Even if The Wreckard construes a personal attack in the way NinjaMarion phrased it, it's a valid and important question nonetheless and deserves an answer, especially given the supposed high ethical standard upon which the former's arguments are based.

For the record, and without meaning personal offence, I think the idea of a given number of gaming hours being occupied by 'good' paid-for games and 'bad' pirate games is ridiculous on many levels.

73mike

And I love how you skirt the issue raised in my last post completely. TV piracy is technically a separate issue... but it's just as valid an issue in an argument where you've so eagerly attacked anyone partaking in gaming without paying for every single game they try. As you've so eloquently pointed out, stealing is stealing. Just because you're more passionate about videogames doesn't make their piracy any worse than the piracy of any other media.

There is need to reply to my last paragraph, as "ad hominem tu quoque" or not, there's still a very big point you're ignoring. You can't come down on people in this post like you have just because it's videogames that they're pirating when you yourself do the same with other media, which your refusal to answer seems to imply you do

NinjaMarion

I have no intention or desire to effect change. Change is inevitable in this particular circumstance and requires no action from me.

My point was: "I don't care about piracy, but I find arguments against it (rather than action to stop it) laughable, since they're mostly based on an appeal to emotion or referencing ethics that the companies themselves disregard whenever practical."

Your point that denting corporate profits affects the little guys, not the Veeps is down to the non-ethical behaviour of the companies and is not my concern. I agree it's unfair, but it's another aspect of a system where the biggest beneficiaries write the rulebook. Kinda like screwing small artists and making massive profits from their work.

Your assertion that "[t]he motive of capitalism is not profit" is simply incorrect, and frankly, a little insane. Do you really believe this?

Here's an interesting point:
General business ethics
* This part of business ethics overlaps with the philosophy of business, one of the aims of which is to determine the fundamental purposes of a company. If a company's main purpose is to maximize the returns to its shareholders, then it could be seen as unethical for a company to consider the interests and rights of anyone else

I think you'll find that the vast majority of companies on earth have this as their main purpose.

73mike

The motive of capitalism is not profit. It is being able to make or buy something, and then sell it as you see fit, with the exception of a few necessities whose price is fixed by the government. Not profit.

The problem with piracy is that it screws everyone working for a corporation, not the dozen or so jackasses who decide to dump oil in rivers. There are hundreds, if not thousands of people who will lose their jobs while the Assistant Vice President in Charge of Butt-Kissing barely sees a dent in his seven-digit paycheck.

Organize protests. Write a book. Buy some stock and protest at the stockholder's meeting. Any one of those would affect more direct change than piracy.

Jonn

The fact is that books came into existence and gained a mass audience long before modern freebase capitalism took off.

Therefore, in comparison to the state of most other forms of modern media, books have something of a privileged status in the western world. They're regarded as somewhat holy by many, and the idea that access to the information contained within them should be restricted solely to those people willing to pay for ownership of personal copies is abhorrent to most civilised people.

The possibly ambiguous point I was trying to make was that if books sprang into existence quite recently, with their massive audience and potential profits, you can bet your bottom dollar that the companies controlling the new technology of 'print' would find the idea of libraries abhorrent and communistic.

My point, I guess, is that books, libraries and most shared human values predate the current form of robber-baron capitalism.

I should point out that I think capitalism is a wonderful thing. It's just, by definition, the profit motive is utterly unethical and needs to be strictly regulated.

In a time when regulation of business is being decimated all over the world, to the detriment of most of its inhabitants, it's the height of hypocrisy for the same multinationals to weep over the profits they lose to the 'unethical' actions of individuals.

No, I'm not a libertarian.

73mike

This is not an 'al corporationz iz evil' cliche, but a genuine fact of big business.

A CEO has a legal (and therefore corporate-ethical) obligation to maximise the profits of shareholders.

Where this comes into conflict with what most of us would call ethical behaviour, profit is always the winner (a decision enforced by law).

Individuals controlling a public company are far more likely to be prosecuted for failing to uphold their obligations to the shareholders than for questionable ethical or legal practices.

For instance, in the role of a CEO it is an ethical duty to pollute as much as the law allows.

This may seem to be veering wildly off-topic, but it's an interesting facet of this debate.

For one thing, digital distribution of intangible, infinitely reproducible products undercuts the most basic principle of capitalism - supply and demand. Infinite supply must push down price, unless special legal conditions are made for these products.

Naturally, such conditions are 'barriers to free trade' as they're essentially price-fixing. Of course, when such barriers boost the profits of a whole industry, they're entirely acceptable.

It should be noted that the invention of cheap mass-printing - the original reason for copyright laws - did not allow infinite, virtually cost-free reproduction.

Capitalism is not an ethical framework, it's a practical, rational one, based on physical goods and human services.

