Do you think piracy hurts the gaming industry?

[jonesman99]

Apparently it does because the romsite i used took out its .nds rom section. Whether it was by a developer or Nintendo themselves, i dont know but whatever company that did it must have been hit by piracy if that happened.

My guess is Disney Interactive, all of their games on the DS is Shovelware, and expect kids to buy it.

DAMN YOU, DISNEY!!!!

 

[Gagarin]

How many times you got to pay for the same thing?
Let's say I like "dirty Dancing", so I bought it years ago on VHS. Then there was a system change - I bought it on DVD. Now I want to see it on BlueRay, or UMD in my PSP - Pay again. Is that fair?
Do you know how much money I spent on Cassettes, Nes Cartridges or Gameboy games?
Now they cost a fraction of what they cost before. Do game companies owe my some money for that?
So when I have some roms of the games that I bought years before - it's not piracy.
If I Bought 10 games that are bad but still costed sixty bucks, I feel free to steal one, couse games are not priced by quality.
Some games are made in years, by army of people. Some of them are using a ready engine, graphics change, and guess what - they cost the same!

You guys think that you owe a money to game companies - think about the money they owe you.

 

[Urza]

I pirate for these reasons: 1. Demos not indicative of actual game play. 2. The failure of stores to offer me ANY kind of remuneration for a terrible game; once I buy a game I am stuck with it.
How is a demo of actual game play not indicative of actual game play?

QUOTEThe above 'reasons' are not to be confused with 'justifications'.

I don't think you know what those two words mean.

Let me try to explain this as simply as possible so that even you would understand. This calls for an amusing and hyperbolistic scenario in which I supplant you and the gist of your argument.

You: Well, in the past I have hired some bad hookers. They failed to get me off, leaving me without money or satisfaction. For this reason I felt I should drug and kidnap one the next time I was horny. If she was good, then I would pay the pimp and be on my way. Otherwise, she didn't deserve my money in the first place.

Judge: lolguilty.

 

[LufianGuy]

Video game companies (THEY) nowadays try to screw the consumer (US) anyway they can, so THEY shouldn't be surprised when WE screw them back.

Enough said.

 

[Urza]

How many times you got to pay for the same thing?
Let's say I like "dirty Dancing", so I bought it years ago on VHS. Then there was a system change - I bought it on DVD. Now I want to see it on BlueRay, or UMD in my PSP - Pay again. Is that fair?
Do you know how much money I spent on Cassettes, Nes Cartridges or Gameboy games?
Now they cost a fraction of what they cost before. Do game companies owe my some money for that?
So when I have some roms of the games that I bought years before - it's not piracy.
If I Bought 10 games that are bad but still costed sixty bucks, I feel free to steal one, couse games are not priced by quality.
Some games are made in years, by army of people. Some of them are using a ready engine, graphics change, and guess what - they cost the same!

1. Why would the manufacturers be responsible for sending you updated media every time you purchasing a new piece of technology?

2. Why would the manufacturers be responsible for the decreased value the market places on used products?

3. How does the fact that you made poor purchasing decisions give you the right to steal software?

None of your points make any sense at all.

 

[Gagarin]

Think about it....

Becouse I paid for a movie not for a format of data!!!!!

So why the the prices are the same for games? I paid some extra for they bad products.
I will explain it to you. Stealing is - something is gone. Taken away.
Stealing a data - is not the same like stealing a physical good. Becouse it can be reproduced billion times without a harm. Identical copy!

And you copyright nazi who put these things together (stealing physical and copying digital) seems to have a problem to understand it.

Shoplifting is bad. copying is less bad.

 

[Urza]

Think about it....

Becouse I paid for a movie not for a format of data!!!!!

You actually paid for the movie in that specific "format of data."

I could say that when I purchased a movie, I actually bought a school bus full of hookers. That doesn't make it true.

