Mass Effect 3 Leaked Online

Aireoth

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
5,449
You know, its surprising how many people assume that because x number of copies are pirated, that is how many where stolen.

I honestly beleive that the majority of piracy comes down to three 'groups' and there is a degree of overlap between them.

1. The largest group wants instant content delivery, I'm pre-loaded, a pirated version is already out, why not just let me play now, or I'll just go get the pirated version. Same for movies, we want it now, not in six months when they decide to release it on Blu-ray.

2. Demo seekers, there used to be a day and an age where demo's meant something, these days not so much. People want to try before they buy, so they pirate, then decide if they pay full freight for it.

3. Low income gamers, a segment on the rise with the economic troubles. I can't afford to buy the game, but need a new game to play to alleviate the stress of a low income lifestyle, so I pirated it, and if I can afford, one day I'll buy.

Once you have eliminated these three from the pool of pirates, I wouldn't be surprised if your numbers (millions on PC, ten thousand on xbox) where equal. PC is the easiest platform for people to use suffering from the above set of afflictions. With record sales numbers being posted for most of the top pirated games, I don't think its as large a problem, and the real target should be the pool of people who pirate because of a sense of entitlement, which won't be more then tens of thousands, not millions.
 

SilverSliver

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 23, 2004
Messages
11,757
1. The largest group wants instant content delivery, I'm pre-loaded, a pirated version is already out, why not just let me play now, or I'll just go get the pirated version. Same for movies, we want it now, not in six months when they decide to release it on Blu-ray.


Pretty much this. If you are offering a game via a digital delivery method, see Origin, Steam, etc -- you need to be flexible with the release date. If you are three days from release, and a pirated copy shows up on the internet, it's time to unlock the game for release. Immediately. Why accept losing potential customers to a cracked copy they can play earlier, versus just letting paying customers play what they bought and people who want the game NOW to potentially go the pay route.
 

FireBean

Gawd
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
994
2. Demo seekers, there used to be a day and an age where demo's meant something, these days not so much. People want to try before they buy, so they pirate, then decide if they pay full freight for it.

BAM! That's me! If I don't like it within the first 1 hour, I don't buy it. Also, If I think I want something, I'll wait for a few days before I get it. If I don't think about it, then I don't get it because it was not something I needed or really wanted. Just an impulse buy. I'm a REALLY bad impulse buyer. I have bought WAY too many games and only have a few hours of play time on them. They're just not that fun to play.
 

Thuleman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
5,833
Putting ME3 on Steam would cut down on the number of pirated copies.
 

RanceJustice

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
6,193
Oh for frak's sake... THIS HAPPENS EVERY TIME. It only takes ONE gamestop/bestbuy/walmart employee to take a box home, or someone in Russia, or pre-loaded data etc... Hell, the From Ashes DLC was the fault of EA themselves! Oh, and I don't want to even seen one whimper about BAWWW PC PIRATES. It takes a lot more effort to make a pre-release PC copy playable (encryption, missing files, DRM etc..), compared to a console title where as soon as a single copy is pressed and makes it into the wild, it WILL be uploaded AND will be immediately playable.

Just accept that it happens and that it isn't a big deal. Mass Effect 3 is looking to be another case of moneygrab, exclusive content and DLC flying all over the bloody place on day one. They're going to make a bazillion dollars and I don't want to hear any more lying that they would have made a bazillion+n dollars if X hadn't happened. They've basically wrapped the entire (admittedly enjoyable) Mass Effect games 2 and 3 in "This game will not be complete unless you pre-order from 2+ locations, buy the Collector's Edition, Drink Dr Pepper, pre-order all our other games, buy the strategy guide/artbook/soundtrack to get codes from there, buy lots of DLC that was completed pre release, use Origin for every bloody copy for no good reason, and generally jump through hoops until you've spent lots of time and money" cloaks of annoyance and still expect to make enough they can afford dropping on minute-long commercials in prime time. There is absolutely no room nor reason for bitching on EA's part. If they don't sell as much as they planned to, they need to rethink their "we're going to spend a fortune on advertising and then making the game as hard as possible if not impossible for many people to find "complete" idea".
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,903
You know, its surprising how many people assume that because x number of copies are pirated, that is how many where stolen.