Digital distribution of media is a deviation from this system, but has been incorporated into it. The owners of the digitised products hope to enjoy continued wild profits based on a monopoly that no longer exists. Too bad.

To me, the injection of 'ethics' into the debate is a laughable, last-ditch attempt to hold off the inevitable change that's a few years down the track.
After years of gouging and price fixing, there are tears in the eyes of mega-rich, as they ask consumers to keep pouring money into a dead business model, for 'ethical' reasons.

However, when such ethics interfere with profit, they're the first thing out the window (global warming, anyone).

Yes, the creators are individuals, or teams of them. Their work is owned by and makes profits for vast, conglomerates who give not a shit for the creators or consumers.

in the long run, the conglomerates must change or die, and the consumers and artists will continue to trade.

Does anyone else remember that 'home taping is killing music'? It's a real shame that the recording industry died with the invention of the cassette deck (anyone remember them?).

73mike

Since that is not what actually happens, I am an enthusiastic patron of libraries.

Jonn

Good day, sir.

PS: By the way, are you a libertarian? That's not a personal attack, just wondering.

Jonn

@NinjaMarion: Well no need to reply to your last paragraph, instead I suggest you google for "ad hominem tu quoque."

We all do unethical things, this is the way the world is. I'm just saying that it's abundantly clear that, at least from a Kantian point of view (i.e. it doesn't pass the categorical imperative), piracy is unethical. TV is a completely separate debate, way outside the scope of this argument.

As for the rest of it - well, you're missing the point to such a degree that there's really no point in continuing the argument. You as a gamer do have a finite amount of time and if some of that time is taken up by pirated games that means you'll go through your legit games a little slower. Over the course of a year, two years, whatever that may lead to you buying fewer games. I know you think piracy does wonderful things but it doesn't create free time out of thin air.

But again, my point was never to brow beat or be pious. Piracy is a fact of life, I just think that people who justify it by saying it doesn't harm the industry, or that it may even benefit the industry - things you were saying a few posts ago - are just rationalizing their own bad behavior.

The Wreckard

And what makes you think there's any onus on me to change the economic system? It's a bizarre assertion, and speaks volumes about your idea of 'debate'. You invented a meaningless condition, then demanded that I fulfill it.
My response to your senseless question is an entirely appropriate 'bollocks'.

The system is as it is, which includes the ability to obtain free digital; copies of media for those so inclined. The onus for change is on those who wish to continue making profits.

"It's called "capitalism". The person who makes a product generally gets to control its distribution."

As you say - generally. The control gives the ability (not the 'right') to profit.

In the case of digitally reproduced media, where no physical object exists, the owner's control over its distribution does not exist either (currently, at least).

Happily, for the businesses involved, their ability to profit has not ceased to exist, but their 'right' to profit has been shown to be non-existent.

The illusion of this 'right' only existed (and was exploited) in the first place because the technology to record and distribute intangible property was expensive and/or monopolised.

"If you think the price is too high, don't buy it, but that means you don't get the product. You're only "obliged" if you want the product."

Reality proves you utterly wrong on both points. 'Debate' reality all you like. Come up with a powerful argument against gravity and see how well it works.

The simple fact is that those who have made enormous profits in keeping control of media must come up with a new method of making profits through their property, or accept that 'lost potential revenue' is an illusion.

Jonn, as your various straw men seem to be coming apart at the seams, perhaps it's time to fall back on some emotional appeals?

73mike

(sorry, I guess this was rhetorical question, but I already hit 'submit' before I realised)

73mike

Cruithne

This thread was began about the leak of GTA IV onto the internet.
From there the conversation ebbed and flowed over various issues relating to piracy.

A few posts ago you decided to demand I confine my contributions to one or two points decided by you.
That's not debate, it's an attempt at browbeating.
What else isn't debate is this shift from the topic at hand to the personalities of the various contributors to the thread.
I'm here to talk about piracy, I've no interst in your personal opinion of me, neither do I think my personal opinion of you is relevant to the discussion.
Though it does seem to be a feature of these topics that those who are anti piracy adopt a self righteous tone.

Cruithne

"In fact, forget the rest of my post; what have you done, besides piracy, to change the current system of creative compensation, much less the economic system under which most of the First World-including, last time I checked, the country you live in-operates?"

You still haven't answered me, Mike.

"In my view, the idea that anyone is morally or otherwise obliged to contribute to an entity's profits is obscene. It speaks of rigorous conditioning, IMHO."

It's called "capitalism". The person who makes a product generally gets to control it's distribution. If you think the price is too high, don't buy it, but that means you don't get the product. You're only "obliged" if you want the product.