 

[BakuFunn]

Ok, I'm gonna state this as simply as possible so that even a 4 year old would understand:

Piracy IS stealing and stealing IS wrong, therefore I am in the moral wrong when I pirate (simple logic).

I pirate for these reasons: 1. Demos not indicative of actual game play. 2. The failure of stores to offer me ANY kind of remuneration for a terrible game; once I buy a game I am stuck with it. And btw, even a movie theater once gave me a refund after having 'finished' watching Pearl Harbour, as I thought it was such a terrible movie.

The above 'reasons' are not to be confused with 'justifications'.


The End.


You can sell games.
You're also bringing up potential profit and all that bullshit. If a demo is bad, then you wouldn't get the full game. That's about it. Your reasons are justifications.



Which movie theater is that? I'd love to visit it.


QUOTE(Gagarin @ Jul 9 2010, 11:11 PM) How many times you got to pay for the same thing?
Let's say I like "dirty Dancing", so I bought it years ago on VHS. Then there was a system change - I bought it on DVD. Now I want to see it on BlueRay, or UMD in my PSP - Pay again. Is that fair?
Do you know how much money I spent on Cassettes, Nes Cartridges or Gameboy games?
Now they cost a fraction of what they cost before. Do game companies owe my some money for that?
So when I have some roms of the games that I bought years before - it's not piracy.
If I Bought 10 games that are bad but still costed sixty bucks, I feel free to steal one, couse games are not priced by quality.
Some games are made in years, by army of people. Some of them are using a ready engine, graphics change, and guess what - they cost the same!

You guys think that you owe a money to game companies - think about the money they owe you.

Are you joking? You're not real, are you?
If you have to pay for it, you have to pay for it. It may not be fair. If a yacht is on sale for a couple of million dollars and you think that price isn't fair, then what? You'll steal it? Fuck all if all unfair things are free.

Nobody gives a rat's ass on how much you spent on things in the past. I bought fourteen tons of food last year, should I get those things for free again?

Prices drop. You really expect to be reimbursed for paying a higher price when supply and demand was at work? That's incredibly ignorant. Buy low, sell high. It's pretty easy. If it works for your side, why can't companies collect more money when a bottle of water is now a dollar, instead of fifty cents a couple of years ago? So, you're proposing every price change to affect the future? That's just ridiculous.

If a game is bad and you bought it, that's your lost. If you buy bad soda, then it's bad. Don't buy bad soda. You think that if you drink a lot of bad soda, you get to steal a couple? It's not fair for the company either. And games are priced on whatever the company wants it to be priced. Don't think a bad price will allow you to steal it. No. Too expensive? Don't fucking buy it.

How in hell do game companies owe us in any way? If you feel you got ripped off on a game, that's your problem. If a guy in the desert sells you snake oil, that's your problem. They don't owe you crack shit. You negotiated the price, and you both agreed on the price. If the other end of the deal was sweetened with good marketing, then great for them. If you're stupid enough to believe them, you're an idiot and deserve your money to be taken away from you.


EDIT: Spelling errors.

 

[Gagarin]

Dont compare a phyical thing like yaht and digital data.

And stop talking about hookers.


"How in hell do game companies owe us in any way? If you feel you got ripped off on a game, that's your problem"

So now they have their problem and we are even.

 

[BakuFunn]

You have to pay for both.
You can compare them fine.




Urza seems to feel as though you're more familiar with the workings of hookers, so you'll understand your stupidity easier.

I feel the same.

 

[Urza]

So now they have their problem and we are even.

Committing felonies may become an additional problem for you at some point.

 

[Gagarin]

Well, in that case you just stole his idea. You didn't pay for it.
Stealing is stealing.

So you think that they can not do anything according to the law without the reason?
I think that all judges and lawyers need that example with hookers so they will finally figure it out.

 

[Urza]

Well, in that case you just stole his idea. You didn't pay for it.
Stealing is stealing.

Except the idea was not a product and freely available for anyone to receive and use.

