|
|
Tom Clancy's Endwar PC delayed due to piracy
Author: Joe MartinPublished: 9th October 2008
Ubisoft has now confirmed that Tom Clancy's EndWar is being deliberately delayed on the PC, due to piracy.
Apparently though, some publishers are through trying to find a way to solve the problem and are instead tackling piracy in a more direct way by just not releasing a PC version. That's what Ubisoft's Shanghai director Michael de Plater has confirmed is happening with Tom Clancy's EndWar, which is due out this year.
“To be honest, if PC wasn’t pirated to hell and back, there’d probably be a PC version coming out the same day as the other two,” said Plater in an interview with VG247, found via RockPaperShotgun.
Plater pulled no punches on the matter either, refuting the usual excuses of pirates and instead boiling the matter down to it's cold, insensitive core; piracy is killing PC gaming.
"At the moment, if you release the PC version, essentially what you’re doing is letting people have a free version that they rip off instead of a purchased version. Piracy’s basically killing PC.”
Of course, just because Ubisoft has owned up to the matter doesn't mean they are the only ones doing it - we're suddenly questioning why Mirror's Edge PC was really delayed until next year. And the same with Gears of War PC and Mass Effect PC - it isn't as if DICE, BioWare and Epic have strong histories of being console developers primarily.
RockPaperShotgun goes on to discuss a few of the other issues surrounding the statement, such as the fact that of all the pirated platforms it may be the consoles that are actually most pirated, thanks to the DS and PSP, before calling Ubisoft out to put irrefutable proof of these claims before customers. It's worth a look - but be sure to come back and tell us what you think in the forums.
Is piracy really killing PC gaming, or is PC gaming being offered up as a scapegoat to try and hide the threat of piracy?
Related
Comments (80)
Compare over 250 mobile phones &
52,000 deals!
Compare over 100 broadband & mobile broadband deals online!
- Site Links:
- About
- Email Editor
- Newsletter
- Privacy
- RSS
- Score Guide
- Our Other Websites:
- Auto Express
- Channel Pro
- Computer Buyer
- Computer Shopper
- Den of Geek
All content © bit-tech.net 2000-2009
© Copyright Dennis Publishing Limited licensed by Felden
All ye damn pirates are gone overboard and left ye ships an become land-lubbing 'software pirates'.
if ye ask me, all these kids need t' get a swift kick up the arse.
Seems like an interesting step to take.
Yet again it punishes the PC gamers who do actually pay to play.
Its interesting that those honest gamers who usually do pay will now not even be faced with the option to download the game.
So if they're really interested in playing a game, they'll need to buy a console and have an inferior experience.
Piracy isn't killing PC gaming, misguided developers are. :(
I for one have always loved buying games. Since the good old cardboard boxes. They make good collectables also :)
I love getting collector's edition, but you sadly can't with downloads :(
Also they could just implement the same account creations that MMO's use. Worked for games like Guildwars and the Battlefield series. There wasn't to much pirating there.
Steam is the best DRM from a consumer PoV but its still not pirate proof (there will be SP versions of the games up days after release..)
On the rare occasion i get the time to game thanks to them i never feeling like playing games from some one else. Thanks to them i actually still know we are not second class gamers, thanks to them i've seen how a good distribution system works (i know it has its faults but its better than securom et al).
I'm never going to buy a console i've not got the money to spend on a decent pc and a console and since PC gamers are being further marginalised I honestly think i'm giving up. I've not bought a new game in ages, i tend to buy second hand and I refuse to buy a DRMed game so no one is going to miss me. However pubs can consider me a lost sale on any platform you care to mention, congrats guys i'm guessing i'm not alone.
Is that sensible? If everyone did that, we'd have no PC games at all! PC breaking DRM software fine, but just cos it's late? Come on.
I believe that neglecting pc gaming will only result in one thing and that is piracy will begin to run ramped on console that's the only truth in this matter
if they honestly ask the entirety of the pc gaming community a solution can be found and the problem can be solved, sites like this and many others have a huge community that wish to be heard they just need to listen
Last week I bought AoE collector's ed.(Ubisoft, exclusive!), so let's get started....
