By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Video Game Piracy costs the industry as much as it makes!

Teeqoz said:
KLAMarine said:

I can't just sneak into a movie theater to watch a movie and claim "well I wasn't going to buy a ticket anyways" when the theater staff ask me to leave.

Thanks for the really great analogy for pirating (sneaking into a movie theater)! I'm deffinitely gonna use that in future discussions.

You are most welcome!



Around the Network

Nope wrong. When I was 16 I would have never spent my money on games. I didn't have much and I spent all I had on drugs. I would have had to save for months to get $60 game.



KLAMarine said:
LuckyTrouble said:

Theoretically, yes. I'm not going to say piracy has absolutely zero impact on sales.

Hmm, I'd argue your previous post:

LuckyTrouble said:
*sigh* Once again: piracy does not equal lost sales. Every person that pirates did not intend to buy. The vast, vast majority of them would never spend their money on the game, for one reason or another

would suggest otherwise.

 

LuckyTrouble said:

I simply argue that we can't quantify the impact in any meaningful way, and trying to argue situations where demand would act differently is fairly pointless overall as there is no definitive way to contradict the reality we experience.

I agree we can't really come up with solid numbers. Be that as it may, I can't just sneak into a movie theater to watch a movie and claim "well I wasn't going to buy a ticket anyways" when the theater staff ask me to leave.

I don't feel like breaking this down the long way, so here's the version that requires me to deal with less code:

1. You clearly missed the following sentence that qualified my previous statement when I said "the vast, vast majority of them would never spend their money on the game, for one reason or another". That implies that there is some sales impact, even if it would just be from a negligible minority. I never completely dismiss the idea that there is some kind of sales impact on some level.

2. Although the relevance of your movie theater example is fairly shaky, I can easily say that you could claim just that if you were asked to leave. I've snuck into a couple movies before that I legitimately did not intend on paying for and would have had no issue claiming as such if I were asked.



 

Burek said:
Another exaggerated report paid for by gaming industry as they work on their DRM agenda. It is much easier to justify such policies by making up numbers and wanti g us to believe that there are actually $160 billion ready to be spent on the product.


Well the report is writen by a security company that is trying to sell their DRM style products to software companies. 

But it's also a good report to see how big pirated content is as well. 



Decades ago there were demos to check if someone wants the game but now to only check out game is to buy it
But the pirates are pirating with this reason to checkout the game before they decide to buy the game or not



REQUIESCAT IN PACE

I Hate REMASTERS

I Hate PLAYSTATION PLUS

Around the Network
mornelithe said:
ZhugeEX said:

The title is that way because of the legality of piracy. 

You're going to need to explain that one a bit, because on the surface, that makes no sense, whatsoever.


You never seen a court case where a judge rules that an individual has to pay a movie company or something damages?

That is where the phrase "Costs the industry" came from. 

It's more of a legal term, not an actual physical cost. It's there to show how much potential lost revenue there was. 



Anfebious said:

It's not really astounding, you just happen to live in a country where piracy is frowned upon (and actually takes measures against it). Here in Argentina, we pirate so hard that even teachers use pirate movies to teach kids. It's normal stuff over here (almost too normal).

We are so fucking hardcore.

In Croatia everybody pirates everything. But the industry adapted: Instead of hunting down individuals for a few movies or games (which is pointless anyway) the Government and the copyright holders reached an agreement by which downloading content is not persecuted (not legal either), and in return they get a small percentage of sales of every recordable media (CD, DVD, harddrives, USB sticks etc...). Everybody wins in a way, without expensive litigation.



LuckyTrouble said:

Although the relevance of your movie theater example is fairly shaky

How so?



ZhugeEX said:
mornelithe said:

You're going to need to explain that one a bit, because on the surface, that makes no sense, whatsoever.


You never seen a court case where a judge rules that an individual has to pay a movie company or something damages?

That is where the phrase "Costs the industry" came from. 

It's more of a legal term, not an actual physical cost. It's there to show how much potential lost revenue there was. 

lol, yeah, I've seen how the industry breaks down those charges, and that actually subtracts from the credibility of the report.



Anfebious said:

It's not really astounding, you just happen to live in a country where piracy is frowned upon (and actually takes measures against it). Here in Argentina, we pirate so hard that even teachers use pirate movies to teach kids. It's normal stuff over here (almost too normal).

We are so fucking hardcore.

Aguante el tercer mundo vieja no me importa nada

Even if it only decreses the revenue by like (random number) 10% that's still a lot, doesn't matter if everyone "wasn't going to pay for it anyway"