 

[Prophet]

Didn't a thread like this one just end recently? I see the same immature justifications too. How about we just admit that people are imperfect and piracy, though immoral, allows a high yield of pleasure for a relatively low cost. The "cost" being the slight burden of remorse our actions place upon our conscious. Unless of course you don't even feel remotely bad about being a pirate, in which case you are a douche.

I call that the "douche clause" in my arguement. Thank you and you are welcome.

Would you shoplift?

Depends. Would I shoplift a game? No. Would I shoplift food if I were hungry? Yes. To be honest, I have done so in the past.

There is however a third variable that must be accounted for. In addition to weighing potential pleasure against remorse, we must take "consequence" into account. Consequence and remorse are unpleasant affairs that people like to avoid. If the sum of consequence and remorse totals a "displeasure" greater than the enjoyment we stand to gain from an action, then we abstain from said action. In the case of piracy the probability of consequence is extremely low and although the amount of remorse varies, it is rarely much at all. Hence, the pleasure of playing that new game and saving money far outweighs the total displeasure.

Shoplifting is of course different. The consequence is perceived to be higher, due to physical theft being a crime people are regularly prosecuted for. Through social conditioning the likely hood of feeling remorse is also higher, especially if you are stealing from a small establishment with which you can personally identify. It becomes hard for us to justify shoplifting because we perceive that it is probable that we might lose more than we will gain. Of course if you are poor and hungry this becomes easier, as you already have very little to lose to begin with.

This Is how the mind of man works. At least I pray it is.

 

[BakuFunn]

Well, in that case you just stole his idea. You didn't pay for it.
Stealing is stealing.

So you think that they can not do anything according to the law without the reason?
I think that all judges and lawyers need that example with hookers so they will finally figure it out.

So, stealing is fine because you've taken bad deals in the past?


Buying something is an agreement. You agree to take their thing for your money. So, you've had bad deals, so you'll steal. Here's the solution: don't buy or steal the fucking snake oil if it's that bad of a deal.

EDIT:

QUOTE(Prophet @ Jul 9 2010, 11:04 PM) Didn't a thread like this one just end recently? I see the same immature justifications too. How about we just admit that people are imperfect and piracy, though immoral, allows a high yield of pleasure for a relatively low cost. The "cost" being the slight burden of remorse our actions place upon our conscious. Unless of course you don't even feel remotely bad about being a pirate, in which case you are a douche.

I call that the "douche clause" in my arguement. Thank you and you are welcome.

Would you shoplift?

Depends. Would I shoplift a game? No. Would I shoplift food if I were hungry? Yes. To be honest, I have done so in the past.

There is however a third variable that must be accounted for. In addition to weighing potential pleasure against remorse, we must take "consequence" into account. Consequence and remorse are unpleasant affairs that people like to avoid. If the sum of consequence and remorse totals a "displeasure" greater than the enjoyment we stand to gain from an action, then we abstain from said action. In the case of piracy the probability of consequence is extremely low and although the amount of remorse varies, it is rarely much at all. Hence, the pleasure of playing that new game and saving money far outweighs the total displeasure.

Shoplifting is of course different. The consequence is perceived to be higher, due to physical theft being a crime people are regularly prosecuted for. Through social conditioning the likely hood of feeling remorse is also higher, especially if you are stealing from a small establishment with which you can personally identify. It becomes hard for us to justify shoplifting because we perceive that it is probable that we might lose more than we will gain. Of course if you are poor and hungry this becomes easier, as you already have very little to lose to begin with.

This Is how the mind of man works. At least I pray it is.

You, sir, are correct. You're diving into the minds of the thieves and how they tick, and you are completely correct. The thing I'm trying to establish is that most people think that piracy is not as serious as stealing something physical. It's because there's a low risk. You're behind your computer at home. Who's gonna find out? I'm trying to establish the fact that the moral toll on our minds should be just as great, while these people are taking easy theft for granted. They're justifying stealing.

