Quantcast
Ubisoft commit commercial suicide

Forums - PC Discussion - Ubisoft commit commercial suicide

Ubisoft and Bethesda are two developers/publishers i try to avoid like the plague



Fuck... I'm dead!

Around the Network
jlauro said:
ChichiriMuyo said:
greenmedic88 said:
Second, while I can't speak for everyone, I can say that the number of times I game on a PC per week that isn't actively connected to the net is about... let me count on my fingers here, might need both hands. Wait, nope: zero times.

Seriously, who actually disconnects from the net before gaming? When you're at work and supposed to be I don't know, working?!

Good thing everyone gets free Internet, right?  Oh wait.  25% of AMERICANS don't have Internet access at all.  Imagine what it's like in a poorer country where it's also very likely that you pay for how long you are connected or how much data you transfer.  Yeah, that's right, for some people it's going to cost additional money just to play this game because that's the only sort of service even available to them.

Seriously, people from 1st world countries are painfull ignorant of how the world actually works.  Hell, in many/most 1st world countries people still pay for specific bandwith usage.  You think that's a justifiable additional cost to play a game you've already bought and paid for?  I don't.

Yeah, right...  It's available in most public libraries for free. There might be 25% that don't have it in their homes, but to suggest that anywhere near that many don't have access at all is crazy talk.  There might be that many that don't want it...

Now, let's just say you were talking home access...  maybe that is 25%...  but of that 25% how many have a PC that meets the requirements to play AC2???  Maybe 5% of that 25%?  and how many of that 5% would even want to play AC2?  Maybe 1% of that 5% of that 25%?  So we are down to 0.0125% that it's a problem for.

 

 

i sometimes go month or two at a time without internet at my house.  i can as you said get internet as school or other places easy.  But now with a game like this I can't play my game.  I can't pick up my desktop (my laptop can't play it) and head to the school/library or wherever to play a game.  and dont' bring up mmo shit.  I know what an mmo is, and have played them.  But I buy that game full knowing i need online, and it is made for online.  A single player game should not need online. 

 

Regardless of if it restricts 1 person or a million poeple from being able to play it it is bullshit.  They are forcing people to purchase internet to play their game when its not a gmae that requires internet.  also what about the times when your interent provider is being gay and not working.  and happens on bad weather days typically.  so now i'm stuck inside on a day where woudl love to play a game but i cna't because i have no internet



greenmedic88 said:

Here's your big oversight: if you're that impoverished, why the hell are you spending your "discretionary time" on something as frivolous as gaming in the first place. More importantly, why are you spending your hard earned money on such frivolity? If it were such an issue, I would think eating better or maybe taking up a sporting activity for heath (since the impoverished generally don't have the time or money for gym memberships) or working more hours if work is available, would be a better option. 

One would think that the essentials of life would take priority, but... maybe that's just me and maybe all the game companies need to look out for those who really can't afford to game, either from a monetary, time (or both) perspective.

The way the world really works is this: if you can't afford to do or buy something, you don't do it or buy it. And that's the unvarnished truth. You want to do it on someone else's dime (ie credit), again, why would you be doing this on frivolous activities if you're hungry or cold, or both?

Are you serious? The point here is not about how or why people pirate. But how theyr dealing with the issue.. Instead of understanding the reasons behind piracy- companies come up with these draconian measures that will ultimately hurt their own product- and the consumers too. A lot of legit buyers are going to be pissed if they cant really play their game coz theyr not connected to the internet. Thats the point.

As far as your dumb take on 'credit' goes.. Japan and the United states are in trillions of dollars of credit. I guess citizens of both nations should just dump their consoles and plough fields like developing nations do...



Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.

owner of : atari 2600, commodore 64, NES,gameboy,atari lynx, genesis, saturn,neogeo,DC,PS2,GC,X360, Wii

5 THINGS I'd like to see before i knock out:

a. a AAA 3D sonic title

b. a nintendo developed game that has a "M rating"

c. redesgined PS controller

d. SEGA back in the console business

e. M$ out of the OS business


Miguel_Zorro said:
Rath said:
Miguel_Zorro said:
Rath said:
@Zorro. Where is the evidence there are any dollar losses at all? As I have posted numerous times the studies on piracy have reached the conclusion that the cost to the industry is either statistically insignificant or in fact causes more copies to sell.

