afterwards.

the_syco

Kinetic^ wrote: »

If there's a demo out then play that and if there's not then let your wallet do the talking and don't buy the game.

I haven't played a demo is so flippin long, I don't remember when I last played one. Probably BF2. Why? Because, sadly enough, the game would be online several weeks before the demo comes out. Heck, it seems the industry norm to now wait a few weeks after the offical date of release before releasing a game!

=-=

Agree fully with what noodler has said, though. You said it yourself Kernel, R&D costs money. Where, apart from video game sales, would this money come from? Santa? :pac:

Kernel

noodler wrote: »

Awful example, what you should have said is would the author mind printing up a few thousand copies and lending hem to potential customers to read and then hope that they decide to buy it afterwards.

Wrong noodler, you give an awful example. Since the publisher isn't printing anything, it's just the same as loaning. It's 1s and 0s on a server to my hard drive, the publisher has nothing to do with it, bar the r&d (writing the book in the analogy).

I've already said that if the game is worth buying I buy. But as I've said, if I'm just going to have a look, and never intend on buying the thing in the first place, then my act of piracy is victimless and doesn't impact on the profit margins of the company. I play very few games, and the ones I play are ones I have paid for.

Kernel

the_syco wrote: »

Agree fully with what noodler has said, though. You said it yourself Kernel, R&D costs money. Where, apart from video game sales, would this money come from? Santa? :pac:

It comes from the people who pay for the game. But if I never intended on buying the game in the first place, then I'm doing no damage to them.

wayne040576

Kernel wrote: »

It comes from the people who pay for the game. But if I never intended on buying the game in the first place, then I'm doing no damage to them.

It depends what you do with the pirated game.

Are you posting negative reviews of the game on message boards thus swaying the decisions of others who were planning to buy the game?

Are you playing multiplayer games on the company's server hogging their bandwith with all the other pirates and reducing the overall experience of those who actually paid for the game?

Are you cheeky enough to post bug reports and complaints on the game's communtiy forums potentially wasting support resources of the company?

Now these aren't directly aimed at you but you'd be suprised the number of people who pirate a game and then do all three of the above. The second point annoys me especially when I have a reduced performance on a multiplayer game I payed for because a couple of hundred thousand people are hogging the servers with pirated version.

Amalgam

Codemasters had a racing game on the PSX 1 that basically caused the cars to veer to one side ever so slightly..

I'd rather a social bug instead of copy protection that renders a system unstable, affects optical drives etc.

This was the case with Beyond Divinity. I was all set to buy the game, but reports of the copy protection put me right off, basically, reducing optical drives to a crawl at an OS level and generally reducing IO performance for HD drives too. No thanks.

L31mr0d

Kernel wrote: »

I've already said that if the game is worth buying I buy. But as I've said, if I'm just going to have a look, and never intend on buying the thing in the first place, then my act of piracy is victimless and doesn't impact on the profit margins of the company. I play very few games, and the ones I play are ones I have paid for.

Let me ask you this. If your son went on to set up an indie game company and develop a game he was proud of, and one of your friends came over to your house and said "Oh I just pirated your sons game off the internet, it's pretty good, I completed it, but I don't think I'll be buying it, oh and I've given copies of it around to all our other friends to try it out."

Are you telling me you'd have no problem with this?

Now, let me just say, I don't expect you to show your hand here (it is the internet after all :rolleyes:) but we all know how a normal person would react.

imo, it is one thing to pirate, it is another thing entirely to pirate and think you are just. That is just plain delusional.

Hercule

Kernel

wayne040576 wrote: »

Are you posting negative reviews of the game on message boards thus swaying the decisions of others who were planning to buy the game?

Almost never, but if there is something particularly rank in the game, then I might mention it on boards or something. Nothing like a full review or anything.

wayne040576 wrote: »

Are you playing multiplayer games on the company's server hogging their bandwith with all the other pirates and reducing the overall experience of those who actually paid for the game?