I honestly beleive that the majority of piracy comes down to three 'groups' and there is a degree of overlap between them.

1. The largest group wants instant content delivery, I'm pre-loaded, a pirated version is already out, why not just let me play now, or I'll just go get the pirated version. Same for movies, we want it now, not in six months when they decide to release it on Blu-ray.

2. Demo seekers, there used to be a day and an age where demo's meant something, these days not so much. People want to try before they buy, so they pirate, then decide if they pay full freight for it.

3. Low income gamers, a segment on the rise with the economic troubles. I can't afford to buy the game, but need a new game to play to alleviate the stress of a low income lifestyle, so I pirated it, and if I can afford, one day I'll buy.

Once you have eliminated these three from the pool of pirates, I wouldn't be surprised if your numbers (millions on PC, ten thousand on xbox) where equal. PC is the easiest platform for people to use suffering from the above set of afflictions. With record sales numbers being posted for most of the top pirated games, I don't think its as large a problem, and the real target should be the pool of people who pirate because of a sense of entitlement, which won't be more then tens of thousands, not millions.

This assumes that people who actually pirate the game would eventually buy it even if they really liked the game. I've NEVER known any one to illegally download a game and actually buy a real copy of it because they liked it.
 

DemonDiablo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
1,767
Pretty much this. If you are offering a game via a digital delivery method, see Origin, Steam, etc -- you need to be flexible with the release date. If you are three days from release, and a pirated copy shows up on the internet, it's time to unlock the game for release. Immediately. Why accept losing potential customers to a cracked copy they can play earlier, versus just letting paying customers play what they bought and people who want the game NOW to potentially go the pay route.

This was question is so idiotic its almost not even worth quoting let alone responding to.

Almost.
 

NickJames

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
6,683
This assumes that people who actually pirate the game would eventually buy it even if they really liked the game. I've NEVER known any one to illegally download a game and actually buy a real copy of it because they liked it.

I will raise my hand at that. I can name multiple ones.

Skyrim
Mass Effect 1 (purchased ME2 day 1)
Dues Ex HR
GTA 4 (although in hindsight I was going to buy it anyway once it was instores)
Assassins Creed (purchased all sequels)
Borderlands
Dead Island

If a game can hold my attention for more than 30 minutes, then it's usually worth buying.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,903
I will raise my hand at that. I can name multiple ones.

Skyrim
Mass Effect 1 (purchased ME2 day 1)
Dues Ex HR
GTA 4 (although in hindsight I was going to buy it anyway once it was instores)
Assassins Creed (purchased all sequels)
Borderlands
Dead Island

If a game can hold my attention for more than 30 minutes, then it's usually worth buying.

Yeah, everyone on this forum is the exception to this rule and always buy the game if they like it and delete it if they don't. Yeah, I've heard that one before. :rolleyes:
 

ir0nw0lf

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 7, 2003
Messages
6,403
The gaming industry will claim it will devastate the fragile gaming ecosystem, cause mass hysteria, cause dogs and cats to live together, an asteroid to hit the Earth and dinosaurs to return. :eek:
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,903
I also find the sense of entitlement disturbing. It is as if some of you believe that you are some how entitled to try the entire game before purchasing it. That's like saying I'm going to live in a house rent free for a year and then decide if I'd like to buy it, or put 30,000 miles on a Corvette before deciding to buy one.

It's bullshit.
 

Dreaz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
1,656
I also find the sense of entitlement disturbing. It is as if some of you believe that you are some how entitled to try the entire game before purchasing it. That's like saying I'm going to live in a house rent free for a year and then decide if I'd like to buy it, or put 30,000 miles on a Corvette before deciding to buy one.

