hit tracker

Uncovering Piracy Myths

Discussion in 'General Undergound Newz' started by GaryOPA, May 15, 2013.

By GaryOPA on May 15, 2013 at 3:20 PM
  1. 25,653

    GaryOPA Master Phoenix Admin Staff Member Top-Dog Brass

    Mar 18, 2006
    Design Eng.
    Tropical Island
    Home Page:
    Study into the 'actual numbers' when related to Video Gaming

    Study Claims Video Game Piracy Not As Pervasive As Thought


    Since the very start of the 'digital universe', piracy has been a problem with everyone, from music, to movies, to of course video games, even in the days before 'digital versions', people were make their own copies of SNES cartridges that were burned to Erasable-Roms on home-made PCBoards, but today we have 'Peer-To-Peer' and 'File-Sharing', better known as 'BitTorrent' and it has been the subject of some large arrests, the biggest being 'Kim DotCom' with his 'MegaUpload' and thousands of lawsuits for those caught downloading torrents, but is the problem of 'video gaming piracy' is as big as the numbers from the large mainstream publishers and groups are claiming, well a group of researchers have decided to look into more deeply and see if there is some truth to those 'large numbers'.

    NEWS SOURCE: Internet digital piracy video games peer-to-peer file-sharing bittorrent theft (via) RedOrbit


Discussion in 'General Undergound Newz' started by GaryOPA, May 15, 2013.

    1. 1,808

      Ichijoe Loyal Member

      Sep 14, 2005
      In short Piracy is not a sale, cause the perp had no intention to ever buy it in the first place.
      The Second-Hand Market however (e.g. Gamestop and co.) are raking over their customers who are stupid enough to sell their Games to them, or buy Games (supposedly new, only to be badly manhandled by some minimum wage lackey). They tryed to pawn such crap off on me once, and I was just like uh no I asked for a NEW GAME i.e. in the shrink wrap and the lackey just looked at me like I was a jerk. Needless to say I just left.

      Gamestop is a decent enough place if you like digging up gems and paying the price for it. Otherwise is a great place to find something in the bargain bin. Otherwise I just shop for such Games on-line though other outlets or use Fleebay.

      And that where these "Publishers" have a beef, cause those "sales" don't get back to them *AGAIN!*, and so fell compelled to charge us for On-Line Passes and such.

      Speaking of that wonderful topic I'm pleased to hear that EA will be binning this idea for the time being. Such a shame that the likes of Codmasters or S0NY wont.
    2. 1,626

      Nocuddle Loyal Member

      Jul 19, 2007
      I agree with u. Piracy does not affect "losing" sales but in fact they may gain extra sales from it.
    3. 1

      kevinwallace Loyal Member

      Jul 2, 2013

      You absolutly right, i am totally agree with you that piracy is not a sale. Thank you so much.
    4. 13,435

      billysastard MaxConsole Co-Admin Loyal Member

      Aug 24, 2007
      West Yorks, UK
      Home Page:
      whilst sony are still using them at present (including last of us ps3) they seem to have cut down their use a little on vita and have said they wont use them on ps4.
    5. 1,287

      Artlover Bad Ass Mother 4000, Twice as Fast as your Ass! Loyal Member

      Feb 26, 2005
      Property Maintenance
      Miami, Fl, USA, Earth, Sol, Milky Way, Universe
      Exactly. It's not even an issue to be questioned because data exists inside the industry proving it. A common example I like to use is Xbox vs Gamecube. Both sold the same number of consoles in the same markets. One had free & easy piracy from nearly day one, the other had no piracy at all for 4 years, nearly it's entire lifecycle, yet the attach rate and game sales between the two were the same. If there was any truth to the piracy BS, why didn't the GC have higher game sales or why didn't the Xbox have lower game sales? Simmilar situation with the 360 vs PS3. 360 was hacked early on, PS3 was over 3 years later. PS3 had lower attach rates and game sales than the 360.

      People who buy games will always buy games and those who don't never will.

      What piracy may do, later on to an extent, is promote console sales. Look at the Xbox and how many people own(ed) more then one. Cheap & powerful hardware with a free & easy hack made having one in every room of the house something you quickly found you couldn't live without.

      Here is where I have issue. Publishers already sold said product and already made their cut from that sale. They have no right to profit from resale by end users.

      The argument is fundamentally flawed anyways. Think about this a second. Every physical copy of product that exists in the consumer market they ALREADY made their profit on. As even retail sellers have to BUY the stock they sell first. When you go to Walmart and buy a new game for $59.99, that they only paid $49.99 for, you're giving $10 profit to Walmart, and covering Walmart's $49.99 investment. Not one penny of what "you" paid is actually going to the publisher, it's all going to the middle man, Walmart. How is this realistically any different than buying used at gamestop? Where the physical product has "already been paid for" by someone else, and you're simply paying a middle man.

      Oh, I don't disagree that there are shady practices in the used market. Low trade-in/sell value for games that they turn around and flip for over 1500% profit, and trying to pawn off used games as new because they only make 20% profit from selling an actual new game. But this is all besides the point and has nothing to do with and is of no concern to the publishers.

      They made x many product, they sold x many products, x many persons possess said product. If I sell my copy of GenericGame to someone else, none of those dynamics change. It's still the same number of people who possess it. But they don't see it like that, they see it as x+1 people who have "experienced" it and that +1 owes them.

      No other commodity works like this, NONE. Not even within the other "intellectual property, leasing an individual experience" entertainment industries of Music, Movies and Print.

      Software alone created this idea that what you are paying for is a temporary single user license that allows you to use a leased product that you do not own. This goes back to the early '70's, and is still their method of operation today, and it's bullshit. It's also selective. They claim they are selling an individual experience not a product, so that's why the normal rules of trade and ownership don't apply. But are they demanding that friends that come over to your house and play the game pay them? They didn't buy it, they aren't part of user base, yet they had the "experience". How many people besides yourself are in your household playing games that you, not them, bought? Are they not getting the "experience" for free without the publisher getting anything. What if I just get bored with a game, and throw it away. Anyone who finds it and takes it out of the trash is going to get the "experience" too. Every single one of these represents an x+1 dynamic that they feel they have an entitled right to profit from, don't see much outrage from the publishers about them. But if I go to gamestop and buy a used copy, it somehow represents a lost sale to them.

      AFAIC, it comes back to what I said earlier: They made x many product, they sold x many products, x many individuals possess said product. End of involvement and end of story. F--k this "leasing an individual experience" bullshit, because that is and always has been just an excuse to double dip.
      GaryOPA, Nocuddle and billysastard like this.

Share This Page