Activision is a worse offender still selling games that are extremely old at full price and the reason is the same as for GTA V.
It sells. While it's BS that it's still a high price all we can hope for is more CD Projekt Red people where it's barely been a year and already there is a GOTY edition at $50 while the main is at $40.
Comment has been collapsed.
so you think a game like GTA 5, which is still selling fairly well should discount itself just because? When the game stops selling fairly well it'll get reduced in price.. That's how it works..
Comment has been collapsed.
When the game stops selling fairly well it'll get reduced in price.. That's how it works..
Oh I know that's how it works. That's why I'm saying Activision still sells their COD games at full price because they know people will buy it at that price.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think you can find The Witcher 3 GOTY on GOG for $30 bucks
Comment has been collapsed.
Exactly. Games get cheap FAST now, much faster in fact. Basically every AAA is down to 35-40 from 60 within weeks if not a couple months after release, and even games with season-type content get fully packaged within a year or two for the original price.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree they add DLC's for free quite often so i can see them keeping the price higher, and also agree activision is greedy scum.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes. GTA V is a terrible example to base this argument on--it's the exception that proves the rule.
Comment has been collapsed.
As someone who hasn't played GTA V is it all MP only content or is it additions to the SP since all the updates I've seen are for the MP only experience and while that's what most people go for it's not what I go for in a game. Plus if you think that adding fresh content allows them to sell the game at the same price than I guess it's just a GGG developer of CD Projekt Red and other devs to keep updating games and not sell them for $60 still.
Sorry that last sentence came off as a bit dick, but that's just how I see it.
Comment has been collapsed.
if you honestly think streaming is the future of gaming you're foolish, people have money to burn, but nobody is going to rent games only.. Any game that tried that would fail pretty hard....
Comment has been collapsed.
you earn the medal for the most stupid f on this thread. Yeah and Netflix doesn't exist, and Spotify will never work...
Comment has been collapsed.
Music and series/movies is not the same as gaming though. You can't really compare them...
Comment has been collapsed.
Nowadays, when a game's life expectancy is under a month, with 5-10 hours of single-player content in most of them (assuming it doesn't pad itself out with endless repetitive side-missions coughAssassin'sCreedcough)? Not to mention that EA, MicroSoft, and Sony already started up something like that.
Comment has been collapsed.
I play RPGs, but very few cRPGs are made nowadays.
Even then, most modern cRPGs last about 30-40 hours, which is still comfortably in a month's worth of play time, even for a working person. (For example, I have 150 hours in Mass Effect 1, which is one of the older cRPGs that were made before the genre was totally consolified. That was 6 or 7 full runs, most on Insanity, doing every possible thing you can do in a play through, including visiting every landable planet. Same amount of full runs in ME2 lasted 120 hours in total.)
But I assume you are referring more like to the open world games like Skyrim, which are more of sandboxes, since the real goal for most players is to just fuck around in them. Or, sometimes the game itself pretty much points every possible arrow in the direction of fucking around instead of doing the story missions. (coughMafia3cough)
Comment has been collapsed.
I was not really thinking at Skyrim (even if it crossed my mind), 30-50h is still much more than 5-10h.... my last RPG is DRAGON'S DOGMA : DARK ARISEN (2013 on console but 2016 on steam) with 100h. Like you said Mass effect is a good example too.
Only 7-12H in single player campaign is a turn off for me (i don't say i don't play it but i enjoy less).
Comment has been collapsed.
Based on my experience and that of my friends and family, 30-40 hrs a month does not fit "comfortably" in the schedule of most "working people". Unless, of course, you don't have any family, friends, or other interests. Don't forget cooking, cleaning, excercise.. kids?
Your taking a rather narrow view of who gamers are, in my opinion.
On the other hand, I appreciate your historical recount of piracy and the pricing of content. I also agree with others that GTA 5 is a bad example of the pricing issue and market dynamics that your concerned with.
Comment has been collapsed.
To be fair, as with any technology, this will get better over time. Example.. touchscreens
Comment has been collapsed.
you earn the medal for the most stupid f on this thread.
Congrats. You earn the medal and maybe something else for the most rude person in this thread.
Comment has been collapsed.
Man you don't have to be an asshole when someone doesn't feel the way you do. I don't care for people being disrespectful like this so I'll be adding you to my blacklist.
Comment has been collapsed.
Please do, some people are spineless coward, I wasn't educated that way.
Comment has been collapsed.
This has nothing to do with bravery or cowardice. While they weren't all that tactful, you did just escalate it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It doesn't, it's not about being tactful, tactful is the cancer that got trump elected instead of arguing with rational arguments.
Comment has been collapsed.
At this point, I can't tell if you're trolling, or just being an asshole.
1st of all, what the hell does Donald Trump have to do with gaming. Other than the shitty meme games
2nd of all, you talk about people being "cancer". What does this have to do with anything this thread is about.
3rd of all, what is your main point/argument because you keep jumping all around. I'm lost at this point.
The $1 sale for a year's worth of OnePlay was a worthwhile investment imo, since you get the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. franchise and also 3-5 LEGO titles. That alone is worth $1. This was the only time I've "rented" a video game.
Comment has been collapsed.
My point I think is best explained by my OP and this:
"The problem is people are completely uneducated on primordial but old commercial market rules.
Copies (manufactured and even more so digital) of single product have always dropped in price overtime, why? because value of said product always decrease overtime, why? because the "people"s job" was done a long-time ago, and either these people move on to another job or it becomes annuity which means speculation, why? Because you when you are artificially maintaining price of a value that is decreasing your are diverting money from the system and further pushing for the devaluation of both the market as a whole ie. other's people's job and eventually your own.
Now that'll be too long to explain why speculation in any form is bad, thus why this pricing scheme will end destroying the video game market but sure, I'll let people conform to pre-fabricated excuses to defend multi-million companies until they don't have money to buy any game and these companies don't sell anymore. But I like to try."
Comment has been collapsed.
So basically your random remarks about cowardice, Trump and tact served no lucid purpose? :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Must have been on some other page. All I see above is restating your points. You haven't revisited your tangent about the subjects Uroboros mentioned in any manner. That may take a while though, because I'm going to lay down something that may completely derail your entire worldview, and recovery is liable to be a gradual process. Ready? Sitting down? Okay, here we go:
Contrary to a commonly held misconception, pointless hostility doesn't make you intelligent, passionate, or - ESPECIALLY in total safety and anonymity over the internet - brave. Your random insults added no logical or rational content to your (apples-and-oranges) comparison whatsoever. You're just one of many people who confuses anger with sincerity.
Since this is the internet, and I happened to mention anger, the next post is the one where you vehemently deny any and all emotional investment in your burst of arbitrary vitriol, since "emotion = bad and illogical" is part of the script for this sort of thing. Go ahead. I won't be reading it since I already know how it goes, but even knowing that, you won't be able to help it (or your inevitable dragged-in tangents about unrelated political subjects) regardless.
By the by: Unless you're operating on some strange non-Gregorian calendar, you might want to make sure you know things like "what year it is" before calling anyone else stupid.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ok thanks bye, have a good Holiday in Hypocriland until we tear it the fuck down to pieces and you burn in the fire of it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Then stay safe in the knowledge that your message will remain known only to yourself, I guess? :U
Comment has been collapsed.
Just tell them that you already posted a perfectly airtight rebuttal to every single one of their arguments and ask them to take it on faith. Apparently this individual considers saying you explained something to mean you actually did, so they're obligated to take your word for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, that would be democracy, the media spin game, political moves gone wrong, and the impending real-life version of Idiocracy.
Your example is steeped in false equivalence and relies on a bogey-strawman.
One can be tactful while being rational, but it's quite difficult to remain rational and impartial in the face of someone who cannot maintain at least a neutral demeanor. Your behavior is a big secondary cause for dissent from your opinions.
Comment has been collapsed.
He'd have a hard time competing with you, but congratulations, you got the trophy for "biggest ass to post in the last week".
Comment has been collapsed.
Not rent games?
so XBOX Live, PSN, EA ACCESS ...
none of them count?
Comment has been collapsed.
Xbox live and PSN are just services which allow gamers to access online services for the respective consoles..
As for EA Access and PSN+ I don't know how successful those services are ultimately going to be, In the case of PSN+ you're getting over 500 games for 20 dollars a month.. You're suggestion of paying that for a month of one game would never work out..
Comment has been collapsed.
XB Live and PSN also give 'free' games while subscribed.. so 'renting' games
AND it's YOUR suggestion, not mine dude.
I'm saying plenty of ppl rent games
Comment has been collapsed.
they give you free games which you can keep as long as you get them while they are free and keep your subscription to the service active.. That's not really the same as renting them.. Also I didn't suggest it, the op said about streaming games, which is akin to renting them.. I just said that would never be a successful business model, as people aren't willing to pay for an hour or two of gameplay..
Sure people rent games,, PC gamers.. not so much..
Comment has been collapsed.
That's exactly the same as renting them..
