|
|
Post by mysterd on Nov 10, 2009 4:50:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by The Sonar Chicken on Nov 10, 2009 5:28:45 GMT
Wow, that sounds like some very messy business strategy.  |
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Nov 10, 2009 6:53:45 GMT
Metal of Honor sucks, and always has.
Dragon Age was awesome, honestly >.>.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Nov 10, 2009 12:56:34 GMT
While I feel really sorry for the staff who are likely to lose their jobs, I can't help but think this is at least partly the result of EA's policy of seemingly regarding their customers as criminals for much of 2009. So I have a lot of sympathy for the employees - especially in today's very difficult economic climate - but none for the company, if that makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Nov 10, 2009 17:25:16 GMT
Well EK, who are their customers?
EA ONLY MAKES PC GAMES because Microsoft asks them to. Thats literally it. PC gaming sees piracy rates as high as 50% for some titles. I love my PC, but you know what? I'm sorry to say it, but if theft goes as high as 50%? Why bother?
Things like Steam are the direction the industry is going. Don't like it? Don't play. That simple. I'm tired of pirates personally, so [Censored] um.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Nov 10, 2009 17:45:48 GMT
I share your opinion of pirates, Terror. And I definitely agree with 'don't like it, don't play'. But it's not the pirates that lose out is it? It's EA (Because of people who absolutely believe in 'don't like it, don't play' so don't play).
My life's not gonna be changed because I buy and play less new games. Probably save me a fortune, in fact. So I should really be thanking them for saving me money...
|
|
|
|
Post by Ubereil on Nov 10, 2009 18:10:04 GMT
PC gaming sees piracy rates as high as 50% for some titles. I love my PC, but you know what? I'm sorry to say it, but if theft goes as high as 50%? Why bother? Well, the Witcher did alright... It's a mistake to look at how much your game gets pirated (which, by the way, isn't really theft). The interesting thing is how well it sells. To use The Witcher as an example, they sold 1 000 000+ copies. It doesn't matter if it got pirated 100 or 100 000 000 times, it still sold 1 000 000+ copies. Übereil |
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Nov 10, 2009 18:56:28 GMT
I think the real mistake is the false equivalence of 'one download = one lost sale'. It's just not the case.
Piracy IS a huge problem and I do see how frustrating it must be for games companies to spend a massive amount on creating a game only to have it pirated, but I think Ube is right that far too much emphasis is being put on stopping piracy (Which no-one has yet managed to do) vrs encouraging more people to buy games.
It also doesn't help when the failure of ultra-cutting-edge games that are filled with bugs is blamed on piracy all the time, when it's clear that few systems can run it and the bugs make it a bad buy in any event. That's just dishonest.
The actual scale of piracy is unknown and quite possibly unknowable. But it's certainly possible for a games company to gain and encourage the loyalty of their fans and get more sales thereby...
|
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Nov 10, 2009 18:56:34 GMT
Wow Ubereil, my eyes are now opened, I hadn't thought of it that way! Your so nice maybe I'll let you come on over and [Censored] my dog.
[Censored] you.
Crysis and Call of Duty 4 both had piracy rates of people trying to connect to servers past 40%. And you wonder why developers are jumping to Consoles?
It IS theft. Its taking a product which takes millions to develop and getting it for free from typically illegal, though untraceable sources. Piracy. Is. Theft. To call it anything but is self imposed delusion.
If people don't buy a product, it doesn't get made. So the Witcher sold a million copies? Well good for the Witcher, most PC games outside of MMO's are grosely outsold by their console counterparts, and its not because of the popularity of consoles. Its because only half of the PC gamers buy the product. Which is bull[Censored]
Shrink rates of 50%? No business tolerates that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ubereil on Nov 10, 2009 21:11:02 GMT
Crysis and Call of Duty 4 both had piracy rates of people trying to connect to servers past 40%. And you wonder why developers are jumping to Consoles? Not really, no. I'm saying the devs are looking at it from the wrong angle though. A lot of them are acting on the wish that piracy isn't a factor, and then they get mad when things don't add up. CD Project didn't do that. Stardock isn't doing that either. Both of them have managed to be successful on this "impossible" market. It IS theft. Its taking a product which takes millions to develop and getting it for free from typically illegal, though untraceable sources. Piracy. Is. Theft. To call it anything but is self imposed delusion. Let's say I'm selling apples in a stand on my front lawn. Theft is when you walk up to my stand, snatch an apple and run away without paying. Piracy isn't doing that. Piracy is walking up to my stand, cloning an apple (thus making a new apple that I did not really produce) and walking away with the cloned apple. So it's not theft in practise. Not that you care, your claim is that it's theft in theory. The theory here being that the consequence of piracy is equivalent of those of theft. IE instead of buying the product you produced they just copy it. Pretty straightforward reasoning. Not always correct though. Because in some cases the choice isn't between buying the game and pirating the game. Sometimes the choice is between not buying the game and pirating the game. In a case like that, what does the seller of the game lose? Nothing, because buying the game is not an option. In those cases it's not theft. Simply put, if the person would have bought the game in an alternative universe where piracy doesn't exist, then it's theft. Shrink rates of 50%? No business tolerates that. It's a vast simplification to claim that piracy is shrinking the gaming market 50 %. It's only 50 % if you assume every single pirate would have bought the game if they couldn't have pirated it. Pirates just aren't rich enough to do that. Übereil |
|
|
|
Post by mysterd on Nov 10, 2009 22:33:46 GMT
Crysis and Call of Duty 4 both had piracy rates of people trying to connect to servers past 40%. And you wonder why developers are jumping to Consoles? Big name products on the consoles - I'm thinking here of Gears of Wars 2, Far Cry 2, Borderlands, Halo 3 - were heavily pirated on the 360, as well. Of course, you'd need to mod out your 360 to be able to do this - which is of course illegal and likely going to get your a ban from XBL if you take that XB online. I think as consoles act more like PC's, they'll end up having more of the problems that the PC's have. Piracy is going to be one of these problems - and it's only going to get worse. |
