Why do they hack???

Locke Da'averan · Post by **Locke Da'averan** » Wed May 12, 2004 1:00 pm

and interrupting to say something "irrelevant": piracy.. as it has already been said it happens, 'cause it's free. Meaning although ppl obviously have computers not everyone can afford to buy the games they want to play. yes you could argue that one should maybe work more and play less or choose the games you want to play instead of hoarding everything and end up not playing even half of them, but some ppl want to just enjoy games without any extra costs, it's nice to play a game when you know that if you don't like it, you just delete it, and don't have to worry about the missing 50€ that you could've spent on something else.. and yes there are free demos, shareware, freeware you name it, but piracy is so easy these days, it's easier to get the game free and check it out than even reading a review on a pc gaming magazine (or so i have heard...)

this is not meant to be anyway offensive and yes, i've not thought every angle of my post through so there are propably some errors/contradictions but what can i say?
sorry i ain't a brainiac

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed May 12, 2004 1:07 pm

Have you actually gone out and bought any game you downloaded from a pirate, just to "try it out?" I've never heard anybody honestly say that. And be it as it may, it doesn't take a brainiac to know that virtually all those who do use pirates for their games never pay for what they get. Of course this hurts game developers and publishers. Every copy that's pirated is sales lost, and evidence that the game is not doing well. The company doen't get revenues, sales drop, and companies go under. If you think I'm exaggerating, check out some of the markets in Asian cities where US computer games, videos and DVDs are offered in pirate copies for $3/piece. And tell me that doesn't undercut a developer's business.

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Wed May 12, 2004 1:12 pm

I personally purchase games that I might have pirated first. Its on several levels better... sure the fifty bucks hits me in the pocket but really... If you wanna play online you usually have ot have a legit cd code, which can be faked easily but then eventually it wont work etc. A lot of pirated games do not come over perfectly, even ISO's. Having the game is sometimes preferable in the simple light that if your PC crashes, you can reinstall. Sure you can BURN iso's and god knows people do... but being able to send back a scratched disk to eidos is nice too.

In the end, People are evil and if given enough free range they would download your soul. Of course with popups.

Locke Da'averan · Post by **Locke Da'averan** » Wed May 12, 2004 1:16 pm

didn't mean it that somebody downloads a game to try it out, and if he/she likes it goes and buys the real thing. hardly.. what i meant was that ppl try the games out and if they like them, they play them and if they don't like them, they delete them, not that they go and buy it.

yes i know about the asian markets, there's a lot of travel programs on tv's where the guy buys what he wants and the seller doesn't even care if he's on the tape, why should he? the officials in that country ain't gonna see it, and it's everyday life in there, the illegal distribution is almost as worse as it is in europe/US since here the stuff travels all around almost instantly. (not a fact just common sense, i think?)

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed May 12, 2004 1:23 pm

Originally posted by Locke Da'averan
didn't mean it that somebody downloads a game to try it out, and if he/she likes it goes and buys the real thing. hardly.. what i meant was that ppl try the games out and if they like them, they play them and if they don't like them, they delete them, not that they go and buy it.

True. And anyway you cut it, it stinks.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Wed May 12, 2004 11:52 pm

Originally posted by fable
Have you actually gone out and bought any game you downloaded from a pirate, just to "try it out?" I've never heard anybody honestly say that. And be it as it may, it doesn't take a brainiac to know that virtually all those who do use pirates for their games never pay for what they get. Of course this hurts game developers and publishers. Every copy that's pirated is sales lost, and evidence that the game is not doing well. The company doen't get revenues, sales drop, and companies go under. If you think I'm exaggerating, check out some of the markets in Asian cities where US computer games, videos and DVDs are offered in pirate copies for $3/piece. And tell me that doesn't undercut a developer's business.

Saying every copy pirated is a sale lost is one of the "misconceptions" that surronds software piracy.

Not everybody, not even the majority, using pirated games would have purchased the game, if they couldn't get it as a piracy version. This is one of the things that makes it semi-difficult to place statistics about loss of revenue and etc.

Nobody can know how many more copies would have been sold legally, if piracy hadn't exsisted, it could have been none as well as double.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu May 13, 2004 6:08 am

Originally posted by Xandax
Saying every copy pirated is a sale lost is one of the "misconceptions" that surronds software piracy.

What are your figures? 99%? 44%? 2%? You have no more exact knowledge of this than any of the rest of us. But if a person could steal a car without fear of reprisal "just to try it out," then deide whether to pay for it or not, what do you think they'll do? Do you think they'll pay for the car?