You lose them once you stop paying.. You didn't specify for 1 or 2 hours
But renting is totally different to game streaming, which i agree won't take off until the networks can support it.
Here in Australia? that won't happen for decades
Comment has been collapsed.
I guess if you want to break it down to a technical level it's kind of the same as renting them I guess.. I think of streaming 1 game for a few hours would be nearly identical to renting.. (you did read the Op right?) Sure it's not a physical copy but that doesn't change the fact you're borrowing the game for a set amount of time..
Streaming won't take off because even with you only owning a license to play the game, the gamer still feels like he owns his library of games, Where as paying to play games doesn't give a person the same sense of ownership of the property.. Also no streaming service offers up new games.. Even EA access you're getting access to the previous years sports titles, which Gamestop sells for like 10 bucks once the newest version comes out.. Paying for EA Access or PS+ offers you a monthly payment for old games.. Not really an ideal situation, nor something that will keep people who like new games engaged..
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes i did read the OP.
But your point regarding owning the product aside, (which i agree with), it also won't take off if it doesn't work well due to buffering and poor performance etc..
I really don't see how they can have it look/play as well as a local copy (that's the point i was making)
Comment has been collapsed.
Wait, you don't know Sony offers "stream games from PS3 anywhere" thingie?
Comment has been collapsed.
yes, I actually subscribed to PS+ for a while, but the fact remains, most of the games are over 5 years old and the few decent titles anyone with a playstation 3 already owns anyway.
As for PC gamers buying in on PS+, yeah you'll get access to some games you can't access anywhere else.. It'll cost you 20 dollars a month.. Hardly the 5 dollars for 2 hours of game play the op suggested.. You get 400 - 500 games for 20 a month.. But the games are old and aside from the Playstation exclusive games which were never on PC, everyone owns the good games already..
Comment has been collapsed.
unless you rent individual titles at $4.99 for a 4 hour rental.
Comment has been collapsed.
who would rent a game for 4.99 an hour.. that would be pretty stupid..
Comment has been collapsed.
It was more of a example streaming games already is here, now only thing they need for ultimate DRM is "better technology".
Will it happen next year? Of course not.
But future is already behind the fence, showing it's bloodthirsty claws ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
even if they get the perfect DRM nobody is going to pay to play games for the minute or hour, it just won't happen.. I suppose maybe really wealthy people will do it because most of them will just do stuff others can't because it makes them feel a sense of pride in themselves.. Like that guy who bough the Wu Tang Album for only himself..
The normal gamer isn't going to shell out cash to play per minute or per hour.. A reason exist those 900 lines which were all over the place in the 80's and 90's don't exist anymore..
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, they will still sell "never ending option". For $100 - like they do now, just spliting it into game and Season Pass.
But they will rule and consumers will be allowed to happily consume.
Comment has been collapsed.
To be fair, though for Live and PSN there are additional features other than just games, like holding console games with online features for ransom. However, yeah, EA/Origin Access is an example of a fairly decent (it hurts me to say it about EA T_T) subscription program.
Comment has been collapsed.
Main fact is that most of the world in not covered with stable and fast internet connection for streaming games, not even I have one lol We're talking about things that are still far because the market is not ready
Comment has been collapsed.
let's say 2/3 years, it's a matter of software technology like codecs (AV1) and server technology.
Comment has been collapsed.
i personally have never rented a game and never will i collect games after i play them so that i can play them again years later if i so chose, if i just wanted to play a game for a few days i would just pirate it or borrow it from a friend like most people would,not to mention i payed good money for a powerful pc why would i want to play something in lower quality with no graphics options in a over worked server farm that will likely be DDoS every other day, as far as the future goes if VR takes off like expected that will hold back streaming of games for many many more years with the bandwidth and server power that would be required.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, so do I choose because I can now. In a few years, because the original incentives for game streaming will be as compelling as Spotify or Netflix, it'll become the norm especially if piracy disappears on the side.
Comment has been collapsed.
i dont really think the streaming tech will ever fully catch up in the gaming industry with the current 4k and coming 8k displays and virtual reality gaming the demands on these services with the low latency required for them to become popular i think they will become less popular over time instead of more popular at least until giganet is common in most every household and much much more powerful servers are designed possibly quantum computing thats starting to look like its not to far off..
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree. They may try, but every such attempt has failed so far. The main reason being the internet and ever growing size of the games... But also, who'd pay $12 to play a game for a day? That's a week or two of food in like 60% of the countries in the world. The only way this would work is if there's enough crazy people to actually pay them... and those people would have to have really fast internet too... so numbers are even smaller...
Comment has been collapsed.
From where did you both got that 12$ per day for 1 game? What if you will need to pay 12$ for a month for entire library (like netflix games) ?
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't know, OP wrote that price so I just went with it for no other reason than it being ridiculous.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thats the point. This discussion have no sense. We dont have any information yet about steaming games, specially the pricing. However the trend is that you pay less for more content like Netflix or Origin Access.
Comment has been collapsed.
Zajebana situacija, ne bi me ni cudilo da to uvedu u skorijoj buducnosti.
Comment has been collapsed.
Netflix WAS 12$ with a huge library, now it's 19$ with a smaller and smaller library. Add 2/3 years more mixed with regular company business attitude and you'll understand why OF COURSE, if there's no other way for you to play a popular game than pay 12$ for a day, you'll have to.
Comment has been collapsed.
$19 for Netflix? I only pay $11 to stream up to 4 devices
Comment has been collapsed.
yea i was still only paying $8 a month up until last week when they finally increased it to $10 a month on me,if it was $19 a month i would just cancel as my cable provider offers all there channels shows for steaming for $20 a month including hbo stars and showtime.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, try $8.99/m to stream HD to 2 devices simultaneously.
As for the game renting/streaming debate, I don't think anyone here has a magic ball to see into the future. It is certainly possible that someone will figure out the right price/library/ease of use to make a game renting service viable. I'd guess it wouldn't be streaming initially, because of lag/file sizes, etc. Plenty of people here have already brought up technical or business/licensing challenges, but they're just that, challenges. Not insurmountable. And even for the folks who say "I collect games, so I can play them in the future, I'd never rent", I get the gut reaction, but I think at some point the extreme cost of trying to maintain that ability will give way to the overwhemling utility and value of a service that you pay a relatively small monthly fee to use, and provides access to essentially all games. Sure it'll take some trial and error to figure out what that sweet spot is for pricing, and to provide the right mix of games, and to make the process seemless for the end user. But I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone like Valve pulled it off at some point. Then again, like I said at the beginning, it may not ever work out, for any number of reasons.
I would personally love a service that I pay say $15/m for and get access to a vast library of games. That's more than I currently spend per month on average for buying games, but if it provided access to all/most of the games I'd ever want to play, that's a great deal.
Just my $0.02
Comment has been collapsed.
Just my $0.02
I like this a lot more than I should.
Comment has been collapsed.
Agreed - and by the time you get to 4k content and above - no codec is going to be able to compress them enough to even be stable over the range of internet connections we currently have - in the UK many rural locations are still served by copper cable telephone connections :P
Comment has been collapsed.
In my locale, we're stuck with a singular ISP because we're one of the last existing municipal telephone services. The wiring is old and shoddy, Kingston Communications own the rights to the area, and any bigger company wanting to provide coverage has to deal with them AND the bad lines and such.
Currently paying £35 a month for 450kbps downstream and 50kbps up. 150gb limit a month, but given I'm on a discontinued package (and refused to upgrade) my data usage from midnight to 8am isn't counted. The pricing is worse on the newer tariffs, and the rollout of fiber-optic connections won't get anywhere near my area for at least another year. \:3/
Technology isn't really the issue when it comes to streaming, it's the logistics and business policies that orbit around it. Fiber-optic is good enough for what we want, but getting the coverage, reliability of service, and a certain guaranteed lack of jitter / packet loss, it's a tricky beast to balance. Short distance streaming is fine, but the longer the trip, the weirder it gets. I mean, online twitch-reflex gaming has been around for a long time, but hit registry and hitbox issues are still a huge thing. Again, tech vs logistics issues. Sad face~
Comment has been collapsed.
Playstation Now already exists though, and people buy the service. That's a game streaming service - you stream PS3 games to play them on your PC or PS4.
Not that I think that in the future all games will be that way, but it's a valid type of service and people already provide it/use it.
Comment has been collapsed.
The main problem I see with streaming games though is that you need a good internet connection to be able to play it well. While it's certainly possible in the richer countries (but still not for everyone), most of the world still has unstable or bad internet. Before that changes, streaming games will never become a huge thing in gaming.
Comment has been collapsed.
Guess you don't remember OnLive.
Streaming/Cloud gaming will never succeed.
Comment has been collapsed.
You mean the OnLive that worked so great even on my laptop that it was bought by Sony and is being developed for the future?
Comment has been collapsed.
Sony bought the rights to their technology/patents, they have no intention of bringing back that type of service.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that's the technology behind Playstation Now
Comment has been collapsed.