It's bullshit.

So are your analogies, but hey, I'm not mad.
 

vortican

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
146
I also find the sense of entitlement disturbing. It is as if some of you believe that you are some how entitled to try the entire game before purchasing it. That's like saying I'm going to live in a house rent free for a year and then decide if I'd like to buy it, or put 30,000 miles on a Corvette before deciding to buy one.

It's bullshit.

I don't think many people recall the days when you COULDN'T demo games. Yes, such a time existed when game demos weren't readily available. In that case, your choice was to borrow it from your friend after they were done with it, buy a copy yourself, or copy his/her disks. Yes, games were still expensive then (in real terms, inflation you know...) but access was far less than it is now.

Access means everything. It's the nature of the entitlement mentality and frankly, a lack of moral character. If people can get something for free, they will, regardless of whether it's ethical or not.
 

Godmachine

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
10,472
I'd like to point out that the console version leaked FIRST.

I wish articles would state this .. but of course the PC version will get the most flak. Not the fact that it takes a JTAG 360 console about 8 minutes to output a fresh unencrypted disc for upload to any site on the net.
 

Outamyhead

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
4,259
The story was leaked? I hadn't known about this.

Would save me a ton of time if true/accurate.

Yeah my nephew told me that there were three endings, and how they end..won't stop me from getting the game though once it hits $20 (sure as hell won't pay anymore than that with all the DLC that's bound to be getting released).
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,903
I don't think many people recall the days when you COULDN'T demo games. Yes, such a time existed when game demos weren't readily available. In that case, your choice was to borrow it from your friend after they were done with it, buy a copy yourself, or copy his/her disks. Yes, games were still expensive then (in real terms, inflation you know...) but access was far less than it is now.

Access means everything. It's the nature of the entitlement mentality and frankly, a lack of moral character. If people can get something for free, they will, regardless of whether it's ethical or not.

Well back in the day most of your AAA titles had demos. They were generally readily available, but back then readily available didn't mean what it does now. You'd have to connect to a BBS, or sneaker net to a friends house to get a copy from them.

Still people need to come to grips with the fact that the world doesn't owe them a damn thing and they aren't entitled to jack shit. If you want something, earn the money and buy it. I think this crap comes from all this bullshit kids are raised with these days about how we are all winners, and there are no losers, we are all special, and that we all deserve the same things. Movies and games have never been free, and if you take a copy off the shelves physically, without paying you'd be arrested for it. Doing the same thing virtually does not excuse the fact, or change the fact that illegally obtaining software is wrong. You aren't entitled to watch a movie without buying a ticket or paying for a DVD, and games are the same way. At no point has this ever been untrue.

If there is a demo, try THAT. Demos were made for just that purpose. If there isn't a demo then do your research, talk to people who've played the game and read the reviews. Then make an informed decision about the product.
 

RanceJustice

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
6,193
Talk of "entitlement" whenever related to piracy (and truthfully, in most other issues of controversy as well) are typically designed to try to win an argument by near ad-homonym attack - "Person X simply wants what he doesn't deserve to have, and thereby his argument is invalid". Happens the same if its industry jokers talking about piracy or conservative politicians trying to justify why universal health care is a bad idea "Fuck the facts, fuck all the real, demonstrable conditions in what can be a multifaceted issue, Person X is just greedy, wants something for nothing and doesn't deserve it, so it shouldn't be done!"

Entertainment copyright infringement's facts have been out for quite some time, but all of them push towards three basic tenets "A sale is a sale is a sale", "you can't squeeze blood from a stone", and "Only real sales counts, not imaginary/projected/suggested". If piracy enables someone with a limited budget to test out and then buy one of the titles, that's one more sale then there would have been. If the person wasn't going to buy without testing, or couldn't afford to buy in the first place etc... then its a moot point.