But there's been so many PC devs and publishers talking crap like this lately. The problem is that EVERY pc gamer(honest or not) is pirate to them!!! And it really piss me off...
Now to software piracy. A software pirate is a thief, period. He doesn't steal because of the "injustice done to him", but because he sees a change to get something he desires for free and with little consequences to fear. That's the entire source of software piracy. If games would be made cheaper, they would still steal them, just with the argument "hey, it's so cheap, taking a copy for free doesn't hurt anyway".
I don't feel valued as a PC customer if it's released on consoles first, am I sposed to start emailing them thanking them for delaying their game? DRM bothers me less, it's easy to stripe away or get around, a delay is only combatted by buying it on a console or waiting, hurm.
I recently organized a competition at the Really Awesome Gaming Expo (RAGE) in Johannesburg South Africa for Lord of the Rings - Battle for Middle Earth 2 and Supreme Commander - Forged Alliance.
You could buy BFME 2 for about $8 on the floor and Supreme Commander + Forged Alliance for $22 on the floor, yet I later realized that about half the people that were playing had pirated the game at the event and they were so greedy that they would not pay these low prices for a game.
There is a general disrespect from the PC gaming community towards the publishers and the creators of these games and an attitude of, I can do it why is it wrong?
I agree with this move and from a publishers point of view it makes sense and if we are standing by without seeing the issue at hand we will loose the beloved PC gaming platform for good, only MMO's will survive.
So if console games are too overpriced that make the less overpriced PC games no overpriced at all? I am not buying £25 game I haven't try because there is no demo, have few hours of pain trying to run the thing and get another few hours of... let call it gameplay and dump the sh** and never play it again.
It's funny how only the devs that made some not-so-good games lately are bitching about piracy. Why didn't Valve or Blizzard do it? Their games are pirated too (and maybe even more)?
+1 for the sentiment - console games are normally released at higher price points than PC games, though I'm sure AAA PC titles are first released with an RRP of ~£35. That doesn't mean you wont find them at £25-£30 at play.com or similar though!
It's the reason that I don't own a console, and I only bought the other half a Wii begrudgingly. (even more so since she hardly ever uses it)
Greedy? Do you realize how much $22 are in some countries? My month salary is less than $600. I can't afford to buy a game just to find out that it is crap or won't work on my PC because someone didn't do their job right and rushed the game out. And still I'm buying the games that I think worth the money.
The main problem is not the piracy itself (still it is a problem) but the way that the industry react to it by kicking all PC gamers in the balls.
I'm quite confident PC gaming will never die.
Large companies like Ubi and EA etc pulling back from PC gaming only allows newer, smaller, hopefully better and less greedy devs into the scene.
With these companies, they will be pirated too but at least they will also make a decent profit from all the honest gamers.
I'd far rather my money went to this type of developer where its not all about their bottom line.
The Stardocks and Introversions of this world are set for a bumper payday soon for all their hard work and faith in the PC gaming crowd.
I for one am all the happier for it.
I'd rather give them my money any day! :)
I'm sure these titles will fill your time whilst we wait for End War. I understand when a developer releases console versions of a game first as I'm sure they are easier to develop for (standard hardware and all) and THEN release a PC version a few months later, but to come out and blatantly blame Piracy and generally offend all legitimate PC customers is an outrage.
Just take look at Sins of a Solar Empire, then shove it up your ars* Michael de Plater.
What seems more likely is Sony or Microsoft slipping a few crisp notes into the publisher's pockets, asking them to hold off on a PC version and renounce piracy on the PC as the excuse until we gamers get fed up waiting and buy their consoles instead. Now that DOES make business sense, as everyone wins. Except the gamer.
People that only use a computer for powerpoint-presentations should not be allowed near a gamestudio, if you can still call it that.
Soon new companies will figure out a way to make business sense AND customer sense, and these decaying talent-eaters lead by stagnant moneycounting managers will be replaced.