I've heard that argument before about "downloading a game to try it," and frankly it's bull, IMO. If they're going to take the effort to find a pirate site, download a game and install it, they obviously wanted the game. All things being equal, they would have paid for it if the pirate hadn't been around. So the sale was lost, and the developer is out of luck and out of pocket.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Thu May 13, 2004 6:51 am

Originally posted by fable
What are your figures? 99%? 44%? 2%? You have no more exact knowledge of this than any of the rest of us. But if a person could steal a car without fear of reprisal "just to try it out," then deide whether to pay for it or not, what do you think they'll do? Do you think they'll pay for the car?
<snip>

Nobody knows - That is excatly my point as to why your statement was faulty.
You don't know that the person downloading piracy software and/or music would ever in a million year have bought the product in the first place.
Take the stole car analogy:
Everybody that steals a car would not neasecearily have bought the car instead, if he couldn't steal it.

You can't equate 1 piracied product with 1 less sold product, because you have no way of knowing that the person would have bought it in the first place.

I'm not talking about using a "testing before buying" argument, and it is not even close to the same. Infact I've not even used that argument in the post you quoted (if at all in this thread).
And no doubt it does cause loss of revenue, and likely also a large loss - I never said that either, just to make sure that this statement isn't attached to me either.

Originally posted by fable

I've heard that argument before about "downloading a game to try it," and frankly it's bull, IMO. If they're going to take the effort to find a pirate site, download a game and install it, they obviously wanted the game. All things being equal, they would have paid for it if the pirate hadn't been around. So the sale was lost, and the developer is out of luck and out of pocket.

Using a pirated product is no where representative with a desire to actually wanting the product if they had to purchase the product. It can be quite easy and requirer no effort at all to get ahold of products.
There is a big difference between wanting a product and wanting a product enought to actually pay for it. And that is at the core of why the "a pirated product is a lost sale" is faulty.

Having known people deeply involved with this scene most of my life, I've seen this over and over again, and at the same time seen it take place on my various places of education over the year. Many people have used piracied software, games or music that they would never have bought in the first place- the only reason they have it - was because they could get it for "free" (or somewhat free) and relative easy.

You don't have any way of knowing if the masses running a pirate Windows XP or Win2K would have bought it if they couldn't have gotten it for free? They could just as well have run a version of Windows 98 instead.

A little personal story to illustrate the point - and I have many of these, because I've been around this for a long time.
Not long ago I was working on a project for a consultation company. Then one of the people there asks me if I had a Windows XP CD he could borrow and install at home (company ran with legal software... I think) - of couse I wouldn't give him my legal version of XP that I've bought for my own money, and thus tell him no. I then instruct him on how he can buy it cheaper (OEM versions rock

).
He tells me that he wasn't really interested in having XP but if he could have it for free he would upgrade. Instead he would just continue running his older version (think it was 98) - or try and get it for free elsewhere.

This is just to illustrate that you can't use the "Every copy that's pirated is sales lost" statement, because it simply doesn't hold.

Therion · Post by **Therion** » Thu May 13, 2004 7:01 am

Originally posted by Xandax
Nobody knows - That is excatly my point as to why your statement was faulty.
You don't know that the person downloading piracy software and/or music would ever in a million year have bought the product in the first place.

[...]

This is just to illustrate that you can't use the "Every copy that's pirated is sales lost" statement, because it simply doesn't hold.

That's just words. It's true, but that doesn't mean that pirating is right or that, say, per 100 pirated copies of a game there will be at the very least some loss for the company who made the game.

It doesn't matter whether they (game companies) lose a lot or less.. by having their products pirated. In fact it shouldn't matter whether they lose anything at all because one is not supposed to pirate at all. But the fact is that they do lose profit because of pirating.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Thu May 13, 2004 7:27 am

Originally posted by Therion
That's just words. It's true, but that doesn't mean that pirating is right or that, say, per 100 pirated copies of a game there will be at the very least some loss for the company who made the game.

It doesn't matter whether they (game companies) lose a lot or less.. by having their products pirated. In fact it shouldn't matter whether they lose anything at all because one is not supposed to pirate at all. But the fact is that they do lose profit because of pirating.

I haven't said anywhere that piracy is right, or that is has to happen, or that companies aren't loosing money and so on, now did I?

So don't attribute me with statements I haven't written/expressed.

Now - What I *did* say was, that you can not say that every copy that is pirated equals a copy not sold, because there is no way of knowing that the copy would infact have been sold.