Copyright law is generally bullshit. Corporate expectations of profit are completely out of line. There is no respect for the customer or user any longer. People copying data that is meant for controlled, artificial scarcity but happens to exist in a world where "Star Trek Replicators" exist for 1's and 0's transmitted electronically, is not a problem with "people", its an issue with antiquated business strategies made worse by corporate entities trying to retain control at any cost, even when it is contrary to the nature of their business.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,903
Yeah my nephew told me that there were three endings, and how they end..won't stop me from getting the game though once it hits $20 (sure as hell won't pay anymore than that with all the DLC that's bound to be getting released).

I'm not reading anything about the story online or seeing how it ends. I'll find out the old fashioned way.
 

BigJayDogg3

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
1,676
I also find the sense of entitlement disturbing. It is as if some of you believe that you are some how entitled to try the entire game before purchasing it. That's like saying I'm going to live in a house rent free for a year and then decide if I'd like to buy it, or put 30,000 miles on a Corvette before deciding to buy one.

It's bullshit.

It would be more like an inspection before buying a house or a test drive of a car.

I'm interested in this item, but I'm not going to give you money and tie myself to this thing before I know its worth it.

This assumes that people who actually pirate the game would eventually buy it even if they really liked the game. I've NEVER known any one to illegally download a game and actually buy a real copy of it because they liked it.

I do this with almost every smartphone app I buy. Is it worth it? Likely not. I've probably saved all of $10 doing it. But I'm less concerned with saving money than I am encouraging developers to continue releasing crappy games and apps.

I did this with over half my music collection. Between my senior year of high school and my freshman year of college, I downloaded something like 20 or 30 gigs of music. A bunch of it went to the trash while the rest is either sitting in my drawer or in my Amazon cart.

In my case piracy actually has gotten me to spend more money on media.
 

vortican

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
146
Talk of "entitlement" whenever related to piracy (and truthfully, in most other issues of controversy as well) are typically designed to try to win an argument by near ad-homonym attack - "Person X simply wants what he doesn't deserve to have, and thereby his argument is invalid". Happens the same if its industry jokers talking about piracy or conservative politicians trying to justify why universal health care is a bad idea "Fuck the facts, fuck all the real, demonstrable conditions in what can be a multifaceted issue, Person X is just greedy, wants something for nothing and doesn't deserve it, so it shouldn't be done!"

It isn't an attack that people should pay for that which they consume, and it applies to healthcare, food, entertainment, or any other good. It doesn't matter whether it's digital or physical; it's morally unacceptable to steal, and to use the "try it before you buy it" excuse when there is already a method of trial available? That's just a thinly-veiled defense of outright theft in my opinion.

Copyright law is generally bullshit. Corporate expectations of profit are completely out of line. There is no respect for the customer or user any longer. People copying data that is meant for controlled, artificial scarcity but happens to exist in a world where "Star Trek Replicators" exist for 1's and 0's transmitted electronically, is not a problem with "people", its an issue with antiquated business strategies made worse by corporate entities trying to retain control at any cost, even when it is contrary to the nature of their business.

So, if it's possible, it's permissible, and the ends justifies the means? I understand what you mean about artificial scarcity; I used to believe that since nothing was technically being stolen, my actions as a software pirate didn't deprive anyone of anything, until I thought about the fact that it's counterfeiting. In the same manner as excess money printing is inflation, thereby diluting the value of every unit in existence and driving prices up, copying products illegal diminishes the value of the good and deprives the creator of that good of the return on their investment, decreasing their earned profits. Some companies produce limited editions of goods purposely, to get a higher return per unit. There's nothing WRONG with that; it's their choice. Simply because they don't produce enough or don't sell it at a lower price isn't a license to steal.

I agree that businesses are behind the curve technologically when it comes to software piracy but they must balance protection of their product (and the inherent burdens that puts on a consumer) with the demands of customers (like the ones here) who won't purchase their product at the price they're selling.