PC gaming is not dead, IMHO it's a butterfly casting off it's old shell. ATM it's a gooey mess, but just you wait and see! :D
Humour me... if PC pirating pirates are ruining the PC as a gaming platform and game dev's finally stop making PC games, won't pirates carry on pirating console games more so? I buy my games because I have fantastic sites such as Bit-Tech to review them for me. If they say, "This game is the mutts nuts - you really need to play this game!" Then, if it's the sort of game I'll play, I'll buy it.
Even though I like to buy an actual product I can't help but think that digital distribution might be the way forward.
Games PC versions being released after the consoles versions dont affect me.
Being released with absurd DRM schemes or not released at all, affects me.
Like it or not, PC games piracy levels are too high.
If games companies can make some money with the console versions before the PC versions are out, better for them. Its understandable.
That will work until the piracy level in consoles increase.
The real problem here is the piracy, not the developer/publisher decision.
Console games are more expensive because console themselves are a) subsidised and b) proprietary. So on top of the natural price for the game, you are paying a levy to help pay for the hardware and a fee because it's a locked-in technology.
As for Steam, it's not bad - it's easy to use, and very reliable. The only problem (which I've mentioned so many times in the past) is that you don't have the capability (officially) to sell the games - a right you would have with retail products.
Sure there is a piracy problem with PC gaming just as there is with consoles, R4DS anyone? Take a look around any big torrent site and you will find console games and instructions on what to do to get things running.
People who pirate games aren't willing to pay at all. The point with them is that they steal software right when it becomes available and do not use somebody else's license which that person has ceased to (legally) exploit.
Let me ask back: What is your real point? To excuse SW piracy?
I'm sorry but nothings safe in the way of piracy. Hell Fallout 3 for the 360 is already on torrent sites. So all they're doing is further hurting their sales. I still wanna see numbers from non-bias parties on how much damage piracy is doing to titles.
The only side in any position to clarify the debate is them as they have access to the numbers.
For example; a good example may be to consider two franchise releases with similar review ratings across a number of reputable reviewers, and comparing their sales in-line with previous years and also measuredagainst econimic activity in their markets (so as to ensure that downturns aren't ignored).
With the facts, people MIGHT actually start believing their claims.
At the moment one side of the debate (anti-devs/pubs) has a perfectly reasonable theory that makes perfect sense, and the other (anti-pirates) makes a less plausible argument, WITH the ability to prove it if they wanted to, yet choose not to... Apparrently.
As long as STEAM exists and these devs/pubs continue NOT to back up their arguments that they could if they wanted to, then the debate will rage on; which makes you wonder about the true motives of the industry.
Tell you what, buy Football Manager 2009 when that comes out in November, a game you'll be playing for months upon months, a game franchise that is ADDICTIVE, a game that will give you VALUE for money.
I know the mindset of SW pirates from experience (not my own, but from having had to do with such people). They do it because they do not care about right or wrong or about others and their lives and making a living. They only care about themselves and how they can get whatever they want w/o having to pay for it. They are parasites sucking on the lives of better people than they are. They have no morale, no decency, they do whatever they see fit to live the life they desire w/o caring about anybody else around them. They do not function properly unless being threatened with severe negative consequences unless they do. It's basically the same mindset that would run down a person while speeding and trying to escape unseen, or cause a traffic accident and try to make the others pay by lieing about what had happened. Imvho.
(Let me add that I am not talking about people who want to try a game and delete it after a short time because they don't like it, or purchase it because they do.)
In the case of these two games they have a proven track record, and are excellent games so your argument does not hold water there.
You can always, read websites, Magazines and try demo's
I do not see any excuse for stealing or piracy, would you feel for a person that breaks in and steals from you just because he has no money?
It's not as if FPS games aren't diverse enough. Compare Mirror's Edge to Crysis to Halo to Bioshock, and you cannot deny that they are far far more diverse then any two football management games will ever be.
IMHO the problem is not that the games or the developers or the creative directors suck, the problem is the mangers.