Think I better leave this thread before I start to get to annoyed.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu May 13, 2004 8:05 am

Having known people deeply involved with this scene most of my life, I've seen this over and over again, and at the same time seen it take place on my various places of education over the year. Many people have used piracied software, games or music that they would never have bought in the first place- the only reason they have it - was because they could get it for "free" (or somewhat free) and relative easy.

With respect, I don't see this. You have no evidence that these people would refrain from buying, if the option to steal wasn't available. The only proof I have to offer is capitalism, which works pretty damn well: where there's a demand, there's a supply, and the supply is purchased. That's not just economy theory, it's human nature.

If you build a shadow economy as pirating does, the demand is undercut.

Will you agree that *most* pirated copies of games would be bought, if pirates didn't exist?

Therion · Post by **Therion** » Thu May 13, 2004 8:43 am

Originally posted by Xandax
I haven't said anywhere that piracy is right, or that is has to happen, or that companies aren't loosing money and so on, now did I? So don't attribute me with statements I haven't written/expressed.

I did not say that you did say that (please, read my post again if you think I'm wrong). I was just trying to point out that.. well, let's keep that for the next one.

Now - What I *did* say was, that you can not say that every copy that is pirated equals a copy not sold, because there is no way of knowing that the copy would infact have been sold.

A point which I did say is true. I, however, find it a weird argument to make as it is not about such details. Not that I think you should not make it, but I personally find it of relatively little importance. That was the point I was trying to make.

Think I better leave this thread before I start to get to annoyed.

I am sorry to see you leave this thread.. and certainly did not mean to offend you or anything. *shrugs*

Kaitsuburi · Post by **Kaitsuburi** » Thu May 13, 2004 8:46 am

Originally posted by fable
With respect, I don't see this. You have no evidence that these people would refrain from buying, if the option to steal wasn't available. The only proof I have to offer is capitalism, which works pretty damn well: where there's a demand, there's a supply, and the supply is purchased. That's not just economy theory, it's human nature. If you build a shadow economy as pirating does, the demand is undercut.

Will you agree that *most* pirated copies of games would be bought, if pirates didn't exist?

Well, how much *most* is will to a large extent depend on the elasticity of demand for those games. In economics, all other things being equal, on the demand side of things, price and quantity are inversely related, i.e. the higher the price, the fewer people willing to purchase at that price (others will refrain, look for a cheaper substitute, etc). Since there are substitutes and games are not a necessity (well, for some they are

), the demand curve for those games would be more elastic than inelastic, i.e. a small change in price would have a larger impact on quantity demanded. Therefore, as Xandax was suggesting, a significant number of people would put off buying the game/look for substitutes/not buy at all because of the high price.

If the demand was less elastic, i.e. there were few substitutes and the game in question were somehow more of a necessity, *most* people would choose to buy legally (i.e. pay $50 rather than $0).

-kaitsuburi

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Thu May 13, 2004 8:53 am

Originally posted by fable
Having known people deeply involved with this scene most of my life, I've seen this over and over again, and at the same time seen it take place on my various places of education over the year. Many people have used piracied software, games or music that they would never have bought in the first place- the only reason they have it - was because they could get it for "free" (or somewhat free) and relative easy.

With respect, I don't see this. You have no evidence that these people would refrain from buying, if the option to steal wasn't available. The only proof I have to offer is capitalism, which works pretty damn well: where there's a demand, there's a supply, and the supply is purchased. That's not just economy theory, it's human nature. If you build a shadow economy as pirating does, the demand is undercut.

Will you agree that *most* pirated copies of games would be bought, if pirates didn't exist?

Sure - lets look at it from a capitalistic view point, if you wish.

We can look at consumers preferences:

Imagine a person and a computergame.
This person then has to find out if the game is worth the value of purcase, before he buys it, right?
That is because there is a cost-benefit aspect to purchasing products.
Now some people will purchase it and others wont, because each persons preference is different.

Now the same person can get a pirated version for practically no cost and no effort.
Now there is another cost-benefit aspect connected to this product, and with simple economics in a capitalistic market the preferences of people will shift, due to the shift in the cost-benefit.

We can also look at it from another angle in a capitalistic econnomy, namely a simplistic pricing policy:

Suppose a product comes out, a portion of people find it to expensive and will not purcase it due to the price. Then the products price gets lowered, then more people will be interested in it because of the lower price.
Sounds plausible? Well - that is why sales are such a big hit amongst the consumers. People buying stuff they don't normally need or would have bought.

Of couse - with these examples - there is no consideration for the real life constraint of the legal aspect, but that wasn't really importent either.