Jonn

No longer true. As the writers' strike showed, the new model includes charging for viewing the shows (without ads, or on demand), not to mention the marketing of every vaguely successful show on DVD (as opposed to back in VHS days, only the most popular shows were available to buy on tape).

Since the vast majority of what I d/l is TV shows (no games actually, since I don't PC game or own a modded console), I'm totally skirting the hopeful new business model *and* the old one by refusing to have a second of advertising material in the TV I watch and by never watching what's broadcast on regular TV.

In the view of some, this should make me 'immoral' for consuming the content, but not doing so in a manner that contributes to the revenue of the program's owner.

In my view, the idea that anyone is morally or otherwise obliged to contribute to an entity's profits is obscene. It speaks of rigorous conditioning, IMHO.

The assertion that I have no 'right' to watch the TV shows in question is irrelevant, as there is no obstacle to doing so.

73mike

It's cute that you're aware there are such things as 'basic debate [sic] skills'. Now all you have to do is learn some.

I suggest looking up the term 'straw man' as your inability to respond to the points people are actually making suggests you've never heard of this particular fallacy. If not, the only obvious explanations are a lack of basic 'read' skills or a passionate love of your own voice/text.

Incidentally, it is possible to make a near-perfect 'cap' of a TV show. Though the meaning of you final conclusion about this point('yes') is unclear.

Glad someone has mentioned books in this debate. If books had been as difficult to reproduce as music, for instance, and their distribution had been bottlenecked and through control of technology and consumers charged through the nose for the privilege of accessing the recorded content, what do you think Sony Literature Division's view on libraries would be?

Not only would libraries never have existed, you'd have folks like Jonn bleating that the very idea was immoral and that anyone who wished to read something for free was a thief for denying authors (read: book conglomerates) potential revenue.

The 'right to profit' and the notion that projected future earnings are hard numbers that can be traded upon is new aberrations in economic thinking, and ones that won't last.
Witness the slow unravelling of world financial markets as a direct result of slap-happy predictions of value.

73mike

Who can and do use said to buy new games. It also saves people money they can, again, use to buy new games.

@Cruithne: "
Piracy, as far as I see it, is no more unethical than taping a show off the TV, or borrowing a book from a friend."

If you found some way to copy the TV show or book near-flawlessly for only a few cents that you were going to spend anyway, and if the friend was someone you've probably never met, yes.

@NinjaMarion: "And if you tape the show, you're less likely to buy the DVD box set, "

Which is why they include extras to get people to buy it. Also; wasn't there a Writer's Strike about the writers not getting a big enough cut of the money studios are making from digital distribution?

As I said earlier, don't try to attack the person making the argument. If someone is a hypocrite, that does not make their argument wrong. It simply means they'd be condemning themselves as well as you.

@Cruithne: Those aren't "my" ground rules. They're basic debate skills.

You seem to have failed to include a link to the original "ur so kool" post, incidentally.

Jonn

That's why 360 games aren't doing so well in Asia market surveys, but almost everyone I know has a 360 and tons of games.

pcypert

And as for taping TV not being the same...it kinda is. Networks sell digital copies of shows now, or offer them for streaming, with ads, on the network's website. You taping it is depriving them of the money they'd make off those sales or of any potential sales of the advertised products, thus causing the advertisers to pull out due to their advertising being less effective (since you only see the outdated ads from whenever you taped it). And if you tape the show, you're less likely to buy the DVD box set, and then you'll start taping every show and pretty soon, you're freebasing heroin with the evil videogame pirates while destroying the entire television industry.

I'd like to know, since you're so high and mighty about supporting the industry and being a perfect little boy scout...have you ever downloaded a movie off the internet? An album? a song? An ebook or other text file of any commercial literature? Ever watched a copyrighted video off YouTube, especially one that's available for sale elsewhere? Ever recorded a show that's available on DVD? Ever played roms, especially ones you did not originally own, on an emulator? Unless you can answer no to every single one of these (And I'd be willing to bet lots of people here, on the rest of the internet, and even those in the anti-piracy camp can't), you are a hypocrite.

NinjaMarion

@The Wreckard: However, you are damn correct that piracy does have an impact - I just felt you had gone a little too hard on the guy when he was just trying to give an example.

Also, you are right that even downloading a pirated game hurts the industry - e.g. with torrents you are uploading to other pirates, and with warez you are increasing hits to their site, which increases the ad revenue and demand, so they will increase their efforts to pirate even more games.

We should all just stick to demos and rentals in order to try out games ;-)

dnzperson

People buying games second hand does mean less money for the industry, but least it's constrained by the laws of supply and demand. That is, not everyone can buy all their games used because then there'd be no used games to buy (since no one is buying it new and selling it back).

Digital piracy doesn't follow the law of supply and demand. If 1 copy is leaked, an unlimited number of people can pirate it. But this is basic stuff, certainly not new to you.

