Encouraging AND profiting from software piracy
by Jim McLuckie · in General Discussion · 10/11/2002 (8:54 pm) · 23 replies
Software piracy is a problem; that's a given. Many people seem to be addressing the problem, but what is the real goal: getting rid of it, or lowering the chances of it happened? If you voted for the former, you're dreaming. If you voted for the latter, you're being realistic. Software piracy will never end...but is this a bad thing?
The majority of gamers seem to be teenagers. How many teenagers do you know that can afford $30-$50 flat out for every game they want to play? OK, so maybe you live in a nice neighborhood, but realisticly thinking, it doesn't seem that the boy next door is going to be shelling out $200 to play the hottest new games this fall. Where does that $50 go, anyway?
Just recently I was introduced to a site called gogamer.com. They have this brilliant promotion called "48 Hour Madness" in which they take one of the latest games and sell it for $20. What's the catch? Well, you just get the CD in the jewel case. And...? That's it...no box, no manual. What else? Nothing...and that's the point. You get what you need. How many of you find the boxes and manuals useful? I admit I enjoy the pretty looking boxes, and thumbing through the manual once, but to save $30 I'd gladly drop the manual and pretty box. But hey, what if we went one step further? What if I didn't need the CD case nor the CD either. Let's take it one step further.
Let's say I already have the software. We won't say how I got it; that's not the point. The point is, I have in my possession a burned copy of the game. Who loses here? Well, it's pretty useless cause I don't have a key, so nobody in this case has the upper hand. What if I could go online and buy the key for a price? The CD + jewel case + key cost $20...it's gotta be cheaper than that. Which brings me to the point: why don't software companies have a system in which users can purchase only the CD key for a fair price?
We'll go back to an earlier question of mine...where does the money go? When I buy a game for $50, where does that money go? It's obvious that if I were to pirate that $50 game, I'm not ripping off the company for $50. A legit company such as gogamer.com can't rip off the game company because...well...they wouldn't be in business. If they can sell a game for $20, that other money has to go somewhere, and wherever it goes, it doesn't seem to go to the software company. There are other costs involved in creating a finished product, like printing manuals, making boxes, and pressing CDs. Why not just cut the foreplay and get down to the nitty gritty...I want the game, I'll give you your money, but I'm not spending more than I need.
This doesn't seem to be a very insane concept. People are always distributing software over the internet. The majority of gamers seem to have broadband, so sending out large files like this isn't a huge feat. For major retail publishers, this would cut out the need to press and box so many copies, and for indie developers, this would cut bandwith costs greatly. Instead of purchasing and downloading the software off your website, the gamer can get a copy from his favorite newsgroup, warez FTP, or friend, THEN buy the CD key and go.
Granted, this setup is mostly useful in multiplayer games, but with a little stretching of the imagination, it could fit into single player games. Or maybe it doesn't have to. Maybe if it were just available for multiplayer-centric games (Tribes, Battlefield 1942, Half-Life [just about], Quake 3, Unreal Tournament...) there wouldn't be a problem. I would pay $15 for each of these games, no problem. I think some or many of the people who pirate software would too. What do you guys think?
The majority of gamers seem to be teenagers. How many teenagers do you know that can afford $30-$50 flat out for every game they want to play? OK, so maybe you live in a nice neighborhood, but realisticly thinking, it doesn't seem that the boy next door is going to be shelling out $200 to play the hottest new games this fall. Where does that $50 go, anyway?
Just recently I was introduced to a site called gogamer.com. They have this brilliant promotion called "48 Hour Madness" in which they take one of the latest games and sell it for $20. What's the catch? Well, you just get the CD in the jewel case. And...? That's it...no box, no manual. What else? Nothing...and that's the point. You get what you need. How many of you find the boxes and manuals useful? I admit I enjoy the pretty looking boxes, and thumbing through the manual once, but to save $30 I'd gladly drop the manual and pretty box. But hey, what if we went one step further? What if I didn't need the CD case nor the CD either. Let's take it one step further.
Let's say I already have the software. We won't say how I got it; that's not the point. The point is, I have in my possession a burned copy of the game. Who loses here? Well, it's pretty useless cause I don't have a key, so nobody in this case has the upper hand. What if I could go online and buy the key for a price? The CD + jewel case + key cost $20...it's gotta be cheaper than that. Which brings me to the point: why don't software companies have a system in which users can purchase only the CD key for a fair price?
We'll go back to an earlier question of mine...where does the money go? When I buy a game for $50, where does that money go? It's obvious that if I were to pirate that $50 game, I'm not ripping off the company for $50. A legit company such as gogamer.com can't rip off the game company because...well...they wouldn't be in business. If they can sell a game for $20, that other money has to go somewhere, and wherever it goes, it doesn't seem to go to the software company. There are other costs involved in creating a finished product, like printing manuals, making boxes, and pressing CDs. Why not just cut the foreplay and get down to the nitty gritty...I want the game, I'll give you your money, but I'm not spending more than I need.