Yep, I should have specified it won't be back as a standalone service such as OnLive, it fits nicely into an already established service. I'm fairly confident though it will never be the main way we get our games in the future.
Comment has been collapsed.
Touchscreen evolution was primarily just a technology issue (as well as perhaps a design and ease of use thing). With streaming, it's not just the technology behind data transfer speeds, it's also their reliability and coverage. High speed internet has been available for a long time now, and yet due to the logistics of it all, there are still an awful lot of unreliable and/or slow connections around even in the most developed areas. If it were just a matter of technology alone, time would usually sweep the problems aside. When the whole logistical issues enter into it, that's where the big hitches are.
Comment has been collapsed.
pulling non-sensical out of your ass, it's indeed behind Playstation Now, and Sony already declared that that's the future of gaming. and I even kind of mention the reason why greedy companies will of course go towards streaming as soon as they can.
Comment has been collapsed.
I read the whole wall of text, and as far as I could tell they were upset that GTA V didn't get a bigger discount in the Winter sale.
Comment has been collapsed.
lol yea mostly... and its like the only game on steam that has not dropped its price that actually deserves to maintain its price because of all the free DLC they add every few months, now if he was bitching about activisions games prices then yea then he would have reason to complain they not only dont lower there prices by much ever they also sell a crap ton of DLC's on the side for said games.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not dropped it's price simply because it's still selling well. It's supply and demand.
If people don't like the way a game is priced, or they don't like the DRM or microtransactions or whatever else, then the solution is simple. Don't buy it and don't play it. You don't need to pirate it - just find something you agree with to support instead. If gamers collectively could manage to do that then we would have the industry that we wanted.
If we end up in a nightmarish future of totalitarian DRM and paying a fortune to rent shit games it'll be because too many gamers were stupid and supported bad practices just because they absolutely always had to play the latest popular overhyped titles no matter what the cost.
Of course I still have enough obsolete consoles and physical media in my spare bedroom to last several lifetimes, so whatever...
Comment has been collapsed.
That's a kind of an overstatement, don't you think? I agree that Steam sales have decreased in quality, but digital game sales have increased in 2016. So, to say that buying games legally is dead is a misnomer. I bought a few smaller games that I'd had my eye on, no AAA titles though.
Comment has been collapsed.
people kept clamoring about steam not having refunds, for years and years and years.. when steam finally introduced refunds, they killed off their better deals.. Now people complain about them not having great deals anymore.. You wanted refunds.. well you got them... now don't complain about sales...
Comment has been collapsed.
wtf is this argument that refund, which is a legal obligation in most civilised country of the world (so maybe not in the US), has anything to do with pricing?
how exactly is your item being refund automatically but then removed from your library has anything to do with the price of the game?
Comment has been collapsed.
With the flash sales, everyone would request a refund if the item went on sale for lower than they'd previously bought it. Refunds hurt Steam and game developers, bad for business; no more flash sales.
Comment has been collapsed.
Refunds give consumers confidence, good for business. Thousands and thousands of businesses do just fine with reasonable refund policies; the video game industry will learn and adapt.
Comment has been collapsed.
i agree refunds are in the better interest of us consumers, it protects us from crap developers scamming people using hype like no mans land did to many people,hell i think they should give more then 2 hours game play for a refund on a $60 game considering it takes a good hour to get your settings right or make some of these under developed games even run on our systems and then be forced to watch opening credits and intros..
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, making flash deals a full sale deal is just impossible, technology isn't here yet.
They saw people will buy more expensive games anyway, so there is no reason to make games cheaper. Simple as that.
Comment has been collapsed.
I believe the flash sales were removed due to the whole investigation into steam's business practices / monopoly / etc. If I remember correctly, some moderation body decided that the flash sales were unethical or misleading (when combined with issues of devs hitching their prices during holidays to reduce the impact of discounts). I enjoyed the hunt of the flash sales but really the prices are about the same across the board, only now we have access to them throughout each sale period. The lowest selling point was simply reserved for flash sales previously, and more often than not it seems we just get that from the get-go now.
It was a cunning way to apply a sense of urgency to buying games without actually applying any hostile pressure. Sorta like how they learned to use steep discounts to spur on our mentality of "I should buy this now while it's super cheap!", which was a great trap given how many games we buy but never get around to playing until much much later.
Comment has been collapsed.
Eh, it's just marketing, same as any other industry. If someone can't stick to a budget, maybe they should hide their credit card somewhere until the sale ends. Sure, I've spent more than I intended before but that applies to much more than games; I don't personally see it as a trap.
Comment has been collapsed.
I kinda meant 'trap' in the softer "Oh boy, buy 2 get 1 free?" manner.
It's nothing hostile or dishonest, but it's certainly a clever way to leverage sales power.
Comment has been collapsed.
It was not clamouring, it should have been their legal obligation from the get-go. It is surprising they weren't fined to oblivion for dragging their asses this long with it.
Comment has been collapsed.
And I really should replace this 4-year old Logitech keyboard soon, I guess. Not the first time I see it skipping letters in the past days around the wasd area (which is funny, because I am a cursor keys guy with video games).
Comment has been collapsed.
Well actually he does have a point kinda - even with steam we are not buying the game - merely buying a licence to keep it in our account and use it when we like where we like.
If steam goes bust - unlikely but possible - then what happens to all those games in your account? You can't access them anymore... whereas with a physical copy you can always reinstall.
See we haven't "bought" a game ever on steam - merely the right to play it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's been said plenty of times before, but Valve claimed that if in the unlikely event of some kind of service breakdown, they would patch the system in some manner that would still let you have access to your games/content even without Valve there. I dunno how that would work in terms of server bandwidth and downloads, but they thought ahead on that.
Besides, the way I see it, your license doesn't just magically expire because Steam stops functioning. You'd just need to acquire a copy elsewhere, and thanks to the magic and freedom of the internet, that's not too hard.
Comment has been collapsed.
I realize you don't actually own the game, but the license was the same even with physical media such as a CD or DVD. The only thing that has changed is the method of distribution.
Anyways, I buy stuff on Steam because it's convenient, supports the developers, and (hopefully) will keep you from getting any malware/viruses from running random programs off the internet. If the service went down, I'd have no qualms about pirating the games I've already "bought". And the Steam ecosystem is so large everyone uses it, I'd love to see GOG become a viable competitor. I do try to avoid intrusive DRM like denuvo, and I'll be picking up DOOM soon now that they've removed it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Supply and demand, if there is a demand for pricing people will pay it, if anything piracy drives up cost. Look at the film and music industry, concert and cinema tickets are very high.
The consumers expectancy of getting something initially priced at $60 to fall below 50% discount whilst remaining highly popular is unrealistic. That however is my personal opinion and not one you share obviously.
Everything is priced highly, however there are still a lot of good deals to be had. Piracy is never an option that should be considered if the quality of the product is to remain high, the more you take from a developer or distributor, the more likely they will cut costs and give a subpar product.
Comment has been collapsed.
Unless you can become a force to be reckoned with and actually hurt them through piracy.
But the pirates are losing, because of the "bounty hunters" that get special privileges to hunt them down.
No pirate can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit, the deeper pocket just keeps hitting them till they are near bankruptcy and take a deal.
Comment has been collapsed.
Prices are perhaps too high, but you'll be hard pressed to convince me piracy is good for quality. All it will do is lower quality to keep profit margins high.
Comment has been collapsed.
Piracy in music as made the number of new, quality and interesting music BLOW UP. I think that the way quality lowers, is when people are ready to buy shit anyway, either because they don't have a choice in buying/pirating or because medias/PR made shit popular enough for it to have incentive. I think cinema is the best example, but recent music too.
Comment has been collapsed.
Music is on deaths door as an industry because of ever easier ways to get hold of it for free. You are less likely to get 20 bands on a label because they can't afford to fund you, now maybe 1 or 2 "make it" and go on heavy touring schedules to fund themselves and turn a huge profit. Touring prices are sky high, physical album sales are tiny, even streaming sites are running at a loss. The only things that remain hugely popular are the well funded top labels as they can afford to heavily promote and tour their top artists. The days of the indie label are dying except some special cases or the few bands that tap into the piracy market.
Again, cinema is constantly upping its pricing point to the point of becoming almost unwatchable. New inventive movies are shoved aside for reboots and sequels which are definite money makers.
Comment has been collapsed.
Labels are so 1992. :)
The labels are part of the problem, seeking out huge profits for the 50 middle-men between the artist and the consumer.
The archaic music, movie, and television giants are trying with all their might to work against progress and keep filling their pockets, clinging to a business model invented when everything was on a physical carrier. These dinosaurs would rather kill an entire industry than change their ways. Heck, even oil companies are finally seeing the light and moving towards renewable, yet the entertainment fossils are still heading towards the cliff.
Comment has been collapsed.
With a friend recently moving into the industry I've been given second hand lectures on the subject daily, I'm far from an expert but I have been given an insiders opinion which is what I'm drawing upon.
