Pirates are eating themselves!

Name one company which was driven extinct by pirates and not by the combination of bad business choices, poor quality service and/or low quality products.

I'm not defending piracy, I am just stating its importance is being overblown to hide the deficiencies of the current PC market which is oversaturated by shiny-looking, shallow clone-titles and thus offers little incentive for the common customer to fork over ~50$ for games which are worth maybe half that much in terms of quality and content volume.

The company might not go extinct, but the quality of games will. And I think you just described that. Why put a ton of effort into making one when no one wants them... or wants to pay for it.

If people just stopped buying crappy games at that price, then the price would lower. The fact is that the people will pay that much for a game they want. If they wouldn't pay it, you would see cheaper games. Actually, if piracy were not possible, PIRATES would probably pay that much for the game. Of course then there would be more incentive to make them and to make them better.

You can think of Piracy as an illegal tax that comes right off the top for gamemakers.

One thing about pirates is that most wouldn't buy the stuff they pirate, even if there was no other choice. They would just do without.

Also, DRM basically says that everybody is a pirate. It took two weeks to get my copy of Mass Effect to work. Eventually, they told me to return it (How many retailers take back opened PC games at full price?) and to go get the Xbox 360 version. I was so angry at that point, I went and got a crack from online. In about ten minutes, the game was up and running and worked perfectly.

When pirates provide better service as well as a product that actually works, and the legit company does not, there's a problem.

As for quality, I see a lot of quality games come out. Sure there's a ton of junk, but quality isn't extinct. I loved Mass Effect once it worked.

I can think of one company that went bankrupt largely due to piracy in the games industry, and only one. SNK. They were a special case though, as people pirated their arcade stuff.

You have any sources for this information or are you just generalizing and furthering a ridiculous stereotype?

Pirates are human beings like you. Some are stupid. Some are freeloaders. Some are extremely intelligent. Some pirates buy a huge quantity of games each year, legally. Piracy has even helped a certain TV show make it big. In other words, they aren't all idiots that would never consider The Big Picture.

I'm not saying that piracy is "right" or "wrong" -- nor do I really care. The MPAA and RIAA aren't going to tell me how I should think, neither is Demonoid or the Astalavista underground; from where I sit, if a good product is made, people will buy it. If a publishing company loads their software up with intrusive and error-prone DRM, don't be surprised if an old customer decides to pirate the next title you sell.

I've had legit CDs fail on me several times on my last computer because the CD drive was somehow bad (according to EA). I bought the games from Wal*Mart, they were legal, but the on-screen dialog box was telling me to insert the correct disc. Worked alright at the office! Hmm.

I guess that makes me a pirate, then, since I used the work of pirates and crackers to get the legit program to run on my computer with a no-CD crack. Curiously, the pirates had fixed several bugs in the program, too. What evil men!

Yeah, long story short: pirates aren't all the same. Some spend a lot of money supporting the developers and publishers they like. Others never spend money and ONLY steal.

And look at Stardock! No intrusive or game-breaking DRM. Easy to pirate? Sure! Are they still making the bucks, despite all their software ending up on torrent sites and newsgroups? Yes. Why? They make GOOD QUALITY STUFF -- and it WORKS. Even the pirates end up buying some of their stuff, what a shocker!

In conclusion, no, I don't believe you that pirates are eating themselves. I hear that from the RIAA/MPAA press releases ... and they're not all that reliable. Lawsuits against dead grandmas and 6 year old girls ... I mean, c'mon.

Dreamcast, Sega, Looking Glass Studios... All died or were bought out due to low sales and piracy (Esp. in the case of the Dreamcast)

Oh no, not another discussion about piracy.....

On topic: The problem is not piracy. The problem is the demand for piracy.

Pirates offers a product at a lower cost, or of better quality, or of more convenience.

How to get rid of pirates? Get rid of the demand for piracy.

How do you get rid of the demand for piracy? Figure that one out and you win at life.

Capitalism, economic survival of the fittest.

Piracy is driven by the fact that the price for dross we are forced to buy is now too high. On the other hand, you can go directly to the source, as this guy did. Personally, I got Sins because they have a dim view of DRM. HAs anyone seen the lengths EA goes to make their rubbish uncopyable? I'd say the crippling DRM is simply a red flag to the cracker groups that make piracy possible, and just the right nudge punters will need to decide it's easier to pirate than go legit. @ SlyDrivel, it's a vicious circle I'm afraid, and can only end in tears, because I know the big businesses really don't want to think that it's their problem, or feel that they should take initiative regarding lowering prices, removing DRM, or increasing quality. It's a useless effor, because almost all games are crackable, (a notable exception would be Codemaster's "Operation Flashpoint". Some wierd bug did some trippy stuff to cracked copies )

Anyways, My point is piracy is a combination of Greed on both sides, and an unwillingness to find happy medium on both sides of the software system.