With pirated products so easy to get ahold of, that it barely requiers an effort to aquire it, would it not be logical to think that people would use these illegal products, even if they had no preference for using the legal version in the first place?

It is the same with all other goods in the market - if we remove the legal aspect once more. Make products easy and cheap (free) to acquirer and peoples preferences for said products change - simple laws of economics.

There is no capitalistic proof, infact I would say, that it would be more proof for the oppersite.

Edit: *bah* Kaitsuburi was faster.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu May 13, 2004 8:57 am

@Kaitsuburi, don't show off. I was studying economic theory when we were still exchanging woven flax for sharp stones.

The demand curve is obviously linked to price as well as other factors (marketing, advertising, distribution venue availability, purchasing power, *perceived* purchasing power, cultural imperatives, etc). Your conclusion has more wiggle words, but it says pretty much what I suggested.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Thu May 13, 2004 9:00 am

Originally posted by Therion
I did not say that you did say that (please, read my post again if you think I'm wrong). I was just trying to point out that.. well, let's keep that for the next one.

A point which I did say is true. I, however, find it a weird argument to make as it is not about such details. Not that I think you should not make it, but I personally find it of relatively little importance. That was the point I was trying to make.

The reason it peeved me was because you quoted a post of mine, and said in the very first sentence:

"That's just words. It's true, but that doesn't mean that pirating is right ..."

Well - I weren't debating or even touching the right/wrong aspect. I was adressing the "Every copy that's pirated is sales lost" argument from Fable, as the only one in that post.

That is why I felt you attributted me with the notion that I defended piracy and that is why I got annoyed.
It may not have been ment that way - but when quoting my post and posting that right after, then that is the way it is read.

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Thu May 13, 2004 9:29 am

ehem. On several occasions I have purchased games I pirated before hand. I can list, Hitman 2, Warcraft 3, Call of Duty, Half Life... theres more... Its simple. I dload check it out then buy it.. of course now aday's all I have is this work connection and I cant offord to Dload games movies etc so I dont. I just buy like I did Hitman Contracts.

I would have never bought Madden 2004 for my pc... I have it for xbox, but I wanted to see some stuff with the pc version see if its better. It wasn't.. no proven loss of revenue.

Although I will admit I haven't bought every game that came my way for free.... its just now aday's It's seriusly just me demo'ng the game. Especially the ones you have to play online with cd keys and codes etc, I want the hardware.

Kaitsuburi · Post by **Kaitsuburi** » Thu May 13, 2004 9:42 am

@RandomThug -- what is your feeling about demos then? Do you feel they are not enough to give you a good idea about the game?

@fable - I'm sorry about the lingo, it does sound c0cky I'll be more considerate

-kaitsuburi

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Thu May 13, 2004 10:02 am

@Kait no its the waiting for ever for gamespy to let me dload, its the half of a level thats not even in the real game. Its the fact its just as easy to get the whole thing. Sometimes demo's aren't even released till after the game.. like hitman contracts.. you could have dloaded the game before the demo.

Demo's rock but with the subscription services and crap out there, its annoying. Trust me I know Im wrong when it comes to the "Right or Wrong" of it... I am just saying that the misconception is that all who have pirated are never paying for thier product. As a younger kid I wouldnt have but as the adult I am now, If i REALLY dig a game I'll buy it to show support.

Kaitsuburi · Post by **Kaitsuburi** » Thu May 13, 2004 10:34 am

Originally posted by RandomThug
@Kait no its the waiting for ever for gamespy to let me dload, its the half of a level thats not even in the real game. Its the fact its just as easy to get the whole thing.

One thing that game companies can do (I don't know if some do it) is release good-quality, long demos using p2p (like bittorent), i.e. the same channels that pirated stuff goes on. Some linux distros (and was it Blizzard too?) utilize p2p, making download a breeze (just a few days ago, I got the new Knoppix off BitTorrent; it came down in a flash!).

Since demos (even good quality ones) are obviously much smaller than the full game, making them as easy to get as the pirated versions, using the same channels, is likely to decrease some of the demand for pirated versions (you would save a lot of bandwidth, too).

Somehow, though, I don't see this happening. For the big corporations and interest groups, p2p is inherently evil and they would rather see it shut down. Well, that's not very likely to happen; even if they continue with their lawsuits, new things will come out.

A grand DRM scheme, on the other hand, using quantum cryptography and hardware level copy protection is going to make cracks very hard, but will likely through so many consumer rights out of the window that it will take a lot of debate/resistance/time to come into existence.

At least in the case of games, nice readily available demos (even half-games) could offer some solutions.

-kaitsuburi