Again, you may not think piracy leads to you spending less on games but over the course of a year, two years it probably does, just due to the sheer fact that you'll spend less of your gaming time on gaming that you spend money on.

The Wreckard

stereoa

Cruithne

Let's say, for argument's sake, that every game ever made provides exactly 10 hours of entertainment. Let's say that our friend here games for 5 hours per week.

If he's an honest gamer - that is to say, he purchases all of his games from the store, he'll buy a new game every 2 weeks, simply because his current games no longer entertain him.

Now in this guy's case, he's a "semi-honest" gamer - he buys some games, but doesn't buy the games that he deems not worth the money. Even though he never intends to buy the games he pirates he still costs the industry money because he's still going through fewer games. Let's say he only plays his crappy pirated game for one hour before throwing it away, and pirates 10 crappy games per year. That means he'll buy one fewer game this year, simply due to time constraints.

Obviously this argument is pretty hypothetical but I think it makes my point. As gamers we have a finite amount of time to game. There are only so many games we can play. Even if we don't intend to buy the games we steal, it may be taking away from time we would have spent on games we bought.

Though, we all know the truth - that there is an entire community of gamers that only pirate games. But they're gamers - if they didn't / couldn't pirate, they'd either stop gaming or start paying.

@Cruithne: My point is just that it's unethical. Just apply the categorical imperative and you'll see piracy doesn't pass the test - if piracy were universally engaged in there would be no more gaming industry to steal from.

People can and will steal, that's a fact of life. I just think that people need to be honest with themselves and others about what it is they're doing and stop pretending that they're doing someone a favor by taking what isn't theirs.

The Wreckard

What morals, whose morals?

I never mentioned morals, other people did.

Cruithne

Wow, thanks for explaining what the word means, can you do a definition of irony as well? too late, you just did.

Or would you like to simply see my comment and read something no one said or implied, just like you did in the last thread? In fact, I defy you to find people in either of these threads, saying piracy is the result of you, or anyone else, "trying to be cool".

I'll give you one example

Man! You're AWESOME! It must be awesome to be so awesome...and cool.

I've never been ignorant enough or dim-witted enough to brag publically about doing stupid, criminalistic things.

But I'm neither c00L or 4w350m3...

So we can see that you're mistaken by suggesting I'm seeing things which aren't there.

Oh, and piracy is not a grey area. You are getting something without finding it, buying it, or having it lent or given to you. I'm fairly certain that constitutes "theft".

I'm also fairly certain it constitutes a type of theft, that wasn't what I mean when I said grey area.

Since video games are not a necessity-like food or water-there is no cause to take them other than one's own desire. They are a "want", not a "need".

I disagree with you, I think human being are more complex than simple basic needs, I love the American constitution for containing the words "the Pursuit of Hhappiness", I think that phrse showed a remarkable insight into the human condition. My support for piracy is partially based upon the belief that everyone, even pooor people, have a right to a certain quality of life.

If you cannot argue against those points-and only those points, without bringing imaginary commenters from Bizarro world into the fray on my side-I wash my hands of you.

Well ,there two things to say here. First of all, you don't get to se the ground rules here, I'll damn well argue whatever points I feel like arguing,whether you stay around to participate in the argument is of little concern to me.

Your cheap jibe about Bizzaro world imaginary comments has been addressed , let's see if you have what it takes to aknowledge your own mistakes in making those comments.

Cruithne

Jonn

Or would you like to simply see my comment and read something no one said or implied, just like you did in the last thread? In fact, I defy you to find people in either of these threads, saying piracy is the result of you, or anyone else, "trying to be cool".

Oh, and piracy is not a grey area. You are getting something without finding it, buying it, or having it lent or given to you. I'm fairly certain that constitutes "theft".

Since video games are not a necessity-like food or water-there is no cause to take them other than one's own desire. They are a "want", not a "need".

If you cannot argue against those points-and only those points, without bringing imaginary commenters from Bizarro world into the fray on my side-I wash my hands of you.

Jonn

I was replying to someone who made an post premised upon a fallacious argument.
No need to go through it all when all you have to do is remove the foundation, the whole thing falls down after that.

It's easy to say someone ignored points, but if you want to detail any points you feel I ignored, I'd be more than happy to address them, or show where I have already addressed them.

As for patronising, I wish I had an illegal copy of GTA IV for everytime over the last few days I've heard people tell me, an adult over forty years old, that "I'm just trying to be cool"

Cruithne

Now, would you like to categorically refute my points instead of calling me names? Or, for that matter, the points of anyone else?

@73mike: "I assume you lathered it on extra thick in response to my revelation that I enjoy reading posts full of witless self-regard in discussions about piracy. Thank you.