Managers that lay the same project management structure and sales models on every single product they get their hands on, be it a broomstick or a spaceshuttle. It's the same people managing the project, with the same methods. Ofcourse they compensate for the lack of specific knowledge by sitting down business analists (or even more condesendingly titled subject matter experts) down in project meetings and ignoring their advice.
It's not piracy or devs or anyone really at fault, it's managers that fly sideways through entire industries. Sadly, they are extremely adept at dodging and diverting blame.
+1, I can understand (slightly) when it comes to office software which runs into the hundreds, but games are NOT expensive, these people need to get jobs.
Piracy is possible on the PC, and games do get pirated. Conclusion? Piracy is killing the PC.
Piracy is possible on the consoles, and games do get pirated. Conclusion? Piracy is killing the PC.
Wait... What? How is the PC a different environment than the consoles?
The only true difference I see is that consoles are not a locked environment, and thus are (in theory) more expensive to develop for. I say in theory as while with PC's one must program for a varying environment, with consoles you have a more complex environment, such as the PS3's obscure method of multiple cores, etc. Added to that, you have the cost of the DRM publishers feel obliged to put on PC games, and you've got a rediculous situation on your hands.
I think the truth of it comes down to (in my opinion) it being easier to release a game on consoles and have it be lauded as the next coming. Games on PC tend to (again, in my opinion) be held to a higher standard, whereas simpler games tend to make the grade on consoles.
Thought for the day: Has anyone asked Valve or Blizzard if they are concerned about piracy, or about the PC's long term viability?
It was an alright game (I personally didn't enjoy it), and as bad as this is to say, it was their own fault. It was their DRM/antipiracy that lead to the bad rumours. Publicity is everything, piracy is inevitable. If they had gone the stardock way and put no antipiracy measures in place the game would have been more successful. Perhaps it's examples like this that stardock built their business model around, either way, I'm glad some companies are learning.
On topic, I don't care about this particular game, but I have to wonder what motivates directors to publicly say things like this. It's like giving the big finger to the community and my immediate response (and many others) is, "Well **** you too." It's the same with mirrors edge, unless they're going to release extra content that makes it worth it (like assasins creed did), I will gladly sit out my what, 8 hour $100 experience? (if that). I was going to buy that game, which is saying something considering the line up this christmas, but I'm not paying money to companies that don't respect their market.
It holds water for me, as for others: they can make up their own arguments. :)
And how many demos have you seen lately? It's gating some how fashionable to not release demos. I wander why...
I do not make excuses, I give you reasons. If some one breaks in my home and try to steal something I'll kick his ass but I don't remember breaking in any dev server room and stealing the HDD they store they games at. They still can sell their product and if the game worth it they do sell it to me later on. On other hand if they game is bad they'll never convince the pirates to buy their game.
People have asked, and they are happy with the money they make and don't see piracy as anything more than the smokescreen it is. I can't remember where I read the interview, but I know at least valve is dedicated to the PC. I will always buy Valve games, regardless of my interest in them, simply because of their full support and dedication to their customers. It's the best consumer service I've ever experienced, I love the TF2 updates :)
Your reasons are excuses, and there is none. It amazes me the lengths people here go to defend piracy, what a bunch of bull. Piracy is wrong, PERIOD,a nd does hurt Pc gaming, even if nothing else in developers gettting discouraged seeing years of their work getting stolen with care by many.
2. It's not a good argument to say that piracy is okay when the games suck. That doesn't mean developers deserve to be victimised, or to be "taught a lesson". They'll learn all too well from poor sales. If they've made a poor game but see it pirated on the Internet, it'll just make them think they've made a game people wanted but didn't want to pay for.
3. It's not a good argument to say that you're not stealing anything physical. You're stealing a value created by the efforts of many hard-working people; the fact that it's information and not physical matter makes no difference.
4. It's not a good argument to say that you're too poor to afford to pay the prices charged by games publishers. You wouldn't use that argument to support theft of anything else. Computer gaming is not a right, it's a luxury.
I'm not a self-righteous dork. I used to download torrents with the best of them. But I know that deep down I only had one reason for it, and it's not a reason that justified my behaviour.
It was simple: I thought I could get away with it.
