vlad321 said:
Jereel Hunter said:
vlad321 said:
Squilliam said:
Yup. The numbers of games bought vs downloaded is quite a difference. It does pay to be sensible and buy games you know you'll play more than once rather than buying 20-30 games a year and not finish many and $600 U.S pays for a hell of a lot of hardware upgrades.
I know many people who pirate that support this logic. They have 600+GB of pirated games they have never played. I know someone with over 200 burnt Xbox 360 games. How many games did publishers really lose out on? About 5 or 6.
The biggest weapon against piracy is a timely Steam sale. A lot of my pirate friends are very value concious. If they can get a game for $20 they will buy it and take advantage of the convenience of Steam rather than download it. |
Basically this. I spent $80 for D2 LoD, and I spent hundreds of hours on it, many many hundreds. $70 for Starcraft and Warcraft 2 and 3 and I spent hundreds of hours out of them. UT2004 set me back only $50.Don't even get me started on the value of Civ 4.
FInally, while I have spent around $750 on WoW, I have 250 days of /played. That's 6,000 hours.
Why should I pay $60 for MW2 which is a re-tread of a game, and is utter shit when it comes to features? Same goes for jsut about any shooter that has come out since 2005, except for Metro 2033 which had some amazing new features, and Portal.
|
You shouldn't pay for it if you feel that way. But you also shouldn't play it. The logic doesn't belong in a piracy dicussion - you're either willing to pay the price for it or not, but if you have the money, and simply consider the product not worth it, you do without. You don't steal it and opt not to pay for it. You seem to be basing the value off of games on blizzard titles. Yes, blizzard titles are amazing, and you will get probably an hour of enjoyment per 15 cents spent. Virtually noone else makes games that hold up that well. Using them as an excuse to take the work of others is weak.
Not to mention that "1 per 1000" figure, that appeared to be a VERY sketchy test, hardly believable. The details of the test give little confidence. Infact the very same article you cited said, and I quote, "it seems clear that eliminating piracy through a stronger DRM can result in significantly increased sales."
|
First, I don't see where you got that DRM increases sales, when they clearly stated DRM increases piracy.
Second, they have no right to want the same amount of money as Blizzard, Valve, Firaxis, etc. for the same type of product when it is clearly inferior.
|
Well, you're citation 7, that quote was pulled directly from that article - copied and pasted... a find on those words would show where it came from. Maybe you misread it? The first round of DRM additions they claimed increased sales and reduced downloads... though I honestly don't think their test was an accurate judge anyway.
As for having no right to want the same money - Blizzard, Valve, etc, companies make money from volume. It's easy for them to not have to charge for more quality if they sell 10x as much as everyone else. Even if some random nobody company puts out an excellent game, they're probably not going to achieve 8 figure sales. You're view is jaded - blizzard put sout games that are worth way more than everyone else - but they charge TOO LITTLE. You get way more than your money's worth. You CANNOT hold everyone to the exact same standard. And if you think everyone's games should cost relative to the quality of a blizzard title, you should just stick with blizzard titles. It's still not a justification for piracy - never was.
