That's another stupid arguement. 

Just because you want something to some degree doesn't mean you'll buy it.  Plenty of people want Rolls Royces but don't buy those.

For example there are a ton of games I just won't by new.   I buy them used.  To the industry it's basically the same thing as pirating since the original creators are getting nothing out of it.

Yousuperchunk are an idiot. It is FLAWED NOT THAWED. If you wish people to take you seriously you need to improve your english skills. The moment I reached that mistake I stopped reading because I feel it was safe to assume you are one IGNORANT FOOL!!!

Except now you're just arguing cost.  "I'd buy that game for $20 but not for $60".  You still want the game, you're just not willing to pay full price, but at what point do you think the game is worth ZERO?   At what point do you look the a developer in the eyes and say "you know, I know you spent 2 years of your life making this, and I AM going to play it, but I don't feel like you should get any money for it.  Sorry, try better next time.  I'm going to go have some fun with your game now.  Get back to work making more games for me!"

Buying used is not the same thing because at least the money is going back into the "industry".  The place you're buying the used games from will likely use that money to keep more smaller, harder to find games in stock or put it towards advertising which will draw people into the store who will purchase full priced games. 

Would you pay for being a VGchartz forum member? If not, GTFO, because you have zero desire to be here.

Your logic= teh fail

There is a sliding scale of demand. There are peopl who would pay $100 for any game because they love gaming so much, there are others who would pay $20, and there are others who think twice before even spending time with downloading some of them, that is a very low, but existing interest.

This isnt rational. You have no idea what that money will be used for. Knowing gamestop, it will likely be to pay the very people they have to push used games. If youy choose not to sell to a game chain, then its truely anyone's guess where the money ends up. Possibley someone's rent or car payment.

I might as well say they money i save pirating this game, is money i'll spend buying another game. It maybe possible, but no where near a certainty. What im trying to say if we have money gained vs money saved in each instance. No one can truly say where either amount will go.

You know I tend to think of that in these kinds of arguments. 

People talk about buying some used games one moment and then explode in rage at the mention of piracy. In either case that money isn't going back to the publisher or developer. With a store though, it could potentially go into bringing more people to the store, but the store would still be pimping their used selection. It's all going to depend on how the person or store who sold you the used game invests that money, which could go right back into other used games.

Heck, I like to rent games and I even had a subscription to Gamefly for a while. Sure, the business has to buy new games and such, but the way I see it I'm only spending a few dollars to play through and beat a $60 game.

I even bought a used game at a rental store once 0_0

Simple answer really.

I like to try out a game before I even consider purchasing it and Nintendo, the cheap asses they are won't even host demos on their out dated online service.

Most, if not all games I pirate are for these purposes. I can't remember the last time I played more than 5 hours in a pirated game. If it ever came to that point (I buy JRPG 90% of the time) and I know it will keep me interested for the long run I go out and purchase the game. I have over 200 titles in my games collection in my sig and every single one of those games are retail purchases with 20 or so being used titles. I already purchased over 50 titles retail this gen, brand new.

I only started doing this 3 weeks ago and even though the 360 can easily be pirated I choose not to do so because they offer demos for my testing purposes. Nobody wants to buy something without having any clue what so ever if they will like it or not. I am not stupid enough to drop $50 just like that.

I also have a Gamefly subscription for this same exact reason, but if I do not like a Wii title and send it back it still takes a few days before the next one comes in. 

I do this because not only is it convenient, it enables me to test potential purchases. Nintendo makes more than enough to at least begin offering demos to us, we do have SD support now for channels. It not only would have prevented me from pirating but it can also help those 3rd party developers who wish to release games on their system.

I blame Nintendo.

To all the blood sucking corporations out there: charge reasonably worldwide- and ppl will pay. I mean it must really pinch MS(just an example) to see consumers in say China or India not shitting $150 for a copy of windows. How dare they. Maybe if they charged $30-40 for it they'd see 5x the sales.

Thank you for showing me the error of my ways. If it weren't for people like you, I surely would die in the gutter with my bell tipped shoes and funny hat.

Btw, I corrected your post with spacing, some commas, a semi-colon, and instead of a fully mistyped word, you had an incorrect tense usage of the verb 'feel'. Maybe you should reread your posts as well.  dick. (Though I could be wrong on the usage of the semicolon, however, I am pretty sure I am right.)

No.  It's still the same thing.  Since they never sell there game for 20 bucks where they get a cut... buying used games puts money back into the industry... the industry of gamestop which spreads and forces it's tendrils into more and more markets, sells more and more used games and takes more and more money from others.

Economic theory states that people WANT to buy stuff.  People are socially and genetically programmed to buy.  VS paying a fair price for a product and stealing a product they will in fact pay a fair price for the product.

Or rather what they see as a fair price in product.  The only anomalies are the few people who are somewhat antisocial me first all the time would steal money from you if your not looking types.

Ergo the vast majority of people pirating do not equal a lost sale. 

The only REAL issue and debtate at hand among actual economists is whether or not piracy leads to a devaluiation of products.  There are currently no good data sets to test this theory.  The closest usually used in support was the rise of Napster and torrents but it's usually just disregarded by the fact that MP3's are dozens of times more usefull then CDs and largely more seen as a mistake by the music industry to not have had a concentrated MP3 plan in place.