What's your reason?
Good post, gamers And this generation have a false sense of self entitlement, they think the world owes them something, sickening really.
So should the publishers go to the extreme and invade your private space so that they can catch you and kick your ass? They are getting desperate and you would too if someone constantly stole what you worked hard to create.
Whether you steel an item or a copy it is still stealing, stealing a 100$ HHD is a loss of $100 for that company stealing a $50 game is a lost sale for that company, so they loose the money. Even if argue that you would not of bought the game anyway it still creates the impression of lost sales when 2 million people play online but only 1 million copies where sold.
By your actions you are giving them a reason to judge the PC gaming community, your actions are enabling the console to become the only gaming platform, so you know what?
When PC gaming disapears in the near future, you will have to spend even more money on games because you'll have to get a console and pay the console gaming prices.
OH SORRY I forgot you will chip the device and pirate again!
Stating reasons as:
- The games are to expensive!
- The local shop did not have it!
- The game had bugs!
- I had no money!
- There were no demos available!
I hope you see the wrong in your ways because I have given you more than enough insight to actually change your faulty way of thinking.
You'll rather chop down the apple tree then climb it, tomorrow you will go hungry because of yesterdays foolish actions!
First of all I never said pirating games is right or is good. I also never try to defend it. I know how many games I downloaded and I know how many of them I buy later on.
Second: if you don't have the money to buy the game then how do you hurt the devs by downloading the game?
If you say yes, I want all of your work from now on, until you die, for free with no repercussions.
No money? How'd you explain that PC you're using to play these pirated games, and then bitch that someone is pissed you're stealing their work?
Pirates, you're all lying pieces of human garbage. Have yourselves a big steamy mug of **** off.
You don't have the right to take what's not yours. It's that simple. Only the creators of a game - or of anything else - have the right to grant people license to use what they have made.
You see, your concept of rights is faulty. You presume that you have a right to the game, and that a value-trade is an optional extra, conditional upon your subsequent enjoyment and approval.
In fact, the creators have the right to withhold, destroy or do whatever they want with the intellectual property they have created. It is their choice to enter into value-trade agreements with purchasers, and to withhold their property from anyone not agreeing to their terms. It is not your right to subvert the rights of a property's creators.
It hurts because they have no way of knowing whetehr you would buy it or not, and it certainly is discouraging for them to see years of their work being stolen without care by peopple like you. Not having money is no excuse, would you steal froma stroe if yuo had no money? The more people pirating the less support PC will get Regardless if you would have actually bought it or not. If you cannot save up 30-40 bucks for games, you should stop gaming, i could make that when i was 13 mowing lawns.
So theft in a poor neighbourhood is just as bad as in the rich neighbourhood!
So who is more victimized the poor or the rich?
Theft is theft!
A girl gets raped because she had a short skirt on. The criminal states that she was looking for it and therefore was justified?
So they created a bad game so they deserved to be pirated?
I am an auditor, I work hard on a report and it is stolen at completion and given to the client, the client refuses to pay me because he already has the report. I still have the original report but yet did not get paid for all my efforts!
You go to the movies but feel that the prices are to high, then you jump the gate and go for free. This is still a criminal act and the cinema lost that sale even though they still have the movie at hand.
Piracy is a criminal act, there is no argument around that.
These debates are always interesting in that they force some people to take a hard-line stance either side.
The problem with that is that they invariably end up ignoring half of the equation and therefore coming to a flawed conclusion.
Your final statement "nictron" sums your stance up perfectly, you assume that the act of piracy is equally attributable to every person involved in the process from start to finish.
That's just plain ignorant of the reality, basically.
There are two clear roles obvious in the process of unofficial game/movie/music distribution; those that deliberately source, copy and upload,therefore make available the software, and those that simply take it.
You throw up all those deliberately misleading and tenuous analogies that are nothing but irrelevant rhetoric, when the only TRUE analogy is something more like someone commiting the criminal act of breaking into a warehouse or shop's store, taking a master copy, copying it, and leaving boxes full of copies on the high-street.