I agree, labels and top media entities are against change. Thing is, they still rake it in. Piracy kills the small guys trying to change things as they can't take the financial hit or offer the financial security these moguls can.
The main problem with the piracy argument is 90% of people who pirate do it borne of greed. I'd argue very few are for some form of change to the system or do it to improve the industry. Obviously I can't back that up with fact, but again you'd be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.
No matter how I look at it, pirating narrows the options, the big guys get less opposition as the smaller guys can't financially take the piracy loss. The big guys are more likely to re-sell successful products than take a chance on something new. Across all industries we get that, they even have started dressing up reboots or sequels with new titles...,
Call of Duty 73, FIFA 17, Madden 17, Assassins Creed 4
Star Wars 9, Indiana Jones 4, Rocky 7, Blade Runner, Total Recall
Collaboration after collaboration of the same singers, remastered old albums, covers for days, "10th/20th/30th" anniversary songs.
Heroes: Reborn, Westworld, Fraiser, Joey.
Everything seems to be geared towards a sequel or spin off or reboot of an existing successful product with a narrow margin for anything new. Things are getting stretched out now to have 3 or 4 "episodes" which used to just have one, be it packaged in DLC to films having a trilogy based off 1 book(The Hobbit) I definitely think piracy has a hand in that as new things garner a huge needless risk. Quality is decreasing.
These sequels, reboots, etc used to be there, but not as prevelent, they're the norm now. Why risk a new IP when you can get definite sales off an existing one.
Edit: I'll also add its getting so ridiculous that re-boots are getting re-booted twice. See Spiderman. Easier to re-sell Spiderman than it is to sell Howard the Duck.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Supply and demand" doesn't mean shit. It's a very little window through which you can look at business. As for Piracy driving up cost, please explain how mechanically piracy rises price?
The thing is, there's a good price for everyone, and that's why I never pirate Square-Enix games. I have them all, got them after a few years with great bundle, so I don't twice before getting Mankind Divided which is barely 6 month old at 15$.
But GTA V? It's THEIR fault if 4 years after it's release, they've sold the maximum of copies they could at full retail, then 30$, but millions of other people will or have already pirated it, finished it, and waited way too long for a good price to come up, especially 4 years after it's declining value, especially if you hear about bans, especially if in fact you don't care about online.
Comment has been collapsed.
So your point is that Rockstar and EA are losing money because they don't drop the price on their games even more? I'm not sure if that would be true that they would continue to sell games at the discounts they do. The more likely way explanation is that they simply don't have to give bigger discounts because they are earning enough money anyway.
Comment has been collapsed.
If an item is in demand, the price reflects the demand. Apple base their business around making items seem desirable and in low quantity keeping costs high. Diamonds are literally abundant but high in price because of supply and demand.
Piracy doesn't raise cost in terms of making the game, but the lower sales lead to pricing points becoming higher to reflect loss of sales. Its all about profit margins not product creation cost, we as the consumer end up suffering
GTAV is good. People still want it and play it. Why lower your profit margin on something that is still selling well? If it starts to sell badly they'll lower prices. Thats what all products do, they remain high in price until selling them lower gives them a better return. If you don't want to wait, tough, there's enough that financially its viable to keep doing so. 50% on one of the best games out there and still in high demand is a decent deal.
Comment has been collapsed.
Then why is Apple rising it's prices even though they're selling less and less? Because of your logic, called the "stooge syndrome", look it up ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
Go steal your games, go spout your nonsense which has been proven incorrect time and time again.
Don't though, try and make yourself sound clever at the expense of someone else by inventing terms like "stooge syndrome" which doesn't even exist and you probably meant "scrooge" which tenuously exists.
Comment has been collapsed.
Here is the definition: http://rabble.ca/babble/babble-banter/stooge-syndrome
These are people like you who would defend nazis in times of war, because "jews are stealing people", and that's how the unfair politic is so it's right and we should defend the government.
Yeah you are exactly that kind. But at this point there's no argumentation, I can't believe and thanks for reminded and those around me that in 2017 there are still people to spew that non-sense argument that hasn't existed for 6 or 10 years http://www.digitaltrends.com/movies/illegal-file-sharing-isnt-stealing-heres-why/
Comment has been collapsed.
You just used a forum to define a word. It doesn't even show up on a quick google search. You then did what every good internet troll does and turns the debate into "Godwins Law". You don't agree so you may as well be aligned with Hitler.
Nonsense is one word.
Stop being aloof and acting like you are better than everyone. Especially those who disagree, at the beginning it was an interesting debate, now its pointless rabble.ca.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's actually philosophical term, but a french one. It took time for someone to notice the Godwin point, which in turn, is a forum word.
It stopped being a debate when you stopped arguing.
Comment has been collapsed.
Godwin's Law isn't an internet term, its the name of the creator of the law applied to people on the internet. Someone didn't randomly say in the middle of a debate "Godwin's Law" then Godwin showed up.
You're boring now, was fun for a bit, but everything you say falls down when challenged. 6/10, a good try.
Comment has been collapsed.
I hate to pull a meddling butthole move on you here Wallister, but I think you're wasting your energy here.
Some kinds of confirmation bias / ego are simply impenetrable, and along with what appears to be a language barrier, some moving goalposts, a little ad hominem and barely related anecdotes, and this is a perfect mix for a classic facepalm broth.
You know how it's always best to avoid butting heads in youtube comment gutters or trying to engage in constructive discussion in replies to a facebook chain-letter? This right here is pretty much just like that. Some people just aren't interested in an honest dialogue, so you'll need more than having stainless steel counterpoints to prove them wrong in their own minds, y'know?
Be free! It's nearly christmas! You don't have to do this, take a vacation!
Comment has been collapsed.
"Challenged"? Was there ever such a thing on this thread?
I don't think so, you completely missed the point of the stooge syndrome, and while I expected you to Godwin Point, which is indeed an internet fabricated term that has absolutely no philosophical or deterministic value (I would cite Bourdieu, but you probably don't remotely know who he is).
In some way, I'd even say the the Godwin's Law is a form of revisionism or even negativism.
Comment has been collapsed.
you win Wallister - you can walk away with a smile - everyone knows it's internet law that the first person to mention the Nazis in an argument automatically loses :) - I have lost sooo many on that little internet law :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Hasn't everyone!
He seemed to want to relate to 2/3 people in the same way as well. :(
Comment has been collapsed.
You thought randomly breaking out of logical discussion and calling someone a nazi is bad? Check further up the page. Later on they ended up trying to defend being rude on the "logic" that... people not being rude led to Donald Trump getting elected.
No, I don't get it either.
Comment has been collapsed.
What do you think the odds are that this is a weird kind of performance-art take on internet trolls?
Sort of like a free in-forum entertainment for catharsis?
Picturing a full mime artist outfit, but with a rubber horse-head mask.
Give it a few hours and we'll be within range of "But what if white obama?" and "Metroid is a cool guy"
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, it's either that or he actually doesn't even know what year it is (just search the page for "2017"). I'm not sure which is likelier.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Supply and demand" doesn't mean shit
Comment has been collapsed.
I've read some research that claimed that over 70% of AAA games got to 50% discount in only 6 months and to 75% discount in a year and a half so... it's actually happening, OP just decided to count only examples that build up their case.
Indies lower their prices even quicker.
edit: http://www.pcgamer.com/steam-sale-dates/
Popular big-budget AAA games get a 50% discount after an average of 7 months: expect to wait this long for your Witchers and your Fallouts.
Breakout indie games take a longer 9.2 months to hit 50%, on average: these include your Rocket Leagues and your Undertales, and typically launch at around $20.
The less popular a game is, the faster it will be discounted: for games in the $30+ category, the least commercially-successful dropped in price 60% faster than the bestsellers.
Comment has been collapsed.
Of course some products will lower prices. There are products which retain market value for years, Call of Duty for example still sell a large chunk of their back catalogue for £20+.
Like in any industry the leading products demand the leading prices. 50% for one of the leading products is fair in my eyes. A "mostly negative" reviewed indie game thats been bundled going to 90% is nothing but an example of market oversaturation.
Are prices too high, yes, I agree on the main pricing is unrealistic. Is piracy going to help change that? No, if anything it will do the opposite.
Again just my opinion though, you're entitled to disagree!
Comment has been collapsed.
Also, this research needs to be shown in every "this sale is shit" thread...
Comment has been collapsed.
Top research, interesting read, thanks for sharing!
Comment has been collapsed.
You'd deport jews in a heartbeat if a "study" showed you that half of them somehow were involved in conspiring. Yes absolutely that's not a joke it's called the "stooge syndrome".
Your study is like any company paid statistic, it doesn't tell shit, doesn't even take into account the actual pricing scheme from 2 to 15 years ago people are comparing current price with, and not even mentioning the lowest peak or the context of these pricing for the whole game market.