Music sales have declined for 10 consecutive years.  That's evidence.  Any study that I've seen that's stated otherwise has been so obviously flawed that I wonder if the researchers have ever taken a stats or research methods course in their life.  One of the studies that somebody posted here stated that "People who pirate a lot, also buy more music than the average person" - they then reached the conclusion Piracy *causes* more music sales.  I shouldn't have to explain how that's flawed.  Do the researchers really not understand the difference between causality and correlation?

You are also missing the link between causality and correlation. You have no proof at all that the decline of music sales is due to piracy. As I said if you can provide statistical evidence through a major study that piracy causes a loss in software sale then I'll listen with interest.

Also people who pirate do tend to buy more music, they also tend to diffuse information more. You really do have to explain how it is flawed to come to the conclusion that piracy causes higher sales. Its what the data definitely suggests.


To your first point.  You're right, I have no proof. (Edit: See below - yes I do) The most accurate way that I can think of would be to do a longitudinal study measuring the same consumers before and after piracy existed, holding everything else equal.  We can't hold everything equal, so something just measuring the same users pre vs. post, would have to suffice.  If I have some free time, I'll see if I can find one.  The closest that I've seen looks at *all* consumers, and concludes that sales have dropped.

To your second point.  This is why it's flawed - people who are huge music fans pirate a lot of music PLUS buy a lot of music.  There's nothing to suggest that the piracy CAUSES these people to buy more music.   They do both of these things because they really like music.  They're comparing these people to those who don't pirate or buy a lot of music.   What they really need to do is determine what the people who are pirating a lot would do if they didn't have that option.  How much music did those same people purchase historically?  My mother never pirates music.  She never buys any either.  One is not a cause of the other.  They're both a function of the fact that she's just not one to consume music.  To compare big music purchasers/downloaders to people like her is extremely flawed.

Tiger Woods sleeps with lots of women.  He's also a great golfer.  The methods used in the flawed piracy studies would conclude that sleeping with lots of women causes someone to become a better golfer.  They'd look at the sidewalk on a rainy day and conclude that wet sidewalks cause rain.

A common sense approach is appropriate.  There are times when a correlation is so apparent that you can draw conclusions about causality.  For example, I cite Music Industry sales statistics:

http://76.74.24.142/81128FFD-028F-282E-1CE5-FDBF16A46388.pdf

The industry was on a growth trajectory until 1999.  In 1999 Napster launched.  Coincidence? Since then, the industry has shrunk, showing almost a straight downward trajectory.  Total value, including digital sales, is down 29% since piracy arrived on the scene - and that's only through 2007.  They shrunk again in 2008 by 18.2%, for a cumulative 41.9% drop since 1999.  That didn't happen by accident.

Update: Here's a study that measure sthe impact of piracy on the music industry.  It references surveys to estimate how much of pirated music would have otherwise been purchased, then applies an estimate that is much more conservatives than that.

http://ipi.org/IPI/IPIPublications.nsf/PublicationLookupFullText/5C2EE3D2107A4C228625733E0053A1F4

Also, the same website http://www.ipi.org/ conducts two more studies - the impact on the motion picture industry, and the impact of total copyright industry piracy.  It states:

"Using a well-established U.S. government model and the latest copyright piracy figures, this study concludes that, each year, copyright piracy from motion pictures, sound recordings, business and entertainment software and video games costs the U.S. economy $58.0 billion in total output, costs American workers 373,375 jobs and $16.3 billion in earnings, and costs federal, state, and local governments $2.6 billion in tax revenue."

Well, first of, Music Market is different from Gaming Market and may reflect the "piracy" in different ways.

 

In the past, to someone listen to your music, you had to play right at their side.