I'd rather focus on the principle than on the technical problems with it. There's a perfectly good demo available for those who want to try the product before they pay money for it. Demanding the right to consume an entire product before paying anything for it is quite different. Just because you don't enjoy your meal doesn't mean you aren't obliged to pay for it.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,903
It would be more like an inspection before buying a house or a test drive of a car.

I'm interested in this item, but I'm not going to give you money and tie myself to this thing before I know its worth it.

That's what the demo is for. Seriously, you aren't going to be able to justify commiting a crime with some kind of excuse. Really, it almost sounds like some of you feel like you are entitled to do something and it's morally wrong to deny you the ability to do so. Its like raping a girl to try out her snatch and then asking her out on a date after the fact. You've got to inspect the merchandise and try before you buy right? How could that be wrong? :rolleyes: Sound ridiculous? So does the notion that you are entitled to download music, movies and games without spending a single penny unless you decide you like something. That's what the hell the iTunes song preview, movie trailers / clips, reviews, demos, etc. are all for. They help you decide to spend the money or not.

Honestly if you can't make an informed decision based on what's legally available, then I don't know what to tell you. But pirating something and using the "try before you buy" excuse is bullshit. The developer doesn't owe that to you. They owe you nothing. It's not morally justified, and buying it after the fact even if you do like it doesn't change the fact that what you did to obtain it initially was wrong and even criminal.
 

Maplehamwich

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
1,539
Arguments about "moral correctness" are about as effective as arguments about artistic value, they are very subjective and wholly based on a person's experience. To have an effectual argument about piracy, seeing as we are mostly concerned with whether or not the creators of the product are hurt by it, we should discuss economics.

Economics says:


From Causes, Effects and Solutions of Piracy in the Computer Software Market
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...ract_id=997193

Quote:
5.2 Motivating Factors. Unanimously in the literature, price is agreed to be the key motivating factor for people, especially students, to pirate software ( Im and Van Epps 1991, Chen and Png 1999, Hindujua 2003, Chiang and Assane 2002). There appears to be a strong income effect with household income heavily influencing the pirate-purchase decision (Cheng, Sims and Teegen 1997, Gopal and Sanders 2000.)


From Piracy of Digital Products: A Critical Review of the Economics Literature
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...ract_id=466063
Quote:
Takeyama (1994) provides a similar analysis in which market demand is
explicitly derived from individual behavior. Contrary to the previous model, in
her model with full enforcement of copyright protection the optimal strategy of a
monopolist may involve selling to all consumers, i.e., also to those consumers
who would copy the product if the enforcement was not in place. The profitmaximizing
strategy given no enforcement may then give higher profits than the
profit-maximizing strategy given full enforcement.

Thus, incorrect pricing models encourage piracy, and the enforcement of piracy related laws tend to drive profits down, while being lack on piracy law enforcement can actually improve profits.
 

Bash

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
284
Its like raping a girl to try out her snatch and then asking her out on a date after the fact. You've got to inspect the merchandise and try before you buy right? How could that be wrong? :rolleyes: Sound ridiculous?

It was only a matter of time before someone compared piracy to the rape.
You are correct this does sound ridiculous.

Also the leak on the PC side is just for the pre-load no? Is anyone playing the leaked copy yet?
 

/usr/sbin

Successfully Trolled by Megalith
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
3,927
Pretty much this. If you are offering a game via a digital delivery method, see Origin, Steam, etc -- you need to be flexible with the release date. If you are three days from release, and a pirated copy shows up on the internet, it's time to unlock the game for release. Immediately. Why accept losing potential customers to a cracked copy they can play earlier, versus just letting paying customers play what they bought and people who want the game NOW to potentially go the pay route.

Bottom line: Support (in many forms), ie:
-Maybe activation/multiplayer servers aren't online/ready yet.
-Training their service reps to take calls about the product.
-Launch day patch for bugs, (pre-load so most data is on the machine days ahead of time, roll out final bug fixes with street launch).

etc.