Better still, haughty pronouncements are even funnier when they come from someone with no justification for their inflated self-opinion."

Well, that's rather an ironic statement. Which one of us just effectively said "tl;dr" and then insulted the other?

In fact, forget the rest of my post; what have you done, besides piracy, to change the current system of creative compensation, much less the economic system under which most of the First World-including, last time I checked, the country you live in-operates?

@NinjaMarion: "And you're saying that no one who pirates this release will still buy the real game even though it's already been cracked? Hell, some of those that will might not have planned on buying it until they downloaded it and found out how great it is."

That's called the Parable of the Broken Window. In this case, "the cost of the window" is equivalent to "the cost of a game many of the people pirating it can afford".

@Mr.SithNinja:Fine, I'll try to scale back on the snarkiness, but I will continue to reply individually. Please pass your message on to 73mike, please.

@NinjaMarion: "I support developers that actually put out good material "

1. You just moved the goalposts.
2. I hear Rockstar makes good games.

All sardonicism aside, what about the people who pirate good games and never pay? What's the ratio of "leechers" to people like you, what does it need to be before piracy is doing more harm than good, and how would you measure it?

@Cruithne: "This is where you make your biggest mistake, because simply put, there is a grey area, and people do indeed get to play stuff they haven't bought.
Now you may well feel aggrieved at this situation, it would seem you're not alone in that. But saying something sin't so, when it so patently is, hardly advances any aergument."

I'm fairly certain you only made two points in there; 1. There is a grey area, and 2. people pirate games. Given that the second is the point of our little discussion, I'm not sure what reiterating it solves.

Also, would you stop being so patronizing? I'm sarcastic, but I do not look down my aquiline nose at my opponent and go "Ha ha, you silly little man" in the text equivalent of a stereotypical French accent, while ignoring every point they make.

Jonn

whereismyarm

This is where you make your biggest mistake, because simply put, there is a grey area, and people do indeed get to play stuff they haven't bought.
Now you may well feel aggrieved at this situation, it would seem you're not alone in that. But saying something sin't so, when it so patently is, hardly advances any aergument.

If you want society to function you have to be a functional human being, and failing that you should at least be an honest one.

That's just more of the same efual to look at the world head on and see it as it is, as opposed to some delusional utopian worldview.
The economoy exists, but it doesn't exist alone, there are also the grey and black economies, and they're just as much part of our society as the normal economy.
I'm glad you brought up that last oint, because I do think t's an important one in relation to this whole debate about piracy.
One of the reasons I don't have problems with piracy and the black market is the very fact that it allows poor people, not just in the West, but second world countries, to access luxury goods.

And guess what?
I get to sleep at night, ther's no jimmy cricket on my shoulder lecturing me about how I'll go to hell for my misdeeds.
I'd even go so far as to say the world is a better place for piracy.

Aint it great that we all have different opinions?

Cruithne

@The Wreckard: He gave a perfectly good arguement, yet you just launched a personal attack against him.

@NinjaMarion: I think you made a good point, however on the moral side of things people are likely to say you should have rented the game to decide to buy or not, rather than downloading a pirate copy to test it out.

It is unforetunate that not all games come with demos, as it would save gamers having to shell out cash on rentals only to find out how much the game sucks. So I really say to myself, if it doesn't have a demo then it's probably crap.

The obvious exceptions to this are the games that get highly praised in reviews - which I am more likely to rent, or straight up buy, than games that receive poor reviews.

dnzperson

sjheiss

And I'm not high and mighty because I support the game industry. Like I said, steal you games, whatever, I don't really give a fuck what you do. Just don't try to rationalize it and claim you're actually helping the game industry by stealing, or that it's ok if you weren't going to buy the game anyway. If the game wasn't worth your money, you don't get to play it. You don't get to pick and choose - there's no grey area there.

If you want society to function you have to be a functional human being, and failing that you should at least be an honest one.

The Wreckard

Fireblast

You can assume all you want about me and feel all high and mighty about yourself because you support the "gaming industry." Fuck the gaming industry. I support developers that actually put out good material and really couldn't care less if the people responsible for Ninjabread Man, Anubis 2, and Billy The Wizard go out of business and end up unemployed.

NinjaMarion

Oh my.

I love how you insist that you aren't rationalizing your bad behavior, and then go on to write 3 paragraphs doing just that. Your sense of entitlement is sad and as transparent as your flimsy excuses for why your behavior is bad.

Let's distill your arguments here:
- "I purchase lots of games so stealing other ones is ok"
- "The ones I stole weren't very good anyway so who cares"
- "I wouldn't have bought it anyway"

If you can't see though your own flimsy excuses there's probably no hope for you. Each one of those reasons is selfish and driven by nothing more than a sense of entitlement. The fact is that no matter how bad a game is, or whether or not you intended to buy it, you're not entitled to play it unless you paid for it. That's just the way the world works.