I personally believe that Music today have a lot to thank from Napster and the now widespread Mp3 sharing, with which all we have to do to know one's song is to connect, search on Google and download what you want.

Much like the Music had a lot to thank from the radios, where people would only need to turn on the radio and listen. If they wanted a copy of that music, all they needed to do was to go to the store and buy the album... or buy a cassette and copy at home... Hey!  PIRACY!

 

Look... the world is different, now we don't wait patiently 'till someone put that specific music on the chart so that I can listen, or 'till this specific guy buys this specific album to sell it in their store so that I can buy it, or 'till that specific guy likes this specific musician so that I can take a look at that same musician work.

Now we download (or listen at online radios) what we choose and people can release their music on small labels and still have a chance to be known around the world, hard but possible.

 

Anyway, we are here to talk 'bout games.

 

And about games... Seriously, guys. I'm from Brazil and I can say for sure that gaming here IS determined by piracy. Why? Price.

I'm not talking 'bout the "I see-I want-I download" piracy, but the "I go to the streets and buy a pirated CD". Go to submarino.com (http://www.submarino.com.br/menu/1471/Games) one famous online store here (not that good, but famous). Prices:

* Band Hero Bundle - Xbox360 - Importado: R$ 1.099,00
* Game Band Hero Software - PS3 - Importado: R$ 219,00

* Game Tony Hawk: Ride - X360 - Importado: R$ 699,00
* Game Wii Plus com Balance Board - Importado: R$ 699,00

* Band Hero Bundle - PS2 - Importado: R$ 1.099,00

And those were softwares... the legal and (NOW CHEAP! =D) PS3 price is: R$ 1.599,00.

 

And our minimum wages (http://www.portalbrasil.net/salariominimo.htm):

* 01/04/2002: R$ 240,00
* 01/05/2004: R$ 260,00
* 01/05/2005: R$ 300,00
* 01/04/2006: R$ 350,00
* 01/04/2007: R$ 380,00
* 01/03/2008: R$ 415,00
* 01/02/2009: R$ 465,00
* 01/01/2010: R$ 510,00

Look, I'm not talking something like "woe of us, poor brazilians that can't play God of War III", I'm saying that there's a population of 192 million people that (5th in the world, http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=brazil) may want to game and have to cope with this outrageous prices.

I'm saying that there's a MARKET here.

And what everyone that understand human nature can say when there's a market? People will try to profit, so they pirate in the streets.

And what everyone that understand basic economics can say when there's two products that are interchangeable with each other, but at two different price points? People will choose the cheaper.

 

Just a (huge) comment  from a friend from the third world.



"How hard would it be to randomize facial features and skin tones? That's what we want, to feel like we're killing hundreds of different people. Not a bunch of clones or twins. We want to know, deep down, that there are hundreds of grieving mothers out there, lamenting the terror of our dreaded blade."

Cracked.com ( http://www.cracked.com/article_16196_p4.html ), saying the Hardcore gamers' dark truth. And it's Hell True.

slowburn said:
Ubisoft and Bethesda are two developers/publishers i try to avoid like the plague

Um, why Bethesda? They're nowhere near Ubisoft in outright cuntishness.



Around the Network

Yeah, I was thinking the same. Bethesda doesn't fuck paying customers over(yet).



jlauro - So you're telling me that you buy video games to play them at the public library? I dunno where you live, but around here they don't let us install our own software on their machines for security reasons. Seriously, you've hit a real low if your justification for excluding customers is that, theoretically, they wouldn't be disqualified if only they could live inside of a public library. Brilliant

miguel - That does not prove piracy had any impact on sales. There has been a freeze on salaries through the last ten years, too. People aren't making more money, and in fact over the last couple of years they have begun making dramatically less money. The 90's gave us one of the biggest booms in the world economy ever. Of course sales of luxury good increased when everyone was making money. That's obvious, just like how sales decrease now that they make less.

In fact, with the severity of inflation this past decade if you're that statistically average person that hasn't increased in salary over the last decade you have 25% less money to spend on luxury items today then you did in 1999. And the essentials (food, gasoline, housing) have all seen very dramatic, world altering raises in prices in that time. People just plain buy fewer things because they have relatively less money.