But I guess an "expert" or a "study" said that so we should probably go to war in Irak and put GMOs in every food because of it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Never been in Irak and my country does not allow growing or selling of GMO.
Been playing and buying games since the 80s, so I have some experience in the matter.
But yeah, I'm out of your thread, troll someone else.
Comment has been collapsed.
For future reference, the whole "only counting examples that support your case" is called "confirmation bias".
Not trying to be a weird kind of know-it-all or anything, it's just a useful shorthand for the next time it comes up <3
Comment has been collapsed.
The media giants are still trying to buy up small competitors so they can keep the artificial prices. :/
Comment has been collapsed.
Did the OP mention about online retailer platforms other than Steam that sell the same products but for less competitively? Skimming through the text I do not see that mentioned.
Anyway, I think piracy is not a go-to solution if people have access to multiple retailer websites and find what they want at cheaper prices after some thorough researching.
Comment has been collapsed.
It seems to me that other online retailers, include now grey markets, align themselves on Steam pricing schemes. So indeed it is not just about Steam but also the publishers.
Your argument is true if you really can find the right price, which usually turns out to be in the same zone for most people, or rather most people of a same target.
But if you remember, with physical games, the declining value of new items, the second-hand market and even flea market made it possible to buy the game at the right price over time. For digital this is not true anymore: if all online retailers align themselves on the same price, the fact that you can't even resell you licence in itself is an odd consumer law problem, but also means that piracy is the only alternative.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why would all online retailers agree to a specific price when part of business is competition?
Comment has been collapsed.
I really don't see what your problem with pricing is. It's always been whether the customer thinks the price is right or not.
There are many factors to be taken into account like if you're going to play the game right away, if you want to support the developper, if it's the kind of game you could spend 100s of hours playing, ...
The problem is that many of us have a large collection of digital games, with many we haven't even played (and I'm very much guilty of that too) and we except to get great new games for peanuts.
For someone who's going to spend 100+ hours in GTA V, $30 or even $60 is a good price. Its age does not matter.
Comment has been collapsed.
Consumers will pay what an item or service is worth.
Compared to most media entertainment, video games have always been a ridiculous amount of value for the price.
Comment has been collapsed.
Game streaming services have failed before such as OnLive, what horizon are you referring to?
Also games like Doom have already drop in price and it was release this year. As for GTA V's case, the old version came out 4 years ago and is currently $30 on PS3 and 360. The newer version came out last year which is improved and the most up to date with it's online content.
Comment has been collapsed.
2/3 years, for AV1 codecs to be operational, and gaming server to be scalable. Doom is a rare example of it being release at full price, and cutting at half a few month after, but this is how MOST games went a few years back on Steam, and I doubt Doom will go lower for a long time, especially knowing ID Software.
Comment has been collapsed.
People will pay what the game is worth to them. That's why Skyrim and Fallout took so long to hit the lows they've reached, and have stayed at that level. People still want and buy them at the price they're offered. If a game is selling poorly, it will be discounted more quickly.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is not id that controls the price of the game.
To be honest, they never controlled the price of any of their games.
Comment has been collapsed.
- Doom was $60 on launch, $20 on Black Friday, and now $19.79
- ABZU came out on August and is now 70% off
- Dark Souls 3 is now 50% off in less than a year
- Overwatch: Origin Edition is the same price as the normal edition or you can get it with the latest CoD for $60 at GameStop
- The Division is currently 50% off
- Deus Ex Mankind Divided is $19.79 in less than 4 months
- Street Fighter V, a Japanese title, is currently $19.79
- Dishonored 2 barely hitting a month and it's $40.19
- The Witness
- God Eater 2
- Hitman
*Gears of War 4 - Forza Horizon 3
- Quantum Break
- Watch Dogs 2
All these games were released this year and are already hitting discounts in less than a few months compared to GTA V. As for 2/3 years, that's unlikely especially with ISPs forcing data caps as of this year.
Comment has been collapsed.
All in agreement with the research PC Gamer did back in September http://www.pcgamer.com/steam-sale-dates/
Comment has been collapsed.
lel the game market is already messed up a long time ago
dlc's and dlc's ... check payday2, killing floor 1 & 2
and you will see what I am talking about
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree 60$ for a single player game is too much unless you are talking about games like: Skyrim, GTA V & Witcher 3.
Especially if these games launch extra DLC's that are another 60$ together.
DLC's are the worst though games with a 60$ price tag usually end up getting another 60$ worth of DLC its stupid.
But because of the shitty releases these days i always wait atleast a month before i even consider buying a game by that time u can usually get them for 40$ but because i can't spend 80$ a month on games
This is why i usually wait about 6-12 months before the games at 20$ from shady 3rd party sellers, i know this is bad for the gaming industry but they shouldn't come up with such ridiculous prices i mean 120$ for a full game?
A resonable price for me would be 30$ for the main game and then another 20$ for DLC but the option for a 15$ season pass at launch.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not sure what you mean. AAA games like GTA V are the exception nowadays; most games drop sharply in price over time, and eventually appear in bundles or steep sales.
(And the honest truth is that GTA V is worth the price. Most AAA titles aren't, and most of them drop sharply in price relatively fast because of it.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Really nice and thoughful thread, man. Here's a bump!
Comment has been collapsed.
So let me get this straight. Because the #3 most played game on steam is not dirt cheap, you think buying games legally is dead?
Comment has been collapsed.
That seems to be a pretty good summary of OPs point. He personally doesn't like the prices of gaming, so nobody does... :/
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a Notabene thread. He often writes stuff like that. If you have a different opinion he just insults people.
Apparently, everybody is entitled to getting luxury items for next to nothing after the initial launch window.
Comment has been collapsed.
Its very funny that he put Witcher next to GTA, Battlefield and CoD. You can get Witcher 1 & 2 dirt cheap, even Witcher 3 GOTY you can get really cheap.
Comment has been collapsed.
You’ve got a point, basically I think that price for most games in some regions are f* joke!
I will comment everything in this way: GTA V (4 year old game for 60$ or something like you sad) here where I'm now where people mostly earn 380$ for month of normal job or even less.. so this is my comment & summary..
& I'm from "European" country..
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey, I can't afford a brand new car, doesn't mean its ok for me to steal it no matter how much I want it. Its a comodity we're talking about not a life essential, if you can't afford it you unfortunately shouldn't buy it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't like this mentality on pirated games. If you steal a car, seller will lose money but if you pirated a copy nobody loses anything. Even further you really like the game pay for it in the future when you have the money even though you won't replay it. I did this with older games myself.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 exactly, I have already gta but I'm waiting for "normal" price at steam to buy them, but I won't pay European amount when I'm not get European salary, even if I'm from "Europe"..
Comment has been collapsed.
How does nobody lose anything? if you pirate a game, the seller loses money. That company then struggles to pay wages. Them wages stop people like the commenter from being able to purchase games. Thus the cycle regenerates itself until the industry isn't financially viable.
Look at GamesRepublic, they gave out keys at a high discount, not even free, and it ended up killing the company.
Piracy always effects someone. Stealing a car was an extreme example to make a point.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, you are still comparing something that being sold with piracy. Don't get me wrong i am not saying piracy doesn't hurt industry or is a good thing. Maybe more like a grey area on my eyes because for me piracy had much more value for my gaming life and if you want to ask about i can share it but it's pretty late here i will try to keep this short. Where your logic is flawed on this specific part is that game seller will never going to have my money to lose. I was never intented to pay them anything to begin with. No money no loss. So in your example GamesRepublic paid for them and made a mistake sold them "lower price than they have bought." This has nothing to do with piracy or it's harmful nature. That's something far far worse in my opinion. Anybody can look and see GamesRepublic doesn't have that kind of money or agreement to do that but everybody will buy from them and go ask them if piracy is wrong or not? Yeah sure they paid some money... If i pirate a game i won't be giving my money to devs which theoretically don't hurt them, but if i buy some glitch i will be directly stealing from that seller's pocket. That's how different this is.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nah you are literally wrong.
You stole goods when you pirated the item, that item gained the seller no income. I'm struggling to see how you don't understand. The item cost money, you paid no money, the person who sold you the game lost the money that game costs.
I'll relate back to the car and use your theory. I never intended on paying for the car before I stole it, so the seller never lost money.
Your argument makes no sense at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
Because you are considering as pirate would pay them. That's why that makes no sense to you. If i steal a car seler can't sell that car. But if i pirated a copy of a game seller still can sell that, it's not related to me. Pirating is not like walking in a store and grabbing a copy of a game. But also you are thinking as i am saying pirating is okay which is not. It still hurts the industry just not with you can't afford argument imo.
Comment has been collapsed.
No it really is still stealing.
The digital copy you pirated cost money to produce, you stopped that money going to that company. I'll try a different extreme example to try and make you understand.
I make a game called Cheese, it costs me £15 to make overall, I sell it for £1 per copy. I sell 0 copies, but 20 get pirated, I have lost £15. Now if I sell 20 copies, but 0 get pirated, I make £5.