Is there anyone in this discussion who has never pirated an idea? What do you think?



Pirates don't offer products. They smuggle the products of others, which is certainly at a lower cost, wholeheartedly not of better quality, and more convenient only in that they don't have to protect themselves from having their ideas stolen (namely because they don't have any); they are the ones doing it.

I think you missed my point. Let's imagine you got a copy of Mass Effect for PC. Also imagine you have little or no internet. Mass Effect wants you to do internet verification periodically otherwise it assassinates your game. Now you head over to a buddy's house, download a 10 MB crack that skips the internet check. You can now use something otherwise rendered unusable due to DRM. Of course, now you're all jaded and bitter because you had to do something illegal to simply use the stupid thing, and you notice no SWAT teams are after you. Why bother will all the effort of purchasing something that simply interferes with it's own running and instead download the thing instead and save some $80 - $120 in some cases.

The problem is piracy makes it easier to play games than the bigwig companies.

EDIT: Whatchoo mean "Pirated Ideas"? I can either take it as "We all do it", or you claiming our reasons unoriginal. Please elaborate.

If it's rubbish, why even bother stealing it? In fact, why go to equal lengths to copy crummy rubbish?



Well, I don't know about the socialist plague that has swept through the lesser countries in the world, but in America, expensive games cost $50 brand spanking new, and anyone buying or stealing the game has a working internet connection. You had to download that hack, right? Don't tell me you actually went to a friend's house with a jump drive and can't afford internet. It's preposterous. I mean, you just spent $120 on a shiny new game. You can't be terribly poor.

We are talking about games, right?



I need more context to elaborate. What confused you?



I actually hope for "crippling" DRM. The better protected are a writer's ideas, the better the ideas will be. I'll stand for a 10 day recurring internet check, as long as I get to play a cooler game. The problem now is that people are intrinsically thieves. It takes consequences to convince them otherwise. So many people in this instance are thieves that, ridiculously, developers have to appease the very people stealing from them! They have to balance revenue lost with pirate "satisfaction", because even the honest consumers probably steal stuff and sympathize with the rest of the criminals.

One more thing. I did not miss your point. You missed mine.

Why do I feel like I'm the only one in any discussion who is radically not a pirate?

Saying that pirates are responsible for the destruction of companies in any shape or form is like blaming ants for showing up in your kitchen after you spread peanut butter all over the floor.

Are they annoying? Yes. Are they responsible for the mess? Absurd.


Piracy in any of its forms has never crippled any industry to the point of it ceasing in the creation of a product. Never. It never will.

Sooner companies start learning ways AROUND piracy instead of headbutting themselves against the same damn brick wall they have been for who knows how long the better.

That's ridiculous.

A game that doesn't require DRM checks, internet connectivity, a cd in the drive, etc. but offers the same game as a retail version is OBVIOUSLY of better quality.

Pirates don't pirate to make money, either, they do it for status. Cracking big DRM is a high to these guys. They don't do it because they're trying to sell at a "lower cost" they do it because they enjoy it.

Additionally, ideas aren't being "stolen". Never at any point does a pirate crack a game then pawn it off as their own idea. In fact, many pirates i've known give kudos to the developers and tell the people downloading the games that if they enjoyed it they should consider buying it. I'm not saying they're a bunch of Robin Hoods, but they aren't the red-eyed devils you seem to think they are.

Please don't scream at us that the sky is green because it isn't.

SlyDrivel, I live in Australia, probably designated at the technological toilet of the developed whold, but hey, we cannot hope to live up the the supreme might of our American overlords. Secondly, Fiskingis rude. Also, we do have a really crappy internet infrastructure. I have cable, so I was relating the problem or a friend (otherwise I wouldn't be here... I guess).

But I digress.
Stardock is right to feel morally smug compared to other big name developers and the like. Most of the gaming community (or at least the circles in which I frequent) consider DRM an unnessasary evil. Maybe where you are you get a decent amount of service if it kills itself, or worse, your PC (Crysis kept Blue Screening me) but for most of the world, getting any kind of support might be best described as hell. Before I get too passionate and start getting a quote dictionary out (yeah, they DO exist.. somehow) let me say it's useless trying to whinge about piracy on a forum here when stardock has already made it's position quite clear.