There are lots of reasons not to release right away.
 

Aireoth

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
5,449
That's what the demo is for. Seriously, you aren't going to be able to justify commiting a crime with some kind of excuse. Really, it almost sounds like some of you feel like you are entitled to do something and it's morally wrong to deny you the ability to do so. Its like raping a girl to try out her snatch and then asking her out on a date after the fact. You've got to inspect the merchandise and try before you buy right? How could that be wrong? :rolleyes: Sound ridiculous? So does the notion that you are entitled to download music, movies and games without spending a single penny unless you decide you like something. That's what the hell the iTunes song preview, movie trailers / clips, reviews, demos, etc. are all for. They help you decide to spend the money or not.

Honestly if you can't make an informed decision based on what's legally available, then I don't know what to tell you. But pirating something and using the "try before you buy" excuse is bullshit. The developer doesn't owe that to you. They owe you nothing. It's not morally justified, and buying it after the fact even if you do like it doesn't change the fact that what you did to obtain it initially was wrong and even criminal.

And this mentality keeps people from finding a real solution, arguing the moral character doesn't accomplish anything. Either you (yes you, not society, and not fact) believe people are inherently good, or inherently not.

They key, as I tried to point out, is to identify why from a tangible stand point, people pirate. I think the responses show that those three points are pretty accurate (amusingly no one has said 'i am poor'). Then you can change your model to effectively combat piracy, no one care about the minority that abuses the system, they will always be there, no matter how many we catch or what we do. This doesn't mean we stop the crime fighting process, just like with rape, murder, child abuse, shoplifting, robbery, etc. We endevor to catch and prevent, but realize that we can't stop them all. Instead we focus on creating healthy society.

So, lets focus on creating healthy content distribution, that minimizes and marginalizes the pirate.
 

SilverSliver

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 23, 2004
Messages
11,757
Bottom line: Support (in many forms), ie:
-Maybe activation/multiplayer servers aren't online/ready yet.
-Training their service reps to take calls about the product.
-Launch day patch for bugs, (pre-load so most data is on the machine days ahead of time, roll out final bug fixes with street launch).

etc.

There are lots of reasons not to release right away.

I understand these things. But do you really think that if they are not ready to release ME3 right now, they will be any further along less than 12 hours from now?
 

BigJayDogg3

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
1,676
Its like raping a girl to try out her snatch and then asking her out on a date after the fact. You've got to inspect the merchandise and try before you buy right?

Again, your analogy is so extreme it overlooks the point.

If the entire reason you date someone is for the punanny, then I feel sorry for you. And yes, before I marry someone, I'm going to try them out...by talking to them and getting to know their personality. If we aren't a good fit, I move on to the next chick and try her out.

If buy games to have fun. I buy a car to drive. I buy a house to live. I marry a girl (hopefully) for love. If I can't live in a house, I won't buy it. If the car is broken, I won't buy it. If I don't love the girl, I'm not marrying her. Why should I buy a game if I'm not going to have fun?

So does the notion that you are entitled to download music, movies and games without spending a single penny unless you decide you like something. That's what the hell the iTunes song preview, movie trailers / clips, reviews, demos, etc. are all for. They help you decide to spend the money or not.

u mad?

Dead Island looked like a good game, got generally acceptable reviews, had no demo, trailers that lacked any footage of game play...and was a POS. Excuse me if I'm going to try something myself before buying it.

They owe you nothing. It's not morally justified, and buying it after the fact even if you do like it doesn't change the fact that what you did to obtain it initially was wrong and even criminal.

That's fine. You can give developers your money and continue receiving sub-par material. I'll keep my money and spend it on things actually worth the money.
 