The fact is that by participating in that community at all - sharing, downloading and uploading images - you're contributing to something extremely harmful to the industry, no matter what your intentions were.

If you're going to steal, steal. Whatever, it's your choice to do that. But to rationalize to yourself and others that what you're doing is anything but selfish, short-sighted and self-serving is delusional at best and disingenuous at worst.

The Wreckard

SYunker

sascha23

I'm not saying that the PS3 and 360 are equal in their specifications and capabilities... they have their strengths and weaknesses... but GTAIV will run the exact same way (hopefully) on both consoles not because they had to dumb it down for the 360, but because the technology is optimized so well for both systems.

I'm sure the PC version that will surely come out in a year or so will look very similar to what us console peeps get to play in less than a week.

blackmanfu

You don't know how often it happens and neither do I. You don't know how much it's hurting the industry. To play your guessing game though, I'd guess the large majority of people that pirate most likely wouldn't have bought the game anyway. As I pointed out above, it's very unlike the Ferrari analogy, and the downloading of a game that one wouldn't have bought anyway doesn't actually cost the company anything (And may even help through word of mouth sales), unlike stealing an actual physical product.

Sure, even one copy lost hurts some, but my only point was that not everyone that downloads a game, ESPECIALLY a leaked copy available before the actual real copies (or regarding PC games, a copy that's easier to install and play without having to jump through all sorts of punish the innocent, don't effect the guilty, anti-piracy hoops included in modern games) is an evil freeloading pirate that should be looked down on by you in your giant ivory tower.

Hell, just to further prove my point, I have a modded Wii. I was actually going to download Zack & Wiki a few months after the release after hearing how good it was so I could give it a try and see if it was worth it. The next day, Capcom released that one level demo of the game. I played it and went out that very same day and bought the game with no downloading necessary.

Yes, I could have still downloaded it and got it for free. I didn't want to. I actually thought the game was worth paying my hard-earned money for. Ninja Reflex, however, was crap. It wasn't worth $40 and it hasn't touched my Wii since the day it was burned.

Taking some information from the last post you commented about, the average Wii gamer buys 3.7 games per year. I've had my Wii less than a year. I see 4 games sitting on my shelf right now. That's right... a modded-Wii-owning, games-industry-killing pirate has more games sitting on his shelf this instant than the average and casual gamers that are fueling Nintendo's rise to the top. And those are the games I didn't loan away when my girlfriend got her Wii. She has all of my other games - games which are actually good and deserve the money. She has the other copy of Galaxy I bought. That's right; TWO copies! She also has my copy of Super Paper Mario that I legally bought. Too bad I'm just rationalizing my behavior and killing the gameing industry by supporting good games instead of shovelware crap. I should go cry now :'(

NinjaMarion

Story of Ricky is on Amazon. Not a good reason to pirate. I did pirate it though in order to view it, as I could not rent it anywhere, but after I watched it once, I knew it was worth the purchase.

stereoa

stereoa

er, at least that's what I've heard...

Cruithne

ZWarren69

ZWarren69

Going after people individualy that disagree with you only turns the thread into a big flame war. Don't let them bait you into it. You are better than that.

Mr.SithNinja

DimmuJed2

ZWarren69

Leaked games are the norm since the invention of piracy, and Live is working beforehand for almost all of them, with idiots being banned everyday.

It's just the hype machine running at full steam.

At least this time they won't exploit the poor Thompson, the last time they employed him, sales suffered...

Maybe this time piracy will be a better theme to grab mass attention.

z.e.r.o

Koneesha

Yeah, I think it is. If you're willing to take the risk, go for it, and I say best of luck to you.

Cruithne

Sure, piracy causes some to not buy games they otherwise would have. But it also causes people to buy and like games they would have never even given a second thought to had it been their money on the line.

Right, and which one of those 2 things do you think happens with greater frequency? Hint: it's not the latter.

It never ceases to amaze me how far people will go to rationalize their own behavior. That so many have convinced themselves that they're actually helping publishers by pirating their game is so absurd it would be hilarious if it wasn't hurting the industry so much.

The Wreckard

moidsch

AltDelete

latinogamer

zerokoolpsx

If, instead, you download a copy of a game you were not going to buy or even play anyway, they still have every single one of their copies of the game to sell. You have not actually cost the company even one cent that they would have made off the game had you not downloaded it. Hell, if it's a good game, they may actually make money off of you, even though you didn't buy the game and wouldn't have anyway. How? Well if it's a good enough game, you will probably tell people how awesome it is and convince them to buy it, even though they wouldn't have otherwise.