Never. Indeed, with the way keys and stuff are needed and the fact that you would be banned from xbox live, I didn't think it was possible. Any games I've played online I always bought. HL1, HL2, DoD, TF, L4D etc. etc. Got great value for money from them, except CS:S. Bought that and literally played it for an hour. Didn't like it. Still sitting in my Steam account.

wayne040576 wrote: »

Are you cheeky enough to post bug reports and complaints on the game's communtiy forums potentially wasting support resources of the company?

Nah. Don't bother reporting bugs as many others already have done so usually, plus I know the company doesn't really care.

wayne040576 wrote: »

The second point annoys me especially when I have a reduced performance on a multiplayer game I payed for because a couple of hundred thousand people are hogging the servers with pirated version.

Understandable. But as I've said, if I was to pirate or borrow a game and not bother buying it, it's because I won't be spending my limited time with it.

L31mr0d wrote:

Let me ask you this. If your son went on to set up an indie game company and develop a game he was proud of, and one of your friends came over to your house and said "Oh I just pirated your sons game off the internet, it's pretty good, I completed it, but I don't think I'll be buying it, oh and I've given copies of it around to all our other friends to try it out."

Are you telling me you'd have no problem with this?

Now, let me just say, I don't expect you to show your hand here (it is the internet after all ) but we all know how a normal person would react.

imo, it is one thing to pirate, it is another thing entirely to pirate and think you are just. That is just plain delusional.

Tbh, I would know the realities of piracy, and if my son's game was already making him bucket loads of money, I'm realistic enough not to care if someone pirated the game. As I have said, the greed of the companies is often to blame. If I can buy a cheap game on Steam or something, and I've already played it or thought it was worth the money then I'd buy it. I've loads of games from playasia and the likes which cost me a reasonable amount of money, but which I haven't gotten my money's worth. Likewise I have cheap DVDs I've added to my collection, from play.com, because they were going cheap and I wanted to add them to my collection. These are films I've not even watched, or have seen already on xvid format. But if they're decent enough with a few extras then I'll pay money for a hardcopy. Half of them are still in the shrink wrap. I honestly can't see the problem with someone downloading something which they wouldn't have bothered buying in the first place - it's not affecting sales.

Another key point, which comes into play with virtual goods, like games or programs, is that most use libraries coded by other programmers, or if they do their own, they use existing algorithms. Is the algorithm copyrighted? No, you may as well copyright the colour brown for artists. The use of the functions and libs, the use of the coding language itself is what produces the end product, but at the end of the day, it's all just digital 1s and 0s, and the pirate who would not be purchasing the game/music/film/whatever is making their own copy of this to check out. It's costing the company nothing whatsoever for this, either for the copy or for the loss in sales - so there is an ethical difference here.

wayne040576

Kernel wrote: »

Another key point, which comes into play with virtual goods, like games or programs, is that most use libraries coded by other programmers, or if they do their own, they use existing algorithms. Is the algorithm copyrighted? No, you may as well copyright the colour brown for artists. The use of the functions and libs, the use of the coding language itself is what produces the end product, but at the end of the day, it's all just digital 1s and 0s, and the pirate who would not be purchasing the game/music/film/whatever is making their own copy of this to check out. It's costing the company nothing whatsoever for this, either for the copy or for the loss in sales - so there is an ethical difference here.

Actually those few examples you listed cost Developers money and it can cost A LOT in some cases.
For example Algorithms can be copyrighted and you have to pay a licence fee to the owner.


So if you use mp3s in you product, you must pay a licence to the mp3 copyright owner.

Third party libs can cost a lot of money. For example, you could buy a third party lib to help out with controls on your interface. That could set you back 1000 quid per developer. So if you have 30 developers working on the project, you're already down 30k.

Programming IDEs, third party engines etc. It all adds up.