Aireoth

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
5,449
Arguments about "moral correctness" are about as effective as arguments about artistic value, they are very subjective and wholly based on a person's experience. To have an effectual argument about piracy, seeing as we are mostly concerned with whether or not the creators of the product are hurt by it, we should discuss economics.

Economics says:


From Causes, Effects and Solutions of Piracy in the Computer Software Market
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...ract_id=997193

Quote:
5.2 Motivating Factors. Unanimously in the literature, price is agreed to be the key motivating factor for people, especially students, to pirate software ( Im and Van Epps 1991, Chen and Png 1999, Hindujua 2003, Chiang and Assane 2002). There appears to be a strong income effect with household income heavily influencing the pirate-purchase decision (Cheng, Sims and Teegen 1997, Gopal and Sanders 2000.)


From Piracy of Digital Products: A Critical Review of the Economics Literature
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...ract_id=466063
Quote:
Takeyama (1994) provides a similar analysis in which market demand is
explicitly derived from individual behavior. Contrary to the previous model, in
her model with full enforcement of copyright protection the optimal strategy of a
monopolist may involve selling to all consumers, i.e., also to those consumers
who would copy the product if the enforcement was not in place. The profitmaximizing
strategy given no enforcement may then give higher profits than the
profit-maximizing strategy given full enforcement.

Thus, incorrect pricing models encourage piracy, and the enforcement of piracy related laws tend to drive profits down, while being lack on piracy law enforcement can actually improve profits.

Nice articles, and it also highlights that these problems have been around and will continue to be around forever. It isn't about stopping piracy, but minimizing its impact.
 

BigJayDogg3

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
1,676
If buy games to have fun. I buy a car to drive. I buy a house to live. I marry a girl (hopefully) for love. If I can't live in a house, I won't buy it. If the car is broken, I won't buy it. If I don't love the girl, I'm not marrying her. Why should I buy a game if I'm not going to have fun?

Furthermore, unlike every other example used here, I cannot sell/divorce these games due the the DRM used. So I really am stuck with a game I buy. This isn't a system I can buy into.
 

Outamyhead

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
4,259
I will raise my hand at that. I can name multiple ones.

Skyrim
Mass Effect 1 (purchased ME2 day 1)
Dues Ex HR
GTA 4 (although in hindsight I was going to buy it anyway once it was instores)
Assassins Creed (purchased all sequels)
Borderlands
Dead Island

If a game can hold my attention for more than 30 minutes, then it's usually worth buying.

I tend to find if the demo can make me come back and play it again for a week or so, then the game is going to be great, but that's a dying concept, so if there is no demo I don't buy the game...almost missed out on Dragon Age Origins because of this.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,903
That economic argument is bullshit. In a capitalist economic model, the person providing the good sets the price based on what they believe the market can handle. If they sell at $49.99, then the developer can choose to charge more, or less based on sales figures. They typically won't increase the price for the simple fact that it's going to generate bad press and piss people off, but they can also choose to drop the price of the game to sell more copies by volume and discourage people to wait for used copies or wait for further price drops.

In other words, as long as these companies make a decent profit and people keep buying games at $49.99, or higher then that's what game companies will continue to charge. Distribution models and physical vs. digital have nothing to do with it. These only effect profit margins on their end. Where people go wrong is that they assume that it's wrong or immoral for a company to charge $49.99 for a physical copy and $49.99 for a digital copy as the latter should be cheaper to "produce and distribute." So because the margin is higher on one version they are some how assholes for charging the same amount. They can charge what they want for whatever they want. If you don't like it, don't buy it. It is that simple.

And most people don't know anything about game development costs. Development costs are huge these days. You've got all the equipment, salaries, software, building / facilities, distribution, packaging, bandwidth for digital distribution, licensing fees for any technology used to make the game, etc. Rarely are exact figures disclosed. So while it doesn't cost them hardly anything to sell you a digital copy of the game, they still need to recoup development costs and factor in a margin for profit to make the development of the game worth the effort on their part. And here is the real problem. What is classified as a "reasonable" profit margin is all based on who you talk to. Retail stores say 35%. Distributors may say 50%. It varies by industry. Many consumer electronics like TV's, receivers, and speakers may have upwards of 40% markup. Furniture is among the worst offenders with a margin of up to 60% from retail to you.