The 99.9999% of people actually downloading the software provided for free are NOT the criminals you try and make them out to be; the people who wilfully sought and made available the software in the first place are the ones who perpetrated any crime.
There'sno crime in taking something that's made available for nothing, in the virtual world or not!
This is a subtle but EXTREMELY important distinction, if you're trying to determine accountability accurately.
Your analogy is closer to the truth, bbshammo, but I don't understand how you make the leap to excusing downloader-pirates.
1. They are not unaware of their involvement. They are not like unwitting victims buying bootlegged gear at a street market. They know that the torrents they are downloading are illegal, because their illegality is defined by virtue of what they are.
2. Their demand for free downloadable torrents fuels the desire of the uploader-pirates to copy the games and make them available in the first place.
3. As for your comment that there's no crime in taking something that's made available for nothing, it is neither the right of the uploader-pirates to make the copy available for nothing, nor the right of the downloader-pirates to accept what is made available contrary to the law.
Both parties are equally guilty in this relationship.
WOW, your saying piracy is not a crime? It IS, it is against the law, I cannot believe you are trying to say it isn't. Some of u are pathetic.
I get your point to a degree, buy witnessing a criminal act and choosing to ignore it is very much what piracy is even though you had no financial, but you get enjoyment from the product.
No matter how you sugar-coat the whole thing it stays wrong, the industry have gone out of there way to advertise that piracy is wrong. You also know that the choice of the the publisher and developer is for you to earn that enjoyment by buying the game.
By ignoring that fact and pirating you commit a falace or criminal act against that company and therefore ignore their rights which at the end of the day goes back to criminality.
Whether my analogies are flawed or not they come down to the basic criminal act, which is wrong.
Same amount of shoplifting happen in the rich and the poor neighbourhood, but the shopkeepers go to the rich neighbourhood just because they may earn more there and blame it on the shoplifting in the poor neighbourhood. What happens then?
You try to sell ice packet in fancy packaging. You go to some desert and make money, then you go to the North pole, you sell nothing and complain that you sold nothing because the natives dig their own ice. Do they deserve to sell anything there?
You write a good book but the manuscript is licked to the internet many people read the book, some like it, some don't. When the book is printed those who like it go to the book store and buy it, those who don't like it don't buy it. Do you go and sue those who did not buy your book? Are they obligated in any way to buy it?
I go to my friends home and read a book. Am I pirating that book? Is it different from downloading the book as PDF from the internet?
Before saying that can you define piracy for me?
People need to understand that intellectual merchandise is not actually physical one and can't and should not obey the same set of rules. And until then there will be piracy either with PCs or the consoles.
Don't get me wrong. I am not defending the piracy or try to justify it. I'm just saying that the devs and the publishers are going in the wrong direction.
It is the same and should follow the same rules, something does not have to be physical in nature to be classified as stealing, that is an ignorant and moronic statement. In fact, physical things often take much less work from less people to make then sonething like an IP.
Good analogy.
Bad analogy - the people who pirate don't also produce their own high quality games.
There is *some* merit in this, but just as the publishers can easily quantify lost sales to prove a theft, nor can you prove that there is no loss of sales and thus no theft.
Yes. You friend has paid for his book and while he lends it to you, he can't read it himself.
That said, he can give you, or sell you the book quite happily. Under Steam, you can effectively read the book 'while at his house' or perhaps he will get a pass from Steam so that you have a day to read the book - a trial, if you will. But he cannot sell you the book, nor can he easily give you the book.
Steam (as it currently stands) is not the utopian answer to piracy. Unless you are Valve.
The entire industry would love to move across to Steam-like distribution platforms, because it is even more restrictive than the game-in-a-box retail model, and makes piracy very hard.
The rules are not entirely the same but they are substantially the same. With piracy, you aren't paying for the game, you aren't legally demoing the game, you aren't being lent the game by someone who has the legal right to do so. You are using a product or service that you haven't an entitlement to use. That is theft, however you like to dress it up.
The publishers have a lot to answer for, but yes, you are justifying piracy.