@Jonn: And you're saying that no one who pirates this release will still buy the real game even though it's already been cracked? Hell, some of those that will might not have planned on buying it until they downloaded it and found out how great it is.

Sure, piracy causes some to not buy games they otherwise would have. But it also causes people to buy and like games they would have never even given a second thought to had it been their money on the line. Others wouldn't have bought it and still won't. Yet even more may already have their copies paid off and don't wanna wait another week just to play their game that's obviously already fully playable and finished. It's a far more complicated issue than simply, "Ur pirating! Ur evil and wrong and trying not to pay 4 things!"

Hell, the PAL version of Mario Kart's been out since about 4 days before the European release, so around the 7th or so? I'm sure plenty of people already have their US copies reserved or even fully paid off. I'm also sure there's probably a fair number of those same people that've downloaded that PAL release because they don't wanna wait almost a fucking month to play the exact same game as what's currently legally available to 2/3 of the major gaming regions.

NinjaMarion

elislider

Better still, haughty pronouncements are even funnier when they come from someone with no justification for their inflated self-opinion.

Now do your little dance!

73mike

Mr.SithNinja

I can wait another 4 and a half days. It's not going to kill me. I don't want t3h ban stick on Xbox live.

CaptLtrl

Very pretty straw-men, though it must be said that you shouldn't need help tearing apart your own creations.

By the way, excellent insight in deciding that I'm American. Twit.

73mike

Mr.SithNinja

It isn't the same thing as said Ferrari. The release isn't tangible until the pirate makes it so. Your analogy would be better suited to the pirate going into Best Buy and stealing the physical copy.

A pirate worth his chops who loves Live! will do one of two things. Either 1) Play Russian Roulette and hope Microsoft doesn't ban them from Live! or 2)Buy another 360 to mod. For the price of 4 games you can have a 2nd 360...then it is just the price of media. <--If it dies they are still ahead. Then can go buy another one.

Gooche

∴ I think you are talking rubbish.

duckmouth

thund3rstruck

And some companies are still against piracy as a form of advertisement.

z.e.r.o

shufflemoomin

Jackel2072

penaloza

@tex1ntux: What, did you take a poll?

@Starsky: "The 12-year old idiots who have a modded 360 wouldn't have bought the game anyway. "

No, their parents would've. ;)

@73mike: Aren't you the passive-aggressive little rebel. Albeit one who seems to confuse "consumerism" and "capitalism", but passive-aggressive nonetheless.

If you' really wanted to effect change, you'd write letters to your congressman, organize protests, something other than sit in the dark and .torrent.

Either you've rationalized your piracy as la revolution, or you honestly went in thinking that piracy sends a message to companies other than "I do not want to pay for your content."

@Cruithne: "
Please, if you're so against someting, at least work up the effort to find a better argument than "Oh, you just do it to be cool""

I've been an anti-piracy participant in both recent threads, and I do not think our words mean what you think they mean.

@Cruithne: While I do admit that PC gaming is too dear for my blood, I would like to point out that piracy further shrinks the value of said two grand. It's like investing in an a solar-powered umbrella, then setting up shop in England.

@jtraveller: "therefore piracy fills the need for cheap electronic entertaiment."

I'm looking at Maslow's pyramid of needs, and I don't see "pwning n00bs" anywhere on it. Please advise.

Jonn

Guys, you can download GTA here.

Tei

mmr

supercrap

Russian Experiment

/sarcasm

Just buy the fricken game people.

phalanges

I'm going to go ahead and go on record here: "The Xbox 360's best mechanism for protecting against piracy is its terrible failure rate."

There, now you have the truth.

DugDawg

stereoa

I guess my point is, what's the upside of posting a news blurb about it?

TychoBrahe

Besides, most, if not all stores should have it by Friday anyway, right?

VicViper

Its not like this is the first time that something like this have ever happened and clearly the folks at R* aren't happy about it...
Imho you're blowing the whole thing out of proportions and also somewhat advertise warez use. :/

neojam

-=-=-= GRAND THEFT AUTO IV =-=-=-
A RockStar Games game

You are standing in the middle of Liberty City. There is a statue off in the distance. There are large buildings all around you.

You see several vehicles nearby: a Porsche; a F-150 pickup; a Beetle;

The street travels to the west and east from here. You can see seedy docks toward the east.

> look buildings
There are no buildings here.

> look cars
There are no cars here.

> look vehicles
You see several vehicles nearby: a Porsche; a F-150 pickup; a Beetle;

> hijack porsche
I don't know what you mean.

> attack porsche
I don't know what you mean.

> shoot porsche
You don't have any weapons!

> jack porsche
I don't know what you mean.

> jack Porsche
You move over to the Porsche, throw open the door, and pull the driver out.