Piracy is stealing. Piracy COSTS the developers money. I don't understand how you think that your copy is magically not costing anything to anyone.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree piracy cost developers money but not money from people who can't afford it. Is this a really hard logic to follow?
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes. Yes it is.
You are saying, "i can't afford it so its not stealing" or words to that effect. You are still costing the developer money. No matter what goods or service you use as an example, taking it because you can't afford it is stealing and costs the creator money.
If you can't afford it, don't buy it, taking it without payment is not "ok" it still costs money. I'm really struggling to understand how you don't understand that.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are a true first world person if this makes sense. :D I am not saying it's not stealing. I am saying it's not stealing "as you put it." Of course getting something without it's creator permission some sense of stealing but you can't put it in the same price as stealing cars. Please tell me what the developer loses when a person with 0 money plays their game? If people who can't afford GTA V couldn't pirate it, how much more money would make Rockstar Games? And what are those people doing with Rockstar's money now? :D
Comment has been collapsed.
You are taking away a sale. If you pirate GTAV right now you are stealing $30 from Steam, Rockstar and any other person or companies involved in its sale. I mean its literally that cut and dry.
Also, as has been pointed out in the thread, if you can afford a PC that runs GTAV, you can afford $30 to buy it.
Its not a "first world" issue, its a life issue. "Thou Shalt Not Steal". Its not a new concept, been around for a few millenia.
If you can't afford it and you live in the UK, USA, China, Syria, Vanatu, you can't afford it...if you pirate it from ANYWHERE you are stealing it and its wrong. Any argument against this promotes stealing, simple fact. Nothing you've said hasn't lead to you stealing money from Rockstar. Keep saying "can't afford it" all you want, you don't get to "take" it and thats ok.
This idea that digital items don't cost money is stupid. You wouldn't steal, literally anything from a shop, this is no different except the shop is digital. You are stealing, its wrong, its your choice to do so that i wont debate. I wont ever agree that "i cant afford it" is ever an acceptable reason as to why you stole.
Comment has been collapsed.
You say piracy hurts industry right? I have pirated over 100 games now i have more than 600 payed games which includes most of the games i pirated not even counting the ones that i give away to my friends. I bought 4 copies of Darksiders just because i loved the game but I have never played an original copy. I have played Witcher 3 pirated just to try if my computer can handle it now i have a legit copy and i will probably buy goty version as well. Without pirating i wouldn't have played any games. The idea of pirating games is really simple, you can't reach them at that moment. You either move on or save money to buy it. But buying was not even available for me at some point. I "payed" for pirated copies of the games without even knowing what pirating is. So tell me do you really understand that? ,
Btw with your current argument, playing games from family share is stealing too. Because you should pay for your own copy otherwise you are hurting developer. So yeah developer lets that happen then magicly it's not stealing anymore even though it costs money right?
Anyways since you like physical examples so much here is mine, Accusing pirates with stealing is like accusing someone who is entering some backyard without owner's permission and accusing them to steal that backyard. Yeah you are causing damage but not as physical as you say. You are using someones work for free but not to gain anything from it. So just please stop comparing piracy with physical stealing. They are not the same. Also if piracy didn't exist gaming industiry wouldn't get as big as now.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's his point. tresspassing is a crime, but it's not stealing: and not being stealing doesn't mean it's not a crime. A lot of people thing that if someone says that piracy is not stealing they're implying it's not a crime.
In most legislations, copyright infringment is not stealing, and it's covered by different laws with different penalties (which, in a lot of cases, are worse than stealing: here, you can rob an entire music shop and you'll only get a small fine, but pirating a single album can get you to jail).
Comment has been collapsed.
I am done. Not even gonna make another argument over this. Sorry but you are kinda obsessive. You made me regret the time i shared with you here which is rarely happens with me. I took your time over pointless things sorry probably won't do it again.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't be so mellodramatic, you disagreed with someone and had a debate about it. Its totally fine and healthy to discuss you opinions. I'm sure in the future we'll agree about something too. I appreciate the fact you had the debate without resorting to name calling or some form of hate. A difficult thing to find on the internet.
Thanks for the discussion.
Comment has been collapsed.
It would be a disagreement if you say i get you but think differently. At every step you said i don't get you i tried to change my aproach every time. And when i put my all reasons at one place and make a sound argument over all i get "piracy is crime." That's really disrespectful to whole conversation considering i have never said piracy isn't crime. So yeah thanks to you too.
Comment has been collapsed.
In all honesty, I think the language barrier has made it difficult for me to fully understand your point. That's my bad, not yours, I perhaps should have asked for further explanation.
Comment has been collapsed.
But you're assuming that those 20 pirates would have bought the game. And having those 20 pirated copies doesn't prevent you to sell 20 more copies to someone else. That's the difference with stealing: if those were stolen cars, you wouldn't be able to sell those 20 cars because you don't have them anymore.
And what costs you money is producing the game, not each individual copy (digital).
Comment has been collapsed.
Games cost money to make. Buying equipment, hiring voice actors, programmers, art designers, marketing teams etc. So they need to make a profit. If I bought a shop. Paid to get it decorated, added tills, added shelves with items, payed staff to serve and advertised my shop... I would need to sell items to make my money back that I've paid to create the business plus make profit to pay my staff, pay for my bills etc and buy more items to sell...
If people are coming to my shop and pay 50p for an apple but complain its too expensive. I'm going to say "I'm sorry to hear that" as I laugh to the bank after they walk out the shop with the apple. That 50p gives me 5 apples to buy and sell..
If that person steals the apple. I have lost a product.
If I don't get customers.. I can't buy more items, I can't pay my staff, I need to descrease my prices to get more customers.
If I have plenty of customers and I meet my targets etc... Why the hell would I put down my price? There is no need for it!
Comment has been collapsed.
That's what i am trying to say, in this argument you don't have a customer to get money from.
Comment has been collapsed.
Exactly... If I don't have customers. I don't make any money. So I can't have a business anymore and will have no money.
Next time buy a game and trade it but ask for nothing because they wouldn't have given you anything anyway. facepalm
Edit: "The enormous scale and detail in Grand Theft Auto 5 led to record shattering development costs. The Scotsman reported the games development and marketing budget at £170 million, or roughly $265 million."
Thats why it costs £60...They need people to pay for it so they can make money back...
Comment has been collapsed.
But you are making me pay for something and i am giving it away for free. I have never done that. :p Jokes aside you two are completely missing my point of view. You are saying piracy steals costumers but i am saying they were never your customers to begin with in this "can't afford argument."
Comment has been collapsed.
Exactly, developers are made to pay to make the game and get nothing in return from people who pirate. If you are interested in the game and want to play it... You are a "potential customer" as in you are seen to want to buy the product. If you own the game and didn't spend money then you have stolen.
Comment has been collapsed.
I get your point, it's one I've basically always held, myself. A lot of pirates had no intention of purchasing the game in the first place, so why one earth are they considered to be customers lost?
They aren't. They were never customers in the first place. They're more like people who walked by the unlocked and open back door to your store and grabbed that apple, then took off with it because they could. Some of them probably didn't even want an apple, they just saw something free.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'll just leave this here.
Most pirates "pirate" because they can't afford the game (or it's not available to them), want to try it before they buy it, or just never buy games at all, all for various reasons.
The ones who can't afford the game literally cannot spend money to buy a game. You cannot spend what you don't have, after all. The seller loses nothing and gains nothing. Yes, it's stealing, in a sense, but the seller wasn't going to see a dime of that money anyway. If it can't be pirated, this person will simply do without it. People who pirate because a game is unavailable in their region/country also fall into this category. They simply have no way to make the purchase, despite wanting to do so.
Then there are those who want to try it before they buy it and plan to eventually buy it. They either want to check the quality of the game, or want to be sure they can even play the game on their PC. If they eventually buy it -- sales gained that the company would not have otherwise received. If they don't buy it, it's because they wouldn't have enjoyed the game or would be otherwise unable to play it.
Then there are those who pirate for the sake of pirating and never buy anything. No sales lost. If they can't pirate one game, they'll move on to another that they can. No one can lose a dime someone was never going to spend anyway. I believe that's the point you were trying to make.
The only pirates of any concern to a seller are the ones who can afford to buy and pirate anyway, which actually tend to be the smallest group and typically pirate out of protest to price, DRM, always-online, or they do it out of simple greed. They're really the only ones who have a direct negative impact on the games' sales numbers because they could buy it and refuse to do so.
An interesting article on the subject: http://kotaku.com/why-people-pirate-video-games-1716103981
As a side not, there are actually independent musicians, film-makers, and developers who have released their material on torrents to promote sales of their media, and with great success. The Pirate Bay has in fact in the past endorsed such projects. It's free and widespread word of mouth advertising, and encourages people to buy into their future endeavors.
The bottom line is that the world isn't "black-and-white", and is in fact mostly grey.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is what i am exactly trying to say. Thank you. :D
Comment has been collapsed.