What you don't understand is that a lot of record companies died NOT because of piracy, but because they used DRM.
It didn't work for the record industry, they're getting rid of it now (except sony i believe). DRM hurt it so bad. And now the games publishing industry outside of Stardock is just now starting to learn this.

A lot of consumers don't like to buy an axe and it says. "You may only use this axe to drop down trees. You may not let a friend borrow this axe. You may not use this axe to chop off fish heads. You may not use this axe to defend yourself against attack. If someone breaks into your house and steals this axe then you must pay us for it twice."

We often think we deserve more, so sometimes a lot of people will fight back. Sometimes this is "unwarranted self importance", but in the case of DRM it is pretty warranted.


It's not to mention that DRM harms the people that buy the game/music, not the people that pirate it. People who pirate music get the music DRM free. People who pirate games get them DRM free. DRM takes less than an hour for people to crack.


And you know Kazaa was made by two guys that didn't want to copy music, but they wanted to DESTROY the record industry? Now why do you think they would want to do that?..
And you know what they made now? Skype. Why? To DESTROY the telecom industry. Now.. why do you think they'd want to do that?
Because the record industry and telecomm industry is largely evil. You know damn well it doesn't cost $40 a month to make a few phone calls. It is so little data. And look at how much money the record execs get and the "stars" get, while the people doing all the work in making the disks, the packaging designs, working in the studio, are getting nothing in comparison.


Really the record industry is a lot better now. You have smaller bands, more concerts.
If someone really likes your music they'll pay good to see a concert, and it's equalized the smaller bands and bigger bands more. Smaller bands are on iTunes just like the big ones, instead of not "deserving space" inside of a CD store next to Madonna because they wouldn't sell as well back then. Smaller bands are making more money and the big ones have to compete with them, and not just use their giant marketing.

I agree that the whole idea that piracy is directly sapping sales is in many cases, completely wrong, and is a myth perpetuated by naive companies who are stuck in old school thinking and don't understand the modern world. For one thing, when they claim how much money is lost to piracy, they assume that every download would translate into a sale otherwise. This is just plain wrong. Some people who download games simply want whatever they can get without paying for it, or they are the equivilent of game renters, who have a lot of games they want to play for just a few days. If anything, it is rental companies who are losing out from these groups. Then there are those who want to try out games. If they don't like it, they get rid of it, if they do, they buy it. Then there are people who own the game, but can't get it work without turning to the pirates for help. DRM plans are just infamous for making it difficult or impossible for some people to play. Of course we also have the people who won't buy, or who return games because the DRM. They never calculate that out.

Stardock does have a form of copy protection. No patches unless you have a unique serial code. This does not, however, interfere with the installation or playing of the game in any fashion. I think their sales speak for themselves.

Brad is a staunch defender of copyright and a constructive critic of DRM. I'm a staunch critic of copyright and have 7 TGN tokens in the bank waiting for NotMoM2. I paid for my licenses and made "an investment" because I want the devs to continue working, not because I believe in copyright. The thing doesn't have to be "copyright or piracy," but people are terribly fond of either/or arguments. Oversimplification can be so reassuring.

I hope I live long enough to see us get over all this distracting nonsense and come up with good answers to the very real philosophical and technical problems summarized in John Perry Barlow's Economy of Ideas. The essay is old by web-time standards, but wine is a central metaphor and the words are aging well, IMO.

So, basically, there is no one in this discussion who believes that digital rights should be defended? In fact, everyone here praises Stardock because they just let pirates steal from them if they want? I am confirmed in my initial belief that you are ALL pirates. I have not heard an opinion from anyone who I would assume has not and will not steal ideas.

It is also interesting to have it confirmed that America's internet infrastructure is infinitely superior to the barbarian countries. Although, America does also have its faults. Some people think that anyway. I usually humm free country in my head until the bad thoughts go away.

SlyDrivel, Please if you are going to speak on the behalf of the United States... Please do not act so pumpus, we are not so superior to the rest of the world. and by no means are most of the other countries barbarians! please go visit them, experiance their culture, perhaps take a year to two and actually live with them before you condem them. so as an American, Please step down from your ivry tower i do so have a Marza Dreadnought pointing at its base.

as to the issue of priacy, its all been stated. like anything illegal you have 2 options, Oppression or adapting to the priacy. you can try oppression by banning priates form the internet, you can take their computers away, you can even throw them into jail, all of which burdens the societies more and more as governements are requireing you to have internet access to file taxes do governement work such as online schools or other reasons. let alone throwing them into jail now takes form the tax payers. so again where dose the hole win from the oppression?

or the industry can adapt, it can reduce their prices to a more acceptable lvl, much like legalizing drugs would put the busness into pharmicy hands rather then the gangs and dealers hands on the streets... unless the gangs and dealers can provide it cheaper still then the pharmicy in which case it becomes a battle of capitalizum. with the only winner being who can produce at the lowest cost possible and the best quality possible.

and as for EA's games... After they destoryed C&C with C&C 3 i do not beleive i have a reason to ever buy one of there games again. because i can not play online with LEAGLE copies due to the port forwarding requirements which are MANY.