Wow, not refering to you particularly... more for the likes of Lepermessiah... but some people are clearly very emotionally affected by all this.
Guys, I'm not and have never said or typed a thing that suggests that those who pick up freely available copies (akin to helping oneself to the contents of an open box in the street) are not being a bit naughty, but their act is NOT THE ACT OF ACTUALLY COMMITING THE CRIME OF ILLEGALLY MAKING AVAILABLE/DISTRIBUTING PROTECTED IP!
The latter point is THE point, the law recognises that fact in every other offense where multiple parties all contribute to any particular set of events constituting a crime or offense, and it's EXCEPTIONALLY important to make punitive measures fit the crime based on cause and effect relatioships as well as the material impact to individuals, and society at large, for example... NOT blanket accountability where everyone potentially involved just lines up to be shot.
Taking things that you intend to benefit from with no intention IS naughty, agreed and never disputed, and depending on how you come to posess it, also a crime. It is not a crime in of itself; no one has ever or will ever be prosecuted successfully for taking something that's a result of someone elses criminal act where neither party colluded to make it happen.
Sorry to seem to shout there, but it's clearly obvious my point is getting lost somewhere.
Sorry dude, you're so off the mark I can't respond without literally reacting to every word! I think you just need to understand there's a real distinction between those who copy and upload and those who take, for the reasons I put previously.
Basically, Piracy is the actual act of taking from the owner. People who download with p2p tools/services are taking a copy from someone else who took it from someone else and so on and so on.... The person you take it from didn't charge you for it, neither did they communicate with you, instruct you, or in any way profit from your choice to take from him.
So if I take from someone else on that basis, what have I done personally, wilfully and directly TO the original owner? I didn't do a single thing to initiate or carry out or support the criminal act that led to my being able to take a copy for myself.
The act of actually going to the effort of copying and upploading would never enter my head, so like so many other people reacting to your damning response, I would take slight offense at being labelled as a criminal for a minor act of naughtiness, as a result of someone elses actual criminal act.
This is all without even going into the 1 copy = 1 lost sale debate, which is already on seriously shakey ground!
Let me repeat that for emphasis: piracy is not stoppable
You can minimise piracy as best you can, but any software can and will, always be pirated. It only takes one person to crack it and put it on the internet. The same is equally true for consoles as well as PCs
Analogy time:
-car 'a' has security on it (door lock, maybe an alarm) to stop it being stolen. it works quite well and doesn't irritate the driver too much, but the car can still be stolen if someone is determined enough
-car 'b' has 5 locks on each door and requires a phonecall to another company to start the car, this annoys the owner greatly but the car can still be stolen if someone is determined enough.
would you buy car 'b'?
I know it's a somewhat vague analogy, as a physical object is not the same as software. But the point is that past a certain point, increasing the security has no effect on things being stolen, but does effect the legit owners. This point has been reached and exceeded greatly by certain software companies already *glares at EA*
I'm not condoning piracy, but you simply need to accept that it's going to happen regardless. All you can do is strike a balance between enough security to stop casual piracy without annoying legit customers too much.
Also give people a reason to want to buy the game, make it easy to buy, easy to use and even some online features if relevant
Because at the moment it's backwards: legit games are actually inferior to the pirated versions. People see this and think "why should i pay for this when i can get a better product for free?"
Steam has it nearly perfect, i can see a game i like, buy it, download and play quicker than getting it off a torrent site, with auto-patching and online features... ie: a better product than an illegal copy.
As I've explained in my earlier post, guilt is equally applicable to both parties; however, I agree that the uploader-pirate is guilty or more and of greater infractions, and should be the one to receive the harshest punishment, much like a drug dealer is judged worse than his clients.
However, that doesn't change the fact that there can be no uploading and no illegal distribution without willing downloaders, who must accept their culpability.
The real sticking point is the charge of "making available", which I believe should only be a basis for conviction if the prosecution can prove intent to distribute or a negligence of care to protect the copyright accepted as part of the purchase agreement.
