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!

ohmylanta1003 on 20 August 2015
LuckyTrouble said:
KLAMarine said:
LuckyTrouble said:

Although the relevance of your movie theater example is fairly shaky

How so?

Although the acts are certainly related, walking into a movie for free is not equivalent to piracy. In the case of the movie theater, what I'm taking is essentially a service for a single use rather than the digital form of a paid product for unlimited use at my personal convenience. The benefits of the movie theater are entirely temporary (assuming you don't film the theater screen), whereas actually pirating the movie is permanent.


Lol. I don't understand why you post so much about piracy. It's pretty fucking annoying. It's illegal, should be stopped, and does harm the industry. End of discussion.



I bet the Wii U would sell more than 15M LTD by the end of 2015. He bet it would sell less. I lost.

Around the Network
Burek on 20 August 2015
ZhugeEX said:
Burek said:

But it'a not a good report because all it does is assume imaginary numbers. And overblows pirated numbers for their own purposes. 


What's your proof for that? Because it aligns with other independant report. Plus the company that estimated the revenue figure is very much respected for their prior reports. 

You can't just say they're making it up without actually looking into it more. 

 

But yeh, they are of course sensationalised a bit for the sake of the report. As other research firms estimate that as little as 5% of that revenue would actually go to the video game companies. So only 5% is the actual theoretical loss out of that total amount. $74b is just how much the overall cost is based on how much is pirated. 


I cannot follow you. First you ask me for proof that numbers are exaggerated, then in next sentence you yourself say that they are exaggerated.

As I said previously, they want to paint the picture of $160 billion being readily available to the industry, half of which is "stolen" by pirates.



LuckyTrouble on 20 August 2015
ohmylanta1003 said:
LuckyTrouble said:
KLAMarine said:
LuckyTrouble said:

Although the relevance of your movie theater example is fairly shaky

How so?

Although the acts are certainly related, walking into a movie for free is not equivalent to piracy. In the case of the movie theater, what I'm taking is essentially a service for a single use rather than the digital form of a paid product for unlimited use at my personal convenience. The benefits of the movie theater are entirely temporary (assuming you don't film the theater screen), whereas actually pirating the movie is permanent.


Lol. I don't understand why you post so much about piracy. It's pretty fucking annoying. It's illegal, should be stopped, and does harm the industry. End of discussion.

Because I can? I'm sorry that I have an intelligent view on something that I feel free to voice in open discussions on the subject. Silly me.



 

KLAMarine on 20 August 2015
LuckyTrouble said:
KLAMarine said:

So what you're saying is piracy is even more harmful?

Is that a real question? Your asking if permanently taking something is more harmful than temporarily taking part in it?

I'm going to take this as a yes.



LuckyTrouble on 20 August 2015
KLAMarine said:
LuckyTrouble said:
KLAMarine said:

So what you're saying is piracy is even more harmful?

Is that a real question? You're asking if permanently taking something is more harmful than temporarily taking part in it?

I'm going to take this as a yes.

If you want to bring in more factors to make it more clear, piracy is easy, convenient, and can be done anywhere at anytime if you have an internet enabled device capable of freely browsing the internet. Walking into a free movie is inconvenient, can only be done at movie theaters, and carries substantially more risk of being caught in the act, all of which keep it from being an ideal solution for most people when compared to piracy. Most people I've talked to would rather watch a crappy cam of a movie than actually try to sneak into a movie at a theater.



 

Around the Network
KLAMarine on 20 August 2015
LuckyTrouble said:
KLAMarine said:
LuckyTrouble said:
KLAMarine said:

So what you're saying is piracy is even more harmful?

Is that a real question? You're asking if permanently taking something is more harmful than temporarily taking part in it?

I'm going to take this as a yes.

If you want to bring in more factors to make it more clear, piracy is easy, convenient, and can be done anywhere at anytime if you have an internet enabled device capable of freely browsing the internet. Walking into a free movie is inconvenient, can only be done at movie theaters, and carries substantially more risk of being caught in the act, all of which keep it from being an ideal solution for most people when compared to piracy. Most people I've talked to would rather watch a crappy cam of a movie than actually try to sneak into a movie at a theater.

Makes software piracy all the more notorious doesn't it? Not only will those unwilling to pay would partake but threatens to even suck in those who would have paid otherwise. The power of "free".



ohmylanta1003 on 20 August 2015
LuckyTrouble said:
ohmylanta1003 said:
LuckyTrouble said:
KLAMarine said:
LuckyTrouble said:

Although the relevance of your movie theater example is fairly shaky

How so?

Although the acts are certainly related, walking into a movie for free is not equivalent to piracy. In the case of the movie theater, what I'm taking is essentially a service for a single use rather than the digital form of a paid product for unlimited use at my personal convenience. The benefits of the movie theater are entirely temporary (assuming you don't film the theater screen), whereas actually pirating the movie is permanent.


Lol. I don't understand why you post so much about piracy. It's pretty fucking annoying. It's illegal, should be stopped, and does harm the industry. End of discussion.

Because I can? I'm sorry that I have an intelligent view on something that I feel free to voice in open discussions on the subject. Silly me.


I mean...you might think it's an intelligent view. But arguing for illegal activity doesn't seem very intelligent to me.



I bet the Wii U would sell more than 15M LTD by the end of 2015. He bet it would sell less. I lost.

Anfebious on 20 August 2015
Burek said:

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.

That's a great move, too bad that Argentina doesn't realy do anything aside from blocking TPB (which can be bypassed easily by typing "TPB proxy" on google).



"I've Underestimated the Horse Power from Mario Kart 8, I'll Never Doubt the WiiU's Engine Again"

Burek on 20 August 2015
LuckyTrouble said:

If you want to bring in more factors to make it more clear, piracy is easy, convenient, and can be done anywhere at anytime if you have an internet enabled device capable of freely browsing the internet. Walking into a free movie is inconvenient, can only be done at movie theaters, and carries substantially more risk of being caught in the act, all of which keep it from being an ideal solution for most people when compared to piracy. Most people I've talked to would rather watch a crappy cam of a movie than actually try to sneak into a movie at a theater.

I still remember watching Batman on VHS, it was in 1989 I think. The movie is dark anyway, but the camcorder copy was ten times darker, it was really tough watching it....but I watched it a week after US premiere (back then, pre-internet, all movies had at least 3-6 month delay before coming to Europe). 



LuckyTrouble on 20 August 2015
ohmylanta1003 said:
I mean...you might think it's an intelligent view. But arguing for illegal activity doesn't seem very intelligent to me

I have never once argued for piracy. What I argue against are the assumed impacts of piracy. I have never once said piracy should not be illegal. I have never even implied that it's okay and justified. I simply have the ability to look at piracy in a way that, you know, actually makes sense and is supported by available facts and experience rather than assumptions.