"no one", "everyone", "confirmed", "ALL", "anyone", "superior", "barbarian", "America", "free"

Is it just me, or was that a pure flame/bait post?




They smuggle products to sell them at lower cost. Thus they offer a cheaper product.

They do sometimes have better quality and convenience, to a particular person(s). Some people consider a product is of better quality and convenience when it don't require a internet connection to authenticate everytime its used, or when it don't look into the computer systems files and fuck up any virtual drives or other programs that the user use, for example.

You can make all the rash assumptions you'd like, but I have no unlicensed software on my machine, and as I mentioned, I actually have *spent but not used* money with Stardock. You're also not reading the thread very carefully b/c several folks made strong anti-piracy statements.

I do not advocate breaking the law, unless perhaps you are conscientiously attempting civil disobedience and are prepared for the possible consequences. I don't actually hold much hope that I'll outlive (c) b/c bad ideas, such as absolute monarchy or social Darwinism, can be very hard to let go.

I guess people just need to waste a great deal more time trying to repair a sinking ship before we can move on to figuring out how things ought to work in a more civilized future. Until then, we just have to accept needless legal fees, excessive administrative salaries, DRM dev costs, etc., all as part of the price we pay for a game.

All a pirate does is leech off the host (Developer)

If it kills the host, it has no more host to leech off of.

You pirates are stupid if you can't figure this out.

Hey, someone finally understands and agrees with me.



My assumption was hardly rash. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that people who don't care about protecting ideas might want to steal them.

Current forms of DRM have proven to be ineffective. The cheaters find ways around it, and the people who do not steal are often hurt by it.

I am not saying that we should not attempt to curb the cheaters somehow - just that we need to find a new way of doing so because the current methods are ineffective.

The solution should be two sided:

-It should diminish the value of obtaining and using the stolen product.

AND

-It should increase the value of using a legitimate product.

I have yet to see such a solution from classic forms of DRM. The first part of the solution is usually nullified by the hackers, and the second part almost never receives attention from the developers.


I think the larger issue is that the current methods of attempting to curb it are ineffective and are even backfiring. We need new methods that are actually effective against illegal copying and provide benefits for legitimate users.

New online platforms are a step in that direction. They provide clear benefits, such as being able to a new legitimate copy of the game should the old copy of the game get damaged. Pirates also provide copies of the game, but with a substantial cost in convenience and risk. This is how the war against piracy should be fought: More convenience for legitimate use, less convenience for illegitimate use.

Checking the internet every ten days is not a step in that direction: Now the user is punished for not connecting to the internet for a long time, and the convenience of obtaining a new legitimate copy is lost.

In addition, a 10 day check does not address the problem of piracy at all: Being disconnected from the Internet for 10 days says nothing about whether the copy of the game is legal or not. It only says that the user has poor access to the Internet. It says nothing about whether the disconnection was intentional, and worse yet even if the disconnection is intentional, it does not imply that criminal activity is taking place.

Military members would be unfairly punished by a 10 day rule. The military of the United States - and I'm guessing most other militaries as well - orders its soldiers to move to new locations frequently. During the move, the soldier(s) (and usually the family as well) must disconnect their computers. This means that the Internet is down during the move, and it can be well over ten days before the soldier(s) can reestablish a new connection at the new location. This would be a case where completely legitimate customers can be punished when there is no wrongdoing involved.

I have gone 100% piracy free on my system. All current software is paid for. I would agree that piracy is a problem. My disagreement is not about the legalities or the ethics; it is only about the effectiveness of current solutions.

He's basically just saying that he's letting pirates steal his game because he can't do anything about it without hurting his sales. The problem is that DRM hurts his sales because even the people who buy his games are pirates. I really doubt that his game sold better because it has no copy protection. Some of the people who would ordinarily steal from big mean EA actually bought his game because they liked that he would let them steal. They saw his decision as moral and just. That might have made a difference. But in the end Frogman's games sell better because they are better and cheaper games. If you want to see more competitors entering the market, give them an incentive by giving them a bigger potential market.