The work involved in making something have nothing to do with the topic. To say that IP obey same rules as the physical one is as if you saying that all water act the same as a bottle full of water. When you buy music you don't buy the CD, you are buying the music store on it and that information does not obey the same physical rules as the CD it is store at because, well, it is not physical. You, as most of the peaople, does not make difference between the container that stores the information and the information itself.
The act of actually going to the effort of copying and upploading would never enter my head, so like so many other people reacting to your damning response, I would take slight offense at being labelled as a criminal for a minor act of naughtiness, as a result of someone elses actual criminal act.
So, the person downloading is not the person who posted it, calls it a 'minor bit of naughtiness', knowing that he/she is DOWNLOADING SOMETHING THEY SHOULD BEPAYING FOR!! That makes the downloader not a thief?
What did your parents teach you about respect for someone else's property?
No PC version, no sale.
i truly believe that most if not everyone is missing the entire point you shouldn't point the finger make excuses etc etc ....... cause it only leads to pointless argument. whether u guys accept it or not piraters are potential buyers as shown from the person above he went legit. pirating will never be stopped despite all the nah saying and pointing of the finger, so whats the next step you look for a real solution to it (OMG I CAN'T BELIEVE I SAID THAT!!!!)
I don't encourage bitching, making excuses, and pointing the finger they get us nowhere, as a community we need to come together and find a solution or at least a find the sweet spot where is balance can be tipped in the favor of game companies as it is in consoles nad the consumers can be respected as they should be.
I as a gamer who has pirated and paid will from this point on look for a solution and before the weekend post them in a new topic
+1 for ur post
Err, no it's not. To have commited theft you need to have dishonestly appropriated property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. Downloading a copy of a game/movie/music/program etc can never be theft under current legislation because you are not depriving the original owner of the property, i.e. they still have the original to do with as they wish.
Please note I'm not condoning downloading games/movies/music/programs etc but claiming that doing so is theft when it isn't leads to a pointless basis for discussion.
Well done, Cpt. Pedant. You are right in that it is not the criminal act of theft, but a civil case of copyright infringement, and probably a number of other things too.
But this is not a legal forum so we can continue to call it theft - for that is what it effectively is - unless you intend to split further hairs?
It makes no difference whether this is a legal forum or not, the fact is piracy isn't theft and continuing to insist it is serves no useful purpose. Unfortunately it's the developers/publishers insistence on treating piracy as such that has, imo, led to little headway in dealing with the causes of and impact of piracy. It's a real shame that fewer companies don't have the same attitude as Stardock ( see http://draginol.joeuser.com/article/303512/Piracy_PC_Gaming ) and instead just lump all their product problems on piracy.
what are they thinking? and about games PC being cheap... yeah right... when a pc game is 50€ and your salary is 615$, of which most go to the house and food and your are mostly left with negative money... and almost everyone here is in the same situation!! so yea, games are expensive depending on were you live!
That's a very good idea. People wouldn't struggle to crack it eventually, though - the reason BF2 and such resist piracy is you can't get online without a genuine copy. But if you add the account system to singleplayer games, there's no incentive against piracy...just a slightly tougher challenge for the crackers.
Steam is a good idea, but I hate buying games over steam. The service is hugely unsatisfying; I frequently forget I own games that I've bought over steam, and I often suspect that in the strictest sense, I *don't* own them. It's a bit of a confusing way to play. And the software itself can blow me - the sheer number of updates they throw down is so huge that I have to update single-player games almost every time I log on. That's just absurd, but I digress.
Re: piracy, I'm actually starting to sympathise with developers, God forbid. I still hate them, because they're richer and happier than I'll ever be, but even so I can see how unattractive the PC market must look to them right now.
Publish a good demo, using a map that is in the game, and by using a online account system.
If paying like 55$, the price for a game here in Denmark, just to find out that the game does'nt hold? Then I can understand gamers start to play using a copy, and then bying the game to go online, if they like it.
Buttom line... get a good demo out 2 months before release, and start using a online accountsystem.
Keyboard/Mouse > Consoles
and until they blocked the use of these usb devices on consoles, you actually could use them.
now no more games for us pc users? I think that is a discrimination on the pc community.