Piracy was very widespread in the 90s, I probably had more of my favorite songs recorded from the radio as a kid then I had on legitimate cassettes in the early 90s (before I got a CD player) and I definitely listened to my mix tapes a lot more than originals. My friends were pretty much the same. Nobody even really thought much about it, either, and the music industry certainly wasn't going around suing everybody for it. But it never stopped the boom times from causing massive upswings in sales.

Sales were great in the 90s because people made more money in the 90's. The average person has steadily declined to 75% of their 1999 purchasing power, so sales have declined. You data ONLY reflects the economic climate we've been in since the decade began. Nothing else, especially not the impact of piracy. The data just isn't there to support your claim.



You do not have the right to never be offended.

arsenicazure said:
greenmedic88 said:

Here's your big oversight: if you're that impoverished, why the hell are you spending your "discretionary time" on something as frivolous as gaming in the first place. More importantly, why are you spending your hard earned money on such frivolity? If it were such an issue, I would think eating better or maybe taking up a sporting activity for heath (since the impoverished generally don't have the time or money for gym memberships) or working more hours if work is available, would be a better option. 

One would think that the essentials of life would take priority, but... maybe that's just me and maybe all the game companies need to look out for those who really can't afford to game, either from a monetary, time (or both) perspective.

The way the world really works is this: if you can't afford to do or buy something, you don't do it or buy it. And that's the unvarnished truth. You want to do it on someone else's dime (ie credit), again, why would you be doing this on frivolous activities if you're hungry or cold, or both?

Are you serious? The point here is not about how or why people pirate. But how theyr dealing with the issue.. Instead of understanding the reasons behind piracy- companies come up with these draconian measures that will ultimately hurt their own product- and the consumers too. A lot of legit buyers are going to be pissed if they cant really play their game coz theyr not connected to the internet. Thats the point.

As far as your dumb take on 'credit' goes.. Japan and the United states are in trillions of dollars of credit. I guess citizens of both nations should just dump their consoles and plough fields like developing nations do...

You're missing the point. The problem here is a lot of people posting on the topic or any of the topics on site are under the notion that the hobby of gaming is supposed to be some sort of inherent right that everyone is both interested in and should have unfettered access to. This is not the case. Most people in the impoverished category don't own the means nor the money to buy the means as "cheap" as the hardware is to play games or pay for an internet connection to download pirated games.

These are not the consumers the industry is particularly concerned with because frankly, gaming is very low on their priority list if it even registers at all.

While anyone (less so now that credit has become more scarce) can buy luxury items or inessential consumer goods like video games on credit, gaming is simply not a priority for just about everyone with more pressing concerns.

Your closing remarks sound like something that would be said by someone who keeps a balance on a credit card due to a gaming habit. Personally, I encourage spending money on the industry 100% whether with cash or borrowed money. The only time consumer credit accumulation really hurts anyone but the borrower is when they default on their debts. Most people manage their credit accounts just fine. And shocking as it may sound, many still stick to the quaint concept of only buying inessentials like video games and consoles and gaming PCs with cash.



Dude, no one has ever needed an Internet connection to buy pirated goods. For a long time, a this may still be the case, it was possible to just walk up to a guy standing on the street in China and buy pirated goods off of them for pennies on the dollar. The CD you've wanted for so long that's $100 in the stores? 25 cents from the guy on the corner. Bam, deal done. It probably still works that way, too, in a lot of countries. Any place with a strong organized crime network and rampant poverty (read: most of Asia) is going to be like that.

Seriously, people need to realize that not everyone in the world lives the same way. There are different practices and customs, and in some countries it is not illegal at all to stand on the corner selling pirated goods. Once upon a time, not that long ago, it wasn't illegal to sell copies anywhere. It's only been in relatively recent years that this idea that you can't make a copy and sell it came into being to begin with, and not everybody agrees that it is a change for the better.



You do not have the right to never be offended.

Some of the comments in here are making my head hurt =/