|
|
|
Post by mysterd on Nov 10, 2009 22:48:38 GMT
I'm saying the devs are looking at it from the wrong angle though. A lot of them are acting on the wish that piracy isn't a factor, and then they get mad when things don't add up. CD Project didn't do that. Stardock isn't doing that either. Both of them have managed to be successful on this "impossible" market. CD Projekt, Valve, and Stardock have found ways to make the customer think that they are better off BUYING the product from them than pirating the product. This is why their games sell. These companies treat their games more like a service, basically. I'll just start w/ Valve, for now. I'll tackle CDPR and Stardock late. Valve has updated TF2, for example, more than 50 times since its original release over Steam. What hacker/cracker is going to try and keep up w/ Valve and constantly keep trying to crack the game if Valve is going to just keep updating it like crazy? If you look at Assassin's Creed for the PC - that's right, the game has only had ONE PATCH - and that patch basically only removes DirectX 10.1 features. So, that's going to be quite easy for a hacker/cracker to go on and tackle. Steam is pretty good at stopping Day 0 piracy - as often their games DO NOT ship on disc w/ all the files needed to actually boot the game - Hence why you do want to run the back-up utility and back-up your game on disc at a later said date. You will also need to activate the game to play it from Steam, as well. This all forces gamers to go out and buy the game as they likely can't wait for whatever game. Plus, for some reason, many fear the ban stick on Steam and just don't want to lose their games, if they get banned. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Nov 11, 2009 4:37:22 GMT
Steam is great. But Steam is a DRM, in Elliot's books, this is bad.
I buy literally 90% of my games on Steam now. And I'm happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Nov 11, 2009 12:14:42 GMT
My problem with Steam is not that it's DRM. It's that it's unreasonable DRM because it requires an online check for offline games. Because it requires an online component, it also means that if Steam goes bust you will be unable to reinstall any game you have that works on Steam.
There are plenty of DRM schemes I don't mind. But Steam isn't one of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lews on Nov 11, 2009 13:05:27 GMT
Steam is great.
And Alex Roots is like 16.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Nov 11, 2009 13:31:03 GMT
17. But close enough! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Nov 11, 2009 18:26:24 GMT
and of course the all knowing Elliot Kane has decreed that something is bad, because it needs to be checked online.
Sorry man, but thats the way a lot more software than gaming software is now. Really. You must not use Office, you must not use Windows itself, seriously Elliot, really? The same old tune is getting old. This is how things are moving. And its good they are moving in this direction.
At my job, when I take the Laptop out of the cage to sell to a customer, I must be exclusively the one to hold it until it is sold. One customer told me that he wanted to hold it, and I told him "look, I'm liable, I must hold it", he responded "What? I'm a thief now? How dare you guys assume someone would steal a laptop?" And I responded along the lines of "This is one laptop sale, but you know what? People steal everything that isn't bolted down. I hold onto the laptop."
He then rambled much as you do about video games about the retailer assuming everyone is a thief, but you know what? Out here, given how much stuff is stolen? We now have to have every major product in cages with specialized electronic locks. Because of. Gasp. Theft. And I don't give two [Censored] if the customer doesn't like it, because we've even seen as little as last week someone try to make a dash with a laptop when an associate didn't follow the rules.
So [Censored] you Elliot, get over it or stop crying about it. This is the way its going to be, and I don't think they give two [Censored] if you don't like it, because one person not liking something, even a group of people, will not stop businesses from protecting their interests. Online validation is an excellent tool and I hope it continues. As it has for your operating system since oh... a decade now?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ubereil on Nov 11, 2009 18:37:56 GMT
Elliot, if you've been looking for the perfect moment to announce that you're a Linux user, this is the time!  Übereil |
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Nov 11, 2009 21:03:56 GMT
Sadly, Ube, I'm not... But if there was ever a good time to switch... ;D I don't use MS Office, mind, but that's only half the victory! ;D
***
Terror - I'm not crying. Like I say, these guys are saving me a lot of money. They make choices and I make choices and that's fair enough. I have to use Windows because pretty much nothing I use runs on Linux, but Microsoft have a total monopoly. Games companies don't.
You may be right. Steam and online authentification may be the wave of the future because they do have an effect on day zero piracy - at least for now. But on the other hand, they may not be. Neither of us know. There are almost as many approaches as there are games companies right now and that's a lot of approaches. Tomorrow they might even come up with unbreakable disk encryption - or they might decide to do away with disks totally and run an entirely digital sales service. I see that as being very likely some time in the next fifty years, in fact.
I'm only one guy, but a quick look around the web would show you it's not just me thinks this way. There are plenty of other people who are tired of being treated like crap for the great crime of actually buying games instead of pirating them.
Sure, you can treat everyone like a potential thief in your business. But when they hand over the money, you give them the thing they paid for, right? You don't impose special penalties on them because they've paid or control a master switch which allows you to switch off their purchase at will, do you? Although knowing you, I think you'd love that idea, so maybe you do... ;D But most businesses wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ubereil on Nov 11, 2009 21:17:45 GMT
If you have programs that only works in Windows there's always Virtual Box...
Übereil
|
|