If you can't afford it, tough shit, we all want things we can't afford. We don't devolve into stealing things because we want it and can't afford it.
If its not available in your region, tough shit, import it or don't own it and wait like a normal person. Stealing it is not an option.
If you want to "try before you buy", play a demo, watch a review, read a review. Stealing is not a viable alternative.
"They weren't going to get paid anyway" is the worst excuse I think I've ever heard. If you went to court after stealing literally anything and your defence was "I wasn't going to pay anyway" you'd be laughed all the way to your jail cell.
Musicians choosing to openly give their work away for free is the musicians choice, which will be made with full financial knowledge behind it. Not every musician gives away all their music for free, even those who upload a torrent don't, its awful business practice.
Substitute "games" for pretty much anything and you can surely see how stupid the argument is.
Comment has been collapsed.
As usual, you've completely missed or disregarded the point of my comment.
Nowhere did I say it wasn't stealing, so don't presume to put words into my mouth. But there's a big difference between stealing someone's car out of their garage because you don't want to buy a car, and downloading a game on the internet because you can't afford it. On one hand, you're taking someone else's "money" they already have and on the other, you're taking "money" they'd never have received in the first place.
If you can't see the obvious differences, then there's no point in you replying further.
And for someone who claims I am stalking them or harassing them whenever I reply to them, you sure do like replying to me. I'd also like to point out I wasn't replying to you. I was letting Aeshma know that I see and understand the point he was making, and that it's actually backed up by research and fact.
Good day.
Comment has been collapsed.
Cool shit Batman, can't have a debate without getting personal again I see.
scriptsoutforHarambe
Comment has been collapsed.
It was a polite hint (again) to take your own advice.
My thoughts on the matter aren't up for debate with you, and I've made that clear. My reply was for Aeshma. Thanks for the offer, though.
EDIT: and please don't let anyone on to my secret identity, either. Thanks. ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't agree for a multitude of reasons I've mentioned throughout the thread, its a debate thats well ended now though.
Comment has been collapsed.
I already told you I'm not willing to enter an argument with you, stop going on about it. The entire discussion has been flogged to death by both sides, your argument I've heard off about 4 different people now. I don't need to answer anything you ask me because I'm not debating anything with you.
Chill out and move on, last words are all yours bro I shan't be replying again! Peace!
Comment has been collapsed.
The seller loses money
I agree with most of your arguments on this thread man, but here I'd say this isn't wholly correct. Sure, you are assuming that the person who pirated the game does so without spending money and that the producer loses the money the person would've paid had they bought the game instead of pirating it. But irl it's also a fact that most people who end up pirating games are ones who would've never had paid a dime for the game to begin with. There are people who legitimately buy games, and there are those who pirate them. The producers earn their revenue from the first category, which is thankfully the larger one. The second category is usually kids, people with income restrains or just mooches. Assuming that the second category would never buy games from the seller, the their pirating the game is actually due to it being made available to them through an illicit means. They were never going to fork over money to the developer in the first place, and hence the dev does not end up losing money over every pirated copy (oh, they end up getting lesser sales, definitely but they don't actually lose money in the way you describe it )
"You stole goods when you pirated the item, that item gained the seller no income." which is again a fair statement for irl but the key difference is that the seller is not having a limited number of copies to sell in this case. It's a digital download and the seller is able to sell infinite copies. Hence, my argument stands on this basis. You're 100% right in the case of limited supplies.
Comment has been collapsed.
steal? regionalization on steam if completely f* up & this is a steal
I'm sorry but I'm not gonna pay for games like I was from UK like you are, when I earn less money than some Russian & I'm still in Eu region..
Comment has been collapsed.
His point is (I assume): It's a luxury item not a life necessity.
So, as unfortunate as your income situation in a EU-region country may be. If you can't afford it don't buy it or pirate it. You don't need the game. You're not entitled to it.
Maybe one day they'll make a new region. Or maybe there will stricter regional restrictions for activating like Poland etc so your local game/key stores can offer better prices
But the fact remains it (games at all in fact) are luxury items.
Edit: spelling/typo
Comment has been collapsed.
I completely agree with this. It's not like your life will end if you don't buy a certain game. Yes, it's crap if you can't afford it, but there are a lot of people that have it way worse then you...
Comment has been collapsed.
That was my point. Its not nice the guy can't afford it, but its a luxury to have. If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. Its not essential to live, its something thats nice to have.
Comment has been collapsed.
Piracy is stealing yes.
I'm not saying your countries pricing structure is fair, but I am saying if you can't afford it you shouldn't buy it. The exception to this is of course things essential to life. Not being able to afford a game is not something that makes stealing ok.
Comment has been collapsed.
I always disagree when it's compared to 'Stealing'.
Piracy, it's not a good thing, it's an offense, but it's not stealing.
Comment has been collapsed.
"You wouldn't download a car, or dvd player, piracy is theft" did you really, REALLY just pulled out this argument?
Comment has been collapsed.
Because its a pertinent point.
You'll steal a game but you won't steal a car or a womans handbag. Whats the difference? Are Ford not price fixing the same amount as EA.
You're argument is beyond flawed and borderline hysterical. 50% discount on a game which got an update not so long ago, so new content, is a good deal. If you want to illegally steal it because you're the best financial advisor since Keynes then go for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
FUCK NO, it's not possible that people are still spouting that bullshit in 2017. Stealing a car, means going to an actual unique copy of a physical car that belongs to someone else, and deprive this someone from his car by displacing this unique car. Downloading has nothing to do with and I though it was clearly established so tell me: who pre-fabricated hidden paid internet account or journalist did you get this idea back from?
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah I forgot that digital distrubtion was totally free so stealing from it means no one loses money!
Must be the "stooge affect" again...
Comment has been collapsed.
I think you mean "stooge effect".
You can't lose money you would never have received in the first place.
Comment has been collapsed.
Lost an item in its place though, ergo i lost the value of the item.
Comment has been collapsed.
The keys don't self replicate, the store isn't run by bots, the distribution isn't free.
The item still had and has a cost. It still has value.
It may have cost £0 to create, but the sale and distribution held a charge. Are you being overcharged in comparison to that charge? Yes. Was the distribution of the replicated key free? No.
Comment has been collapsed.
What are you talking about?
1) The distribution is absolutely free if they use their own platform (EA's Origin, Ubisoft's uPlay, Valve's Steam, CD Projekt Red's GOG)
2) Keys are not lost because someone pirated a copy of the game. You don't steal the key and then enter it on Steam. Have you no clue what you're talking about?
3) "Was the distribution of the replicated key free? No." Further proof you have no idea how piracy works.
I'm not even going to bother arguing with you beyond this, because you are clearly working off of a biased viewpoint and not listening to reason.
Comment has been collapsed.
Steam isn't run by volunteers, servers aren't free, contracts between companies aren't free, games dont develop themselves.
Any argument for stealing which uses the line "I can't afford it" is nonsense. Taking a key removes you as a customer as you already own the game, its taking away money. If EVERYONE pirated GTAV, Rockstar would have lost £120m+ in development alone.
It's not just the product that costs money. Yet you're saying I'm missing the point here?
Comment has been collapsed.
What? so if I pirate a game a key magically disappears from some online store? Interesting. It also seems if I download a game from a torrent another random online shop is charged for distribution costs. That's even more interesting.
So if I keep downloading again and again the same game, that game will eventually run out of keys worldwide, and a bunch of online stores will go bankrupt.
Comment has been collapsed.
Its not as black and white as you're all thinking about. Piracy lowers legit sales so they can't cover their costs/make enough profit, these things need paying for I'm not saying the pirated key comes from these sources but the money you didn't spend effects them. Debates well over though mate, you don't need to reply to like every comment I've made disagreeing. I get your point, I disagree. We won't agree I'm guessing.
Comment has been collapsed.
Excuse me, but how exactly is buying games legally "dead"? Because GTA V doesn't get a high discount? O.o
Some games are expensive as hell indeed, but there's still plenty of cheaper games that are just as good ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
He's whacked in the head and incredibly hostile to anyone that doesn't see his delusional argument.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's why I respect CD Projekt Red. Well, one of several reasons.
Comment has been collapsed.
Rockstar and especially the GTA series are known for keeping steady a price. Due to the online part introduced with GTA V and the continuing updates this part is even more stable than those before. You might not be interested in the online part, others are and therefore the demand for it is still high.
If GTA is one of your most favoured series, it shouldn't be an issue to save for it, even as a student (I did that for GTA IV, playing the add-ons later). Though your statement that GTA V was already 4 years old is obviously false, you then could have already bought it for a less than one buck a month. Of course that would lead to less other games or whatever you're using your income for, but: your buying priorities are up to you.
If you don't want to support the pricing of Steam, get a retail version. If you still just want a digital version, buy at resellers. If you don't want to pay the current price, wait longer. There are alternative ways (do you know how it had been 15 years ago?).