This is before you start paying wages and rent etc

Now imagine trying to do all that as an indie developer with no publisher backing.

SeantheMan

Kernel wrote: »

There's a lot of moral high ground being taken by people here.

Not by you obviously as you seem content to pirate to your hearts content.

You can't pick up food, eat it...and then tell the shopkeeper...I don't want it anyways...doesnt taste nice. But if it was nice I'd have bought it.

The same with any product.

The fact is...Batman is an excellent game, well done to all those involved in making it. And ts not that pricey if you shop

Dont be at yourself

So if you use mp3s in you product, you must pay a licence to the mp3 copyright owner.

Third party libs can cost a lot of money. For example, you could buy a third party lib to help out with controls on your interface. That could set you back 1000 quid per developer. So if you have 30 developers working on the project, you're already down 30k.

Programming IDEs, third party engines etc. It all adds up.

This is before you start paying wages and rent etc

Now imagine trying to do all that as an indie developer with no publisher backing.

Don't be silly, all games companies are greedy money factories and can buy whatever algorithms they want. They're not laying people off or going bankrupt due partly to piracy.

wayne040576

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

Don't be silly, all games companies are greedy money factories and can buy whatever algorithms they want. They're not laying people off or going bankrupt due partly to piracy.

Sorry,

Guess their in-game subliminal messages finally got to me.

speedboatchase

All this down with capitalism nonsense is ridiculous, I worked with a guy who downloads every single game, movie, dvd, everything. He at least admits what he's doing is wrong however, rather than existing in Walter Mitty fantasy where he's sticking it to the man. I've seen a few people online now claiming they're boycotting MW2 because of the Activision CEO's recent comments on the company practises. Of course these people are now going to pirate the game like they always were, only now they've invented a justification that grants them supposed moral high ground

Batman is a great game, and is surprisingly cheap for a new release, coupled with the fact it has a really impressive demo on Xbox Live. Its only the developers second game and they absolutely deserve your euro monies for the effort they put in IMO

jonny72

Kernel wrote: »

Another key point, which comes into play with virtual goods, like games or programs, is that most use libraries coded by other programmers, or if they do their own, they use existing algorithms. Is the algorithm copyrighted? No, you may as well copyright the colour brown for artists. The use of the functions and libs, the use of the coding language itself is what produces the end product, but at the end of the day, it's all just digital 1s and 0s, and the pirate who would not be purchasing the game/music/film/whatever is making their own copy of this to check out. It's costing the company nothing whatsoever for this, either for the copy or for the loss in sales - so there is an ethical difference here.

I agree with a lot of other things you say, about personal use etc, but the truth of the fact is, most people pirate stuff just because they don't want to pay for it. Piracy affects the sales, which affect the profits, which affects everything from whether the company goes under to what amount of profit they can use to produce a better game.

Your argument above is ridiculous though. If you never ever had the option to pirate games then there'd be a lot more of them on your shelf trust me. Same with the whole system, no matter how many of us delude ourselves that we 'wouldn't have bought it anyway'.

Kernel

wayne040576 wrote: »

Actually those few examples you listed cost Developers money and it can cost A LOT in some cases.
For example Algorithms can be copyrighted and you have to pay a licence fee to the owner.


So if you use mp3s in you product, you must pay a licence to the mp3 copyright owner.

Third party libs can cost a lot of money. For example, you could buy a third party lib to help out with controls on your interface. That could set you back 1000 quid per developer. So if you have 30 developers working on the project, you're already down 30k.

Programming IDEs, third party engines etc. It all adds up.

This is before you start paying wages and rent etc

Now imagine trying to do all that as an indie developer with no publisher backing.

True, but that just reinforces my key point that information should be free or treated differently to physical products. Like the analogy of patenting the colour brown. The algorithm is an idea, or a way to do something and shouldn't be possible to be copyrighted. There are, for example, only a finite number of ways to address memory, print text on screen, draw polygons etc. It's copyrighting of ideas and algorithms (and to a certain extent basic libraries) that kills indy developers. Non-profit guys like modders don't typically have to worry about this stuff, and they produce some excellent work. That's presuming of course that many games and programs are disassembled and checked by the capitalist dogs.

