First of all, this isn't a thread supporting piracy. This isn't even a thread discussing the morality and/or legality of piracy. We can make other threads for that, if there aren't some already.

The thread title is related to the assumptin that damage of piracy is the apparent loss of sales, and that less piracy=more sales.

Is that really the case? Or at least is it the case anymore?

The rise of used game sales and prevalent digital distribution might mean it's safe to say that people who pirated due to price or availability are using those options now. That likely means that those who still pirate wouldn't pay for a game no matter what. It isn't even just games though. One band offered their album for as low as a penny and still got pirated.

It's not about money for these people anymore. It's more just because they can, and want to, and then even get so caught up in it, they can't see the point of not pirating (the reason they often ask "Why pay X for Game Y when you can get it for free?"). To those people, you are not going to get sales if you stop them from pirating a game. They won't suddenly start paying money for it if they weren't going to when they could pirate it.

The hope here is that is not the case all over the place. There are plenty of people who will pay money for a game, which means the better method is simply to make a game that people want to pay money for. That might seem obvious, but the point here is to focus in favor of the people who would pay money, not against the people who would pirate. This can even help PC sales, which many assume is not salvageable, but look at the success of the Steam service, or even in retail like Starcraft 2? Those are things people are willing to pay money for, and do.

I think to some degree the pirates ARE doing it because they can, but take away the option and they might very well go somewhat legit. They just won't be buying all the game they pirate. Only the rare few that kick there interest.

I have a friend who owns a PS3 and a 360. He bought the 360 specifically to play pirated games (it was a modded console) and bought the PS3 for its exclusive. When the PS3 was hacked, he stopped buying those exclusive as well and pirated everything. Now I am 100% certain he would have purchase a few of those game he pirated if he couldn't get them any other way, so in the end, it is lost money... just not the 1:1 ratio that a lot of pundit believes.

it makes way too much sense, i never got why these big companies thougth that every pirated game is a lost sale. its not even close to 1:1. my good friend has a DS and all of his games are pirated. every single one. when Ninty finally stopped that R4 did he start buying games??? Hell no, he simplied shevled his DS and use the PSP more. His justification was that the DS games are not all that and arent worth the money.

Which is why it's not true that pirated copies are lost sales, at least for the most part.

Piracy = lost sales

Pirated copy does not equal lost sale copy.

Big difference.

Seeing how PS3 hardware/software sales were completely non-existent. I'd have to agree piracy killed PS3.

Actually, I meant the latter.

criminals can be criminals just because they can,that still does'nt make it right. 

Ok, but my point stands, piracy still cost the industry, just not as much as the industry likes to boast about.