Anybody saying piracy is most likely biased and/or uneducated on the matter.
People who pirate the games would probably not have purchased it if the game wasn't available to be pirated.
BUT
People buying used games, if used wasn't an option, wouldn't be shelling out THAT much more for a new title and likely would end up getting it new.
What does this mean? Well, pirates aren't affecting gaming anywhere near all that much, because most of them wouldn't have spent the money in the first place. They're just taking advantage of an opportunity to enjoy something they wouldn't have enjoyed otherwise. They exist outside of the sphere of influence.
Used game buyers, however, while they may be more ethical, are absolutely hurting the industry worlds more. They're shelling out money to a conglomerate that doesn't develop titles and instead just sells them - and gets most of their money from selling used copies. Yes, used games are limited by how many new are sold, but that doesn't stop used game buyers from being able to find nearly everything they want AS a used copy.
As for that Silicon Valley Insider chart, it also is extremely biased, because (1) not all digital purchases are tracked so digital numbers are significantly higher than they represent them as, and (2) it fails to provide for the fact that we're in the biggest national and world recession since before that chart even shows. Also, our culture was HUGE on music in the mid 90s, but for the past ten years, focus has been shifting drastically. Of course, music is still huge, but nothing like it was for us ten-fifteen years ago. Piracy doesn't account for anywhere near the amount of damage that graph would like us to believe.
But it ultimately, neither damages the industry as much as people are trying to pretend it does.
Lastly, I've pirated zero games in the past year, purchased a couple dozen used, and about 15 new. Not including digital downloads.
SW-5120-1900-6153