SeantheMan wrote:

You can't pick up food, eat it...and then tell the shopkeeper...I don't want it anyways...doesnt taste nice. But if it was nice I'd have bought it.

The same with any product.

Comparing digital content to food or sports cars is not a good analogy. More appropriate would be the idea of sharing art like books, movies or music with your mates. Developers are going to need to find better reasons for people to part with their hard earned cash tbh.

jonny72 wrote:

Your argument above is ridiculous though. If you never ever had the option to pirate games then there'd be a lot more of them on your shelf trust me. Same with the whole system, no matter how many of us delude ourselves that we 'wouldn't have bought it anyway'.

I disagree jonny. I only have so much disposable income I spend on games, for example. I would have played a lot less games and roms, but the amount of originals on my shelf would be the same. And the games I play frequently (and frequently is not very often to me) are all originals. It's funny that I'm the only one playing devil's advocate here when I guarantee that most people have broken copyright laws in some way or another.

Amalgam

Piracy reduces the chance of good games appearing, publishers will not support unusual or 'risky' game ventures, they'll just churn out something quick and quite probably predictable, instead of maybe spending more time and capital on nurturing a better product for the gamer.

Dont be at yourself

It's funny that I'm the only one playing devil's advocate here when I guarantee that most people have broken copyright laws in some way or another.

It's trying to justify your piracy that's the crux of the matter. There is no justification. If you pirate, at least admit you're a thief who is harming the industry, stifling the production of niche or innovative games, putting studios out of business and people out of jobs.

Don't go on a marxist tirade against IP and copywrite laws, because it's the stuff of a fight-the-power 16 year old who's seen The Motorcycle Diaries one too many times.

Burning Eclipse

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

It's trying to justify your piracy that's the crux of the matter. There is no justification. If you pirate, at least admit you're a thief who is harming the industry, stifling the production of niche or innovative games, putting studios out of business and people out of jobs.

Don't go on a marxist tirade against IP and copywrite laws, because it's the stuff of a fight-the-power 16 year old who's seen The Motorcycle Diaries one too many times.

I couldn't have put this better.

At least be 'honest' about your dishonesty... so to speak.

noodler

Kernel wrote: »

True, but that just reinforces my key point that information should be free or treated differently to physical products. Like the analogy of patenting the colour brown. The algorithm is an idea, or a way to do something and shouldn't be possible to be copyrighted. There are, for example, only a finite number of ways to address memory, print text on screen, draw polygons etc. It's copyrighting of ideas and algorithms (and to a certain extent basic libraries) that kills indy developers. Non-profit guys like modders don't typically have to worry about this stuff, and they produce some excellent work. That's presuming of course that many games and programs are disassembled and checked by the capitalist dogs.



Comparing digital content to food or sports cars is not a good analogy. More appropriate would be the idea of sharing art like books, movies or music with your mates. Developers are going to need to find better reasons for people to part with their hard earned cash tbh.



I disagree jonny. I only have so much disposable income I spend on games, for example. I would have played a lot less games and roms, but the amount of originals on my shelf would be the same. And the games I play frequently (and frequently is not very often to me) are all originals. It's funny that I'm the only one playing devil's advocate here when I guarantee that most people have broken copyright laws in some way or another.

Right, so no copyrighting of digital material? So no incentive to produce it? S billions of dollars worth of investment gone? So economies like ours screwed to an extent way beyond what they are now?

Kernel

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

It's trying to justify your piracy that's the crux of the matter. There is no justification. If you pirate, at least admit you're a thief who is harming the industry, stifling the production of niche or innovative games, putting studios out of business and people out of jobs.