This doesn't seem to be a very insane concept. People are always distributing software over the internet. The majority of gamers seem to have broadband, so sending out large files like this isn't a huge feat. For major retail publishers, this would cut out the need to press and box so many copies, and for indie developers, this would cut bandwith costs greatly. Instead of purchasing and downloading the software off your website, the gamer can get a copy from his favorite newsgroup, warez FTP, or friend, THEN buy the CD key and go.
Granted, this setup is mostly useful in multiplayer games, but with a little stretching of the imagination, it could fit into single player games. Or maybe it doesn't have to. Maybe if it were just available for multiplayer-centric games (Tribes, Battlefield 1942, Half-Life [just about], Quake 3, Unreal Tournament...) there wouldn't be a problem. I would pay $15 for each of these games, no problem. I think some or many of the people who pirate software would too. What do you guys think?
#2
The hope here is that the pirates don't find your backup system before they release the game. Make *sure* that it won't trigger before 4 hours of play, so that all the pirate groups release 'bad copies'.
As a final backup plan, have a third level of protection that doesn't effect gameplay but just puts a link in the users' start menu to the guilt text spiel.
If everything goes well, you have the pirates distributing your 'demo', you have negligable distribution costs to sell legitimizing keys, and your sales will be high.
10/12/2002 (8:55 am)
The way to go with single player titles is to make a trivial copy protection system that can be bypassed by pirates in < 5 minutes. This sytem is of course just a decoy, and the real copy protection system (which can be just as simple!) kicks in a ways into the game, say 30% through it which should be at least 4 hours. Pop up your guilt trip text to the user and offer them a link to an amnesty program where they can legitimize their copy for only $15 online. If they played through 4 hours already then they probably want to continue playing the game. The trick here is to make it easier to pay at this point than to go out and find the crack. The pirates will certainly get around this problem by the next day, but because of the way pirate distribution works there will be a large number of 'bad copies' floating around for months to come.The hope here is that the pirates don't find your backup system before they release the game. Make *sure* that it won't trigger before 4 hours of play, so that all the pirate groups release 'bad copies'.
As a final backup plan, have a third level of protection that doesn't effect gameplay but just puts a link in the users' start menu to the guilt text spiel.
If everything goes well, you have the pirates distributing your 'demo', you have negligable distribution costs to sell legitimizing keys, and your sales will be high.
#3
10/12/2002 (9:09 am)
My thought is that Blizzard should be held as the best example for reducing piracy. From all the people I used to know at uni, everyone bought their games because Battle.Net was the best part about them and you couldn't get online to play in there without a valid CD-Key. The single player game was cracked so anyone could play it after downloading it but the mp made everyone buy it.
#4
--KallDrexx
10/12/2002 (9:26 am)
David: i'm confused tho, how do you put that only in the pirated copy?--KallDrexx
#5
The same way you normally detect pirated copies. This involves CD checks, checking game code for alterations, and any other technique you care to use. There are many ways to detect pirate copies.
10/12/2002 (9:51 am)
Kall,The same way you normally detect pirated copies. This involves CD checks, checking game code for alterations, and any other technique you care to use. There are many ways to detect pirate copies.
#6
Piracy does hurt because a good majority of those pirates would have bought the game if they couldn't have gotten it for free. The publisher still had to pay all of those fees I mentioned. With Piracy you steal potential money (although I see it as stealing actual money since money was paid to make that game your playing for free..but Im sure some don't see it that way) where as if you stole the box, cd, etc then you would be stealing actual money. That's enough on Piracy..dont need anymore flame wars :)
A problem with copy protection schemes is they still will be cracked even if they offer a smaller fee for the game. Crackers enjoy the challenge. I read in one of the Spyro games they put copy protection in so that it took a month for it to be cracked instead of less than a day. They basically had the copy protection spread throughout the game so that the crackers had to actually play the game all the way through in detail to find all of the copy protection schemes...since it was a Playstation game Im sure they wasted many a cdr. The article was in Game Developer magazine...I dont remember which issue but I think it had spyro on the cover. If you get a chance to get a copy of that one read the article..its interesting.