All I'm saying is that piracy is theft. Shoplifting is just something people can relate to easily, and will see the impact that every game pirated costs.

 

[Urza]

I fall into the "douche clause."

 

[Gagarin]

Nice. So this is your justification. I hear some people who can say that about roms

I respect it.

Read the question in the thread. It does effect the industry, but it is kind of their fault that they don't secure they goods.

I wrote my opinions, not that I truly belive in them. I wanted a nice conversation about it, but you downgrade it to an insult.

I apologize for being wrong. I think that there is a door in hell with my name on it.




Committing felonies.... nice I hope that you are bad at fortune telling.

 

[Prophet]

I fall into the "douche clause."

I know. But the fact that you know, is why I love you.

 

[Gagarin]

Didn't a thread like this one just end recently? I see the same immature justifications too. How about we just admit that people are imperfect and piracy, though immoral, allows a high yield of pleasure for a relatively low cost. The "cost" being the slight burden of remorse our actions place upon our conscious. Unless of course you don't even feel remotely bad about being a pirate, in which case you are a douche.

I call that the "douche clause" in my arguement. Thank you and you are welcome.

Would you shoplift?

Depends. Would I shoplift a game? No. Would I shoplift food if I were hungry? Yes. To be honest, I have done so in the past.

There is however a third variable that must be accounted for. In addition to weighing potential pleasure against remorse, we must take "consequence" into account. Consequence and remorse are unpleasant affairs that people like to avoid. If the sum of consequence and remorse totals a "displeasure" greater than the enjoyment we stand to gain from an action, then we abstain from said action. In the case of piracy the probability of consequence is extremely low and although the amount of remorse varies, it is rarely much at all. Hence, the pleasure of playing that new game and saving money far outweighs the total displeasure.

Shoplifting is of course different. The consequence is perceived to be higher, due to physical theft being a crime people are regularly prosecuted for. Through social conditioning the likely hood of feeling remorse is also higher, especially if you are stealing from a small establishment with which you can personally identify. It becomes hard for us to justify shoplifting because we perceive that it is probable that we might lose more than we will gain. Of course if you are poor and hungry this becomes easier, as you already have very little to lose to begin with.

This Is how the mind of man works. At least I pray it is.

Thank you for that. The whole discussion make a lot more sense now.

 

[LufianGuy]

Didn't a thread like this one just end recently? I see the same immature justifications too. How about we just admit that people are imperfect and piracy, though immoral, allows a high yield of pleasure for a relatively low cost. The "cost" being the slight burden of remorse our actions place upon our conscious. Unless of course you don't even feel remotely bad about being a pirate, in which case you are a douche.

I call that the "douche clause" in my arguement. Thank you and you are welcome.

Would you shoplift?

Depends. Would I shoplift a game? No. Would I shoplift food if I were hungry? Yes. To be honest, I have done so in the past.

There is however a third variable that must be accounted for. In addition to weighing potential pleasure against remorse, we must take "consequence" into account. Consequence and remorse are unpleasant affairs that people like to avoid. If the sum of consequence and remorse totals a "displeasure" greater than the enjoyment we stand to gain from an action, then we abstain from said action. In the case of piracy the probability of consequence is extremely low and although the amount of remorse varies, it is rarely much at all. Hence, the pleasure of playing that new game and saving money far outweighs the total displeasure.

Shoplifting is of course different. The consequence is perceived to be higher, due to physical theft being a crime people are regularly prosecuted for. Through social conditioning the likely hood of feeling remorse is also higher, especially if you are stealing from a small establishment with which you can personally identify. It becomes hard for us to justify shoplifting because we perceive that it is probable that we might lose more than we will gain. Of course if you are poor and hungry this becomes easier, as you already have very little to lose to begin with.

This Is how the mind of man works. At least I pray it is.

Wow, I never expected anyone to bring Cesare Beccaria's pain vs pleasure principle into this thread, mad props to Prophet (I'm assuming you are a criminal justice major or at least took one college class in that field).