...At this point it crashed... which is what makes me suspect that this isn't the real thing!

IQpierce

close ur windows and start crying :D

nOObert

KK

@jtraveller: very true... while companies think of emergent markets (latin america, parts of Europe, parts of Asia) as disposable the piracy will be rampant

bunch.of.wackos

doobymoo

Too bad, because it would be interesting to see just how close they are coming to two disks.

Niroth

Uzumaki_Kiba

Wulfgang

boots555

jtraveller

TheHun

mferrari

FLYBOY611

Musai

Piracy that requires hardware means that the potential pool of pirates is much smaller, and that those who do intend to make money must commit a lot more time, space and money to producing 'their' product.
This means that (in theory) such large organisations are easier to find and may even have the resources to be worth suing.

This is less true of bedroom pirates.

Of course, the rise of a little country called 'China'to become the the world's high-tech semi-regulated work-shop might make the theory of finding the bigger pirates somewhat impractical...

I still reckon that the big companies would rather have a product that's expensive and complex to pirate than one that anyone can rip-off.

73mike

DrXym

Pombar

somehow i preffer a geek giving out a copy of something for free or as much as the blank dvd price than people getting rich by selling pirated stuff. why? well, real world mafias took or are taking over the commercial movie and game piracy to further finance themselves.

jtraveller

73mike

"don't forget to unplug it from the mains before touching the power supply inside it"

hamandcheeseUK

so you see, propietary hardware wasnt an issue for the chinese pirates back in the old days, without cheap PCs.

a second thing... there are countries where most people cant afford a console, and buying ONE game for it is almost impossible, given the prices, therefore piracy fills the need for cheap electronic entertaiment.
so, if the legal market cant change and leaves a void, why act so surprised when something or someone fills it, legal or not?

jtraveller

The a simple internet connection is all you need to access nearly every game ever made on for the PC, yet this is not the case with consoles.

However, this discussion is probably best suited for outside of the comments for this particular post.

dnzperson

ca$h

jamega

[/Hicks]

Cruithne

Not that i care, but that's kinda promoting the leak. Twice. In 2 days.

Fabrice

After all, why did consoles not die the death after the invention of the cheap home PC in the mid-Eighties?

I'd say that one of the major reasons was the difficulty of pirating carts and modifying proprietary hardware.

Many of those early anti-piracy measures that were inherent to consoles are now not much of an obstacle to pirates.

But it's worth noting that pirates and their activities were probably a major reason that consoles continued to exist until now.

Get online and thank a pirate for your xbox360 today!

73mike

The videos are VERY sexy. I can't wait, well I can.. I'm not going to download it is what I mean

bombyaker

dnzperson

Come on, Take Two. Release it already! You're killing me here!!

Dijkie1337

As for the "arguments" (I tried to keep a straight face when I said that)against pricay on this and other threads?
Please, if you're so against someting, at least work up the effort to find a better argument than "Oh, you just do it to be cool"
I remember being a teenager and adults saying the same thing to me about recreational drugs. I always thought at the time that they were talking outta their asses, I did it because it was a hell of a lot of fun to do. As I grew older I moved on to other things (trust me, it takes a lot longer to recover from a night of whores'n'coke once you hit forty)

Anyway, to sum up.

If you're going to speak out against piracy, try to put a tenth of the effort into your anti piracy argument that the pirates put into doing what it is they do.

"Just say no" didn't work for drugs, and it sure as shit isn't going to work against piracy.

Cruithne

I could hypothesise that in a large country whose (not-so-subtly-enforced) state religion is Consumption, the act of getting free stuff is akin to heresy.

But I won't.

73mike

I dunno - I dont want this leak/piracy thing to overshadow one thing - this game is going to be a new watermark in gaming, and for that, we should all be happy.

Crab_Botherer

Look at the bottom of the article, where there is a link that says digg it.

dnzperson

Poisonous Taoist

Crab_Botherer

RykinPoe

baccardi84

@Mattz: Oh, so I got a Wii modchip shortly after launch and imported NTSC games for no reason? I wonder why they worked then, maybe because you're WRONG.

Libo

MattB

that all that needs to be said. Arg!!

xXSlayer77Xx

@Poisonous Taoist: I know piracy can't keep a big hit game down, but the problem (for the industry) is that it affects all games, not just "invincible" games like GTA 4.

eastx

*offers an olive branch*

Owww...just realised it was actually poison ivy, excuse me whilst I start trawling the internet for cures

Dannon

The other kind of pirates are the ones who cant afford them but still like to play them. Maybe they live in Brazil, maybe they live in a trailer park in Missouri, but they just don't have the resources to buy every game that catches their eye.

The other kind just dont give a sh** and will take whatever they can get their grubby hands on. Greedy bast****.

tex1ntux