Don't go on a marxist tirade against IP and copywrite laws, because it's the stuff of a fight-the-power 16 year old who's seen The Motorcycle Diaries one too many times.

How can it be harming the industry if the pirate never intended on buying the game anyway? Whether a pirate copy be available or not?

Gummy Panda

Kernel wrote: »

How can it be harming the industry if the pirate never intended on buying the game anyway? Whether a pirate copy be available or not?

I don't think thats true. I think some pirates would actually buy the some games if there was no other option.

Kernel

Gummy Panda wrote: »

I don't think thats true. I think some pirates would actually buy the some games if there was no other option.

Some certainly would, but my point has always been about those who have no intention of ever buying the game. What harm is done to 'the industry' then?

d0gb0y

Kernel wrote: »

Some certainly would, but my point has always been about those who have no intention of ever buying the game. What harm is done to 'the industry' then?

Actually its a plus for the industry...more beta testers
maybe if they spent as much money on beta testing and support for the games as they do on cp, piracy might not be as prevelent

If you look at some games like X3tc for example they are still fixing and releasing new content a year after release and not charging for it

eldin

Kinetic^ wrote: »

The product comes with a price. If you take it without permission for zero remuneration, it's stealing. There is no ifs ands or buts about it. It's stealing.

It is not stealing, if caught you are not convicted of theft. Saying it is stealing with no ifs or buts is just plain wrong and looks like your purely throwing it out there because it sounds better/has more effect than saying copyright infringement. If you call copyright infringement theft, do you also call manslaughter murder?

Anyways... i like to buy my games as i appreciate and enjoy them more. There was a time when I downloaded lots of games but played all the way through very few. These days I have less time to play and less games but i appreciate them more. Almost every game I have bought in the last while I downloaded first - single player titles often stay in their packet after being bought.

There are several reasons I do this:
1) downloaded copies are usually better. They are more convenient to use and usually have the most annoying crap removed. (which incidentally just reminded me to check for pirate copies of gta4 with all that logging in junk removed)

2) theres an unbelievable amount of rubbish games around. this was inevitable as gaming became more popular - theres more of everything. I've been burned too many times buying junk so if i cant try it out then im not buying. simple as.

3) it easy and convenient. i get to try games as soon as they are out and dont even need to exert any energy.

If a game is pants then i dont buy it and dont keep the pirate copy. i think theres a lot of self-rightous people here talking nonsense and would bet that half the people screaming 'its theft' still download their favourite tv shows.

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

It's trying to justify your piracy that's the crux of the matter. There is no justification. If you pirate, at least admit you're a thief who is harming the industry, stifling the production of niche or innovative games, putting studios out of business and people out of jobs.

Don't go on a marxist tirade against IP and copywrite laws, because it's the stuff of a fight-the-power 16 year old who's seen The Motorcycle Diaries one too many times.

I pirate - am I a thief? no. Do I need some moral justification - no i have zero guilty conscience. I've downloaded more games than average but Ive also spent a small fortune on gaming over the years.

The copyright system is very broken and its getting worse (ACTA should be fun) but that problem hasn't really affected the games industry side of things. However putting any complaints about it down as marxist tirades of 16 year old kids is disingenious at best. Would you have said similar to people originally against software patents in the US? look at the mess thats causing.. Copyright is needed but it is being abused. It needs fixing to prevent abuse.

Kinetic^

eldin wrote: »

I pirate - am I a thief? no.

Yes you are, you just admitted it by saying you downloaded all those games.

Dont be at yourself

Kernal wrote:

Some certainly would, but my point has always been about those who have no intention of ever buying the game. What harm is done to 'the industry' then?

Two points.

1. If you download a game via P2P, you are not just pirating the game for yourself, but also uploading it to others, who may have otherwise bought the game.