So because people don't agree with the markup and believe the profit margin to be excessive, they think they are morally justified in theft. Everyone's bar for what is fair is different. The fact is if you don't like it you should vote with your wallet. And not opting to buy something means you don't get to have it. You are not entitled to anything. This is what people need to understand. If you can't afford a $50 game then either you need to wait until it's cheaper or you need to find a way to manage your finances better or generate more income. I dare say if you can't afford $50-60 for a game (which is what the fuck they've been priced at for at least a decade) then you've got bigger problems and you need to get your priorities in order.
 

BigJayDogg3

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
1,676
That economic argument is bullshit. In a capitalist economic model, the person providing the good sets the price based on what they believe the market can handle. If they sell at $49.99, then the developer can choose to charge more, or less based on sales figures. They typically won't increase the price for the simple fact that it's going to generate bad press and piss people off, but they can also choose to drop the price of the game to sell more copies by volume and discourage people to wait for used copies or wait for further price drops.

In other words, as long as these companies make a decent profit and people keep buying games at $49.99, or higher then that's what game companies will continue to charge. Distribution models and physical vs. digital have nothing to do with it. These only effect profit margins on their end. Where people go wrong is that they assume that it's wrong or immoral for a company to charge $49.99 for a physical copy and $49.99 for a digital copy as the latter should be cheaper to "produce and distribute." So because the margin is higher on one version they are some how assholes for charging the same amount. They can charge what they want for whatever they want. If you don't like it, don't buy it. It is that simple.

And most people don't know anything about game development costs. Development costs are huge these days. You've got all the equipment, salaries, software, building / facilities, distribution, packaging, bandwidth for digital distribution, licensing fees for any technology used to make the game, etc. Rarely are exact figures disclosed. So while it doesn't cost them hardly anything to sell you a digital copy of the game, they still need to recoup development costs and factor in a margin for profit to make the development of the game worth the effort on their part. And here is the real problem. What is classified as a "reasonable" profit margin is all based on who you talk to. Retail stores say 35%. Distributors may say 50%. It varies by industry. Many consumer electronics like TV's, receivers, and speakers may have upwards of 40% markup. Furniture is among the worst offenders with a margin of up to 60% from retail to you.

I agree with this.

The fact is if you don't like it you should vote with your wallet.

And this.

I dare say if you can't afford $50-60 for a game (which is what the fuck they've been priced at for at least a decade) then you've got bigger problems and you need to get your priorities in order.

But not this. Entirely possible the reason I can't afford a $50-60 game is because my priorities are in order.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,903
Furthermore, unlike every other example used here, I cannot sell/divorce these games due the the DRM used. So I really am stuck with a game I buy. This isn't a system I can buy into.

If it's not a system you can buy into, then don't. It sounds to be like gaming just isn't for you. Or maybe console gaming should be more your style so that you can sell your old games or games you can't stand.

Just what exactly have you done with your life or what makes you so deserving of the "right" to try before you buy a game? Where does this sense of entitlement come from? Buyer beware is a concept that's been around since the history of trade in human culture across every continent and with every civilization past or present that has graced this planet. What gives you this belief that you or anyone else is so damn special that the rules and legality of software purchases do not apply to you?

The sense of entitlement and lack of moral fortitude indicates what a sad state the people of the world are in now. I've less faith in humanity than I did 10 minutes ago. (Which isn't saying much as I already knew society as a whole is in serious trouble.)
 

NickJames

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
6,683
Gamefly is great for trying out new games, especially since they give a 1 month trial every 6 months, and since 80% of new releases are console ports anyway, the experience is the same!
 
Top