-Tim aka Spock
10/12/2002 (10:07 am)
The 50 bucks mostly goes to the publisher. Its for paying back the publisher for the money they spent to pay the developer, the money spent to print X copies of the game (including manual, box, cds), it goes towards marketing done by the publisher, and it goes towards the money required to get the game into all of the stores. Piracy does hurt because a good majority of those pirates would have bought the game if they couldn't have gotten it for free. The publisher still had to pay all of those fees I mentioned. With Piracy you steal potential money (although I see it as stealing actual money since money was paid to make that game your playing for free..but Im sure some don't see it that way) where as if you stole the box, cd, etc then you would be stealing actual money. That's enough on Piracy..dont need anymore flame wars :)
A problem with copy protection schemes is they still will be cracked even if they offer a smaller fee for the game. Crackers enjoy the challenge. I read in one of the Spyro games they put copy protection in so that it took a month for it to be cracked instead of less than a day. They basically had the copy protection spread throughout the game so that the crackers had to actually play the game all the way through in detail to find all of the copy protection schemes...since it was a Playstation game Im sure they wasted many a cdr. The article was in Game Developer magazine...I dont remember which issue but I think it had spyro on the cover. If you get a chance to get a copy of that one read the article..its interesting.
-Tim aka Spock
#7
And it's also true, games can be cracked very easily...just about any protection that can be assembled can be disassembled just as easily. Notice I say "just about." To my knowledge, there's no way possible to crack online CD key verification. All the Blizzard games, Tribes 2, Battlefield 1942, Half-Life (with won.net), and I'm sure many others must be purchased in order to be played online. Sure, some have managed to make cracked servers which don't require a valid CD key, but finding those are very, very difficult, and frustrating to the point which the gamer would almost wish he had a valid copy.
If I were a game developer, I'd feel comfort in knowing that I can get $15 of pure profit for each game I sell. Does anyone know how much the software developer gets after all the publishing fees are taken it? Probably about that much. So what's the deal here? This seems like a win/win situation for the gamer and developer alike. If anyone can come up with any serious flaws to this plan, I'd love to hear them...it seems like a pretty solid concept to me.
As we move forward, more and more gamers are turning to broadband. Even those who play singleplayer games are probably sitting on their always-on internet connection. This verification system could work in that case, but could be bypassed, and is almost an invasion of the user's privacy (requiring a check every time you load up your singleplayer game...big brother is watching you). Maybe some day some company will come up with a pretty flawless way to rent computer games, just as people can rent console video games. That way, they can easily tie the game to an online verification system. Valve's Steam seems to work in this sense, but it's not even released, so who knows when it'll be cracked.
10/12/2002 (10:33 am)
Spock, thanks for elaborating on where all the money goes, which further pushes my point. Why should we have to pay for all these expenses? Piracy does take away from potential sales. Hell, I'm not gonna lie. Some of the best games I've ever played were pirated. Honestly, I probably would have bought them if they weren't $50. And I'm sure most of you can say the same thing. I wouldn't believe you if you told me you've never pirated a game.And it's also true, games can be cracked very easily...just about any protection that can be assembled can be disassembled just as easily. Notice I say "just about." To my knowledge, there's no way possible to crack online CD key verification. All the Blizzard games, Tribes 2, Battlefield 1942, Half-Life (with won.net), and I'm sure many others must be purchased in order to be played online. Sure, some have managed to make cracked servers which don't require a valid CD key, but finding those are very, very difficult, and frustrating to the point which the gamer would almost wish he had a valid copy.
If I were a game developer, I'd feel comfort in knowing that I can get $15 of pure profit for each game I sell. Does anyone know how much the software developer gets after all the publishing fees are taken it? Probably about that much. So what's the deal here? This seems like a win/win situation for the gamer and developer alike. If anyone can come up with any serious flaws to this plan, I'd love to hear them...it seems like a pretty solid concept to me.
As we move forward, more and more gamers are turning to broadband. Even those who play singleplayer games are probably sitting on their always-on internet connection. This verification system could work in that case, but could be bypassed, and is almost an invasion of the user's privacy (requiring a check every time you load up your singleplayer game...big brother is watching you). Maybe some day some company will come up with a pretty flawless way to rent computer games, just as people can rent console video games. That way, they can easily tie the game to an online verification system. Valve's Steam seems to work in this sense, but it's not even released, so who knows when it'll be cracked.
#8
I think a better idea is to do what Future Shop is doing here in Canada. They are selling games with a bonus piece of hardware. Nothing to drastic mind you but the stuff is still useful. For example UT2k3 comes with the SideWinder, a headset with a mic and a software package for voice communication. Buy the game, you get this cool headset for free (although FutureShop is selling the game for $5 more then other places around here). Personnally I wasn't going to buy UT2K3 right now because I can't really play it. But with the free headset which I pretty much use everyday I was sold.
Alc
10/12/2002 (10:38 am)
There is one major flaw with that idea. Now your promoting pirating so why would anyone buy the real version? I myself buy the majority of my games (on occation I borrow a game from a friend) but I could buy a game for cheeper why would I buy the more expensive version.I think a better idea is to do what Future Shop is doing here in Canada. They are selling games with a bonus piece of hardware. Nothing to drastic mind you but the stuff is still useful. For example UT2k3 comes with the SideWinder, a headset with a mic and a software package for voice communication. Buy the game, you get this cool headset for free (although FutureShop is selling the game for $5 more then other places around here). Personnally I wasn't going to buy UT2K3 right now because I can't really play it. But with the free headset which I pretty much use everyday I was sold.