Your alternative way is piracy? Well, won't blame you if you just want to test it and buy it later. Or if you're in a bad financial situation at release and absolutely can't wait. But keep in mind that you're not only hitting the publisher who probably had only very low (due to successful franchise) financial risk when investing in the development and marketing, but also the devs and ordinary employees (you should be able to emphasize, if you're having a low income yourself).
And stop advertising this way. There are enough people out there who accustom theirselves to this and still abuse it, though their income has become larger in the meantime. Or still want to see nearly every movie at the release without paying for the cinemas (and Netflix etc. are too slow). You can always find an excuse for piracy.
Oh, and if your motivation is more a political one (which I would welcome), then stop playing stolen video games and do politics for more social equity, less copyright laws and less multi-national corporations dictating the politics.
Comment has been collapsed.
Political motivation is exactly why I mention piracy. I can't believe seing someone pulling that 2001 rhetoric of "you would download a car, wouldn't you?" in 2017.
Less multinational corporation dictating the politics is another topic, and yet through the prism of video game prices I address a very particular theme of economical corruption and destruction: value speculation.
Comment has been collapsed.
The thing is, everything was great until 2014. Every game would get a bigger discount after several years. But then Ubisoft, Activision, Bethesda and other big companies had a "meeting" and they decided to put a base price tag and discount to older games in order to milk gamers more. For example, old Ubisoft games dropped to $2.5 before, but after 2014 they only dropped to $5 with 50% off instead of 75%. Every single one of them did this, Bethesda, Activision, Ubisoft etc. This is a giant scheme started in 2014 and only a few are aware of it.
About marginal cost, you're totally right. Digital goods have almost 0 marginal cost (when you spread the server, platform and support costs relative to per sold copy, it's close to zero) but they won't turn away profits. People are still buying thousands of copies of GTA V every month so they won't discount it unless the sales drop to a certain point. There is nothing we can do about it.
So yeah, supply and demand. If people keep buying a game, it won't get a discount because every $ counts for extra profits. Nothing will change, companies will keep milking even their old games. But bad business behavior with DLC's and terrible optimizations will pay off. Look how hard Ubisoft tries to fix their image, they recently realized how much they lose by being assholes. Right now my biggest suggestion is to go with medium sized companies. Polish companies make great games and they're not assholes in a sense. Shadow Warrior 2 was amazing but it sold only around 250k copies on PC, which is a shame because even the shittiest titles of Ubisoft easily sells 500k-1m. Personally I'd never buy a new released game from Ubisoft,Rockstar or Activision but I'd definitely support Polish devs. I just wish people had some sense and realize what they're doing to gaming by purchasing DLC's. But people are idiots and those 12 year olds will never understand how harmful their mindless buying behavior.
Nothing will change. Not for a long time. Best we can do is to support smaller companies with better business behaviors.
Comment has been collapsed.
FFS thank god there are few people smart enough to get the point.
Comment has been collapsed.
There is so much wrong with this. People still buy old music and movies, which can be priced lower, the same, or higher, than market rate for new releases. (see e.g. Criterion Collection).
Games now are subject to menu pricing:
Regular edition for those willing to buy the game new
Deluxe edition for those willing to pay more for the same game
DLC add-ons as a way for those willing to pay more to extend the experience
Discount pricing for those not willing to pay full price - with the discount going up as time progresses
People are still buying. don't know why you think buying games legally is dead.
Furthermore, Apple/itunes showed that enough people would rather buy legally than download illegally - if the process is simple enough
Comment has been collapsed.
Nobody buys music anymore, and that's really sad. But is it because of piracy, or is it because greedy as fuck labels NEVER adapted to the demand and pricing enabled thus required by the digital format, since Spotify/Apple Music are hyper successful as legal offers?
Comment has been collapsed.
You high? You never heard of youtube? Dahell would I buy music if I can go to youtube and the channel (Which most of the time belongs to the music company) gets paid from the ads and crap I get to see some times during the video... It's easier to just make a playlist and play it, than to pirate or buy and download so I can listen to. ANd if you don't have 3G or 4G to listen to music on your phone or home net to do it on your pc/laptop then... Nice to meet you. mr 3rd world country...
Comment has been collapsed.
"get paids by the ads" as well as concerts, as well as spending your attention in sharing it. So although you are not buying the music, you are still paying for it under another form.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not sure if trolling or just acting stupid. One moment you cry that ppl just pirate and they hardly make money cuz of it and when I showed u they make money cuz no point to pirate as the stuff is free anyway, you act like in the stupid one stupid one who didn't just literally said it...
Comment has been collapsed.
What the fuck are you talking about. I never cried that people just pirate, I want smart people to pirate unfairly priced games or music.
Comment has been collapsed.
A) smart has nothing to do with it
B) fair is a very subjective standard
Comment has been collapsed.
He's so stupid that he thinks games are made for free and that there's a point to pirate music which is already free on youtube...
Comment has been collapsed.
I buy music still - just purchased a new version of a tori amos album on CD and also a new vynl album :) today - so not sure what you mean by no one buys music anymore ! very odd...
Comment has been collapsed.
How many vinyls do you have? I'm ready to bet you have 10x less that I have, so to me you're just a fucking pirate...
Comment has been collapsed.
okay - so now you are just being rude it appears; which is somewhat odd, as I was simply noting that your statement that no one buys music anymore is clearly incorrect - as I do indeed buy music still - very strange, not sure how that makes me a pirate (very odd indeed)
Comment has been collapsed.
please do while smart people gather together towards a more enlightened future while the thinking process you display clearly dubs you for a shit life when the krash hits the fan. thanks for passing by.
Comment has been collapsed.
"while smart people gather together towards a more enlightened future"
Shame that's a bus you won't be on. Ask your daddy to pay your fare next time.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're arguement is only built on games that represent just a share of the whole market, and not representative for even AAA gaming. Maybe you should look around for the -66% off Deus Ex, or the 75% off 5€ Mad Max on bundlestars. All games drop price, it's Activision, Blizzard and GTA that doesn't really let go simply because they sell so well that no need of lower price.
Comment has been collapsed.
You mean Square-Enix, the only company I mentioned in my thread doing things right?
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, Square Enix does things right... by putting in microtransactions in their games, splitting off content into DLC and screwing over customers making them WANT to be pirates.
Comment has been collapsed.
...is it time to go back to a new kind of "piracy"? Everybody now knows it (except for the few hypocrites who'll accept any crap shoved down their throat)...but do you know a little about the background?
There's a lie which consists in thinking that popular media formats scheme changed with the internet. But it's not true: since the first vinyls sold in the 50s, the relative price of records have always been balanced with a bootleg market which emerged first in russia (called roentgenizdat). Then K7 and VHS came-up, of which the cost of production was way lower and yet prices remained the same, which made piracy grow. Then came CDs and DVDs which despite the price of production being dramatically reduced stagnated and then even rose, provoking even more piracy.
And then the internet. But was it different? Absolutely not, the thing is you still buy a licence to use a copy of a media, wether it's on a physical format or directly the digital file, except of course digital format crush the prices of production, manufacture, distribution...close to zero. Yet price remained the same although the offer multiplied, hence piracy finally exploded.
But the video game market, contrary to other media market, had the chance of successfully transitioning to digital thanks to several adapted schemes: first, the likes of Humble Bundle or PS+ which gave a certain amount of games bundled for a very low price. Then there was the rational business idea that, your goal as a publisher since there is no format cost, is for a maximum of person to get your games no matter the price, be it for them to buy DLCs or have more people talking about it to friends then buying it or for them to be locked into your franchise to buy the next opus.
Therefor the pricing scheme that made Steam and digital game so successful was that a game would release at full retail price for those ready to fork-in 60$, but then months after months it would get down to reach lower and lower thus more and more pockets, and eventually have very low flash sales. This is not only rational in terms of business but also in term of mercantile rules: the older the object, the lower the value for it to be adopted and distributed by more people.
Unfortunately this has now changed. Because piracy has backtracked thanks to this legal scheme, as well as denuvo and corruption, but also because game streaming is on the horizon, the new pricing scheme is worse than EVER in ANY market that exists (beside housing): now most games are released at full retail price and barely go down even long after, but never below a certain point making them unaffordable if you play lots of different games or you're young/student, the worst being GTA V: this now 4 years old game is STILL a 60$ retail price, only to be regularly cut at the same high 30$ price, especially if you don't care about online.
I'm sad to say, as I rapidly mentioned, that this will get 3x worst in the coming years, not just because "piracy" is not counter-balancing with the legal market greedy price abuses, but also because streaming is on the horizon and it changes everything: with streaming, you're not paying to own a legal licence anymore, nor can you pirate the game in any way: you will have to pay 5$ to play a game for a hour, 12$ for a day, 20/30$ a month, 50/60$ for the year and IF you want to own the game (if it's still possible) and never own it, it'll probably cost you 80/120/more to fully buy games like GTA, Battlefield, CoD, The Witcher...
So as the title announced...what are your ideas.
Comment has been collapsed.