2. If a game is worth scouring the internet for, downloading, installing, cracking and playing, then there must be some value to it. Otherwise, you wouldn't bother. So it's a ridiculous thing to say that you wouldn't buy any of your pirated games if that was the only way of obtaining them.

eldin wrote:

There are several reasons I do this:
1) downloaded copies are usually better. They are more convenient to use and usually have the most annoying crap removed. (which incidentally just reminded me to check for pirate copies of gta4 with all that logging in junk removed)

Putting aside the often crippled online play, spyware, malware and backdoors that often come part and parcel with pirated games, the copy protection of PC games is unobtrusive. Nearly every big PC game is available on Steam, which offers an elegant solution.

2) theres an unbelievable amount of rubbish games around. this was inevitable as gaming became more popular - theres more of everything. I've been burned too many times buying junk so if i cant try it out then im not buying. simple as.

Demos, reviews, previews, trailers and discussion boards all offer a means of evaluating a game before you pay the money for it.

3) it easy and convenient. i get to try games as soon as they are out and dont even need to exert any energy.

Steam is easier and more convenient. No torrents, no cracks, no workarounds. Click the game and it installs.

You've clearly left out reason 4: If you can take something illegally with no repercussions on yourself, you will. As much as you try to justify it, that's not a copyright question, that's not a convenience question, that's a moral question.

Copyright is needed but it is being abused. It needs fixing to prevent abuse.

Copyright is being abused? Is it unfair for developers to expect people to pay to play the game they've created? The people who are abusing copyright are the pirates, not the developers or the publishers.

eldin

Kinetic^ wrote: »

Yes you are, you just admitted it by saying you downloaded all those games.

uhuh, you got me. Well done you :rolleyes:

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

Putting aside the often crippled online play, spyware, malware and backdoors that often come part and parcel with pirated games, the copy protection of PC games is unobtrusive. Nearly every big PC game is available on Steam, which offers an elegant solution.

It can be obtrusive but I wasn't just referring to copy protection (which seems pretty clear reading my post back, to me at least). I dont want steam or microsoft rubbish blocking me from loading saved games (GTA4) or anything else except the game. I'm not bothered about malware, I only use windows for games and download from reputable sources. I cant remember the last time I had a virus or a crippled game.

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

Demos, reviews, previews, trailers and discussion boards all offer a means of evaluating a game before you pay the money for it.

Demos can be good but theyre not always available. If theres a choice between demo and pirate copy ill take the demo. The rest of that list is rubbish - reviews cant be trusted anymore, previews often dont reflect the games well and trailers are specifically designed to sell the game - they tell you nothing about how it plays or feels. meh to forums, always a mixed bag.

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

Steam is easier and more convenient. No torrents, no cracks, no workarounds. Click the game and it installs.

You've clearly left out reason 4: If you can take something illegally with no repercussions on yourself, you will. As much as you try to justify it, that's not a copyright question, that's not a convenience question, that's a moral question.

Speak for yourself and noone else mate. I didn't leave it out - its not one of my reasons. If it was then I wouldn't buy games. If I play through a game you developed for more than a level or so then chances are good I'll have bought a copy too, or will as soon as i'm at the shops. If you want to sell me a game your going to have to let me play it first or someone else will get my money. It's not nice (particularly for indie developers) but thats how it is.

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

Copyright is being abused? Is it unfair for developers to expect people to pay to play the game they've created? The people who are abusing copyright are the pirates, not the developers or the publishers.

Of course its not unfair - you quoted me saying copyright is needed!
I clearly stated when I said copyright was being abused that it didn't affect the games industry much. I was referring to the recent pushes to have copyright extended to ridiculous lengths for film/music and the incoming ACTA agreement - which by all indications we will be subjected to right here.
Copyright is a necessity but it has to be balanced to stop big media companies from abusing it (disney springs to mind). Copyright should be limited in such a way that the producer amkes their living and the work is moved into the public domain, otherwise we would all be charged royalties to sing happy birthday.. Thats what copyright was created for in the first place.