L4D2 is $20 cheaper on PC than 360

[vlad321]

ZenfoldorVGI said:

vlad321 said:

 

I thnk you completely missed the point. I have never argued whether piracy is right or wrong o whether used selling does the same. I'm arguing that on the individual scale they are equally bad, with used game selling being worse. As for laws, of course about the chaos.

On the individual scale, piracy taes as much money away from a developer and publisher as does selling yoru used game. I've already shown you, it's the exact same. In fact piracy would equate to giving your game away, not selling it. It all amounts to other peple playing it without paying money to the developer and publisher. It's not about paying or not, it's about where the money goes.

Piracy is also not stealing, it has not removed a copy of the game or prevented anyone else from using the original, it's jsut a copy. That's not stealing. When you buy a used game, you are stealing jsut as much from the developer and the publisher. You jsut stole it from them by paying another thief who makes money out of the theft.

A. Piracy takes much more away from a publisher, even on an individual scale. The publisher gets paid for every game sold, and resale stimulates interest in the product, as well as benefiting the gaming economy.

How does it spark interest? Someone else plays it? Well so does someone who shares it. How does it benefit the economy? The original owner can buy another game? Indeed, however so too can the original person who shared it. If ayou are not the original it doesn't matter if you have mooney or not, it still doesnt go to publishers and developers.

B. The gaming economy doesn't just consist of the publisher. There are middlemen, like Steam, that also get a cut. There are also gamers. The most important part. They pay for everything(unless they're pirates). Giving money to Steam, or Gamestop, or gamers, allows them to increase the size of their business, or the rate at which they continue to purchase games, benefiting the publisher indirectly, while helping the economy by increasing the amount of money spent on each game. Pirates save money by not buying games, but they won't reinvest that in games, because they are pirates, and choose to steal their games for free, unless it's a console game which they can't pirate. With selling used games, the original purchase always ends up with money to spend on another original purchase, which he might do. Rentals to a greater extent, benefit the publisher directly, and often benefit the actual developer more, than a single sale would.

See this is your best point, however you failt at the pirates thing. Just like pirates will never buy games, so won't the people who buy them used, thus making it the same thing, developer/publisher gets no money from that person, ever.

C. Piracy benefits the pirate only, and hurts the publisher, the distributor, and the entire economy, gaming or otherwise.

So does reselling. It only benefits the person and hurts the publisher and the developer. Hurting the very people who make the games.

D. Piracy IS stealing. It's not stealing physical property, but that is just cemantics. Piracy is stealing digital property. You contradict yourself. How is "piracy is not stealing" congruent with the phrase "When you buy a used game, you are stealing jsut as much".

If piracy is steaing then so is reselling. You "pirate" the idea, someone has uses the idea without paying money to the people who made it happen. When you resell the same thing happens. You make money out of THEIR idea. It's not like cars where you also pay for materials and stuff, the game is just an idea. So by reselling you are basically stealing the person's "idea" and benefitting from it.

E. In your example, it wasn't even "the exact same." I've given you multiple examples very clearly and concisely stating the differences, but you continue to ignore and marginalize them.

And I have given you dozens of rebuttals and reasons  showing you they are the same, but you ignore and marginalize them.

We are at an impass. You refuse to admit that economics exist, and you try to generalize this argument down to its lowest common denominator, by only worrying about how the publisher of a game benefits directly from each individual SALE(much more than they benefit from each individual download, I guarntee you that). You also refuse to listen to reason. I don't know what else there is to say at this point. I've issued you a very complex and cohesive argument, which you completely dismiss, so I've probably been wasting my time.