Alc
#9
I am a music lover. I have a cable modem. I can just as easily download every new album from the artists I love for free and not think anything of it; but I don't. Why? I enjoy supporting the artist, and out of it I get the CD case, an actual pressed CD, and lyrics. All this for around $15. I'm sure there are a lot of game fans out there just like me...those RPG players who want to get the manual and map for their game, the Blizzard completists who like having every alternate box cover for some crazy reason...
Maybe if we had some hard figures of how much the game developers make, how much the publisher makes, and how much is actually lost to piracy, we could see if this plan would really work out. If anyone ever put this into effect, I think we'd still see people going to the store to get their favorite game when it comes out. You still have the people without broadband, without CD burners, and those who just aren't hardcore gamers who would do something like this. And who knows...maybe publishers will start to take notice that "Wow, we really are charging too much" and start lowering prices on retail games, or start selling games for half the price on the first month of release or something...
Or maybe I'm just dreaming of a perfect world...
10/12/2002 (10:58 am)
That could be a flaw...but ultimately, the game developers are getting the money which they deserve. The logic that "If I can get it for cheaper/free, why buy" is kinda flawed. If it were completely true, the world would grind to a halt...everyone would stop buying music, games, movies, cause we can just copy all of those, right?I am a music lover. I have a cable modem. I can just as easily download every new album from the artists I love for free and not think anything of it; but I don't. Why? I enjoy supporting the artist, and out of it I get the CD case, an actual pressed CD, and lyrics. All this for around $15. I'm sure there are a lot of game fans out there just like me...those RPG players who want to get the manual and map for their game, the Blizzard completists who like having every alternate box cover for some crazy reason...
Maybe if we had some hard figures of how much the game developers make, how much the publisher makes, and how much is actually lost to piracy, we could see if this plan would really work out. If anyone ever put this into effect, I think we'd still see people going to the store to get their favorite game when it comes out. You still have the people without broadband, without CD burners, and those who just aren't hardcore gamers who would do something like this. And who knows...maybe publishers will start to take notice that "Wow, we really are charging too much" and start lowering prices on retail games, or start selling games for half the price on the first month of release or something...
Or maybe I'm just dreaming of a perfect world...
#10
10/12/2002 (11:47 am)
Isn't this idea commonly called Shareware?
#11
What this idea is suggesting is hey LOOK almost everyone at some point has an illegal copy of software somewhere
so why not tap into this, especialy with the increasing broadband capabilitys, i think this a matter of conditioning, the mentalty that scream the damn (insert swear word here) didnt play for it could be used against the pirate, most are casual anyway, they look at it and if its usefull they struggle with the copy protection and other anomilys because its worth it, as they find the software usefull, if they had the option as the post says, to then purchase a genuine Key (whatever) this would reduce the piracy on that particular software, how, by dealing with the pirate,. there will always be your die hard collectors but they hardly ever use the software, they simply collect stuff, in fact its probably a medical condintion lol, but these people would then help the producers by supplying the illegal copys of which 3 % would then purchace a key adding revenue to the software company, it is a fact that any copy protection can be cracked, so what this post suggests is that stop fighting against the "weather" we cant change it, so why not benefit from it, this post isnt directed against you Greg i just noticed your veiw and have extensive experience in sales and was able to throw some light on to the suject, (i hope).
To Sum up: many know that you cant stop piracy (all code thats assembled can be dissassembled and reverse engineered) just like you can (if your carefull) demolish a building and use the same materials to build a replica excluding the crappy statue at the front (ie the copy protection) that doesnt do anything usefull, selling a legit key or serial to someone at a reduced price (considering the virtual zero cost involved) would increase the companys revenue and in someway combat the piracy problem, those that collect software would then propagate this by getting more consumers interested in your product, affectivly biting their own arse.
at least i think thats what the post is trying to put across.
10/12/2002 (1:48 pm)
Greg in your last post what you described is basic sell ing patterns, all these ploys are use to convince the consumer that they are getting a good deal, this is used extensivly and sometimes illegaly in direct sales enviroments, ie bumping up the price because the consumer "considers" he is getting something for free, which in some cases are valid, obviously the seller is getting the added products for a reduced price ie adding 5 $ to the game price is probably less expensive than buying the hardware you mentioned in a seperate package, the salesman/person is selling at a profit, he not only makes the normal 100/100 markup used in most retail sales, but when you consider the added sales they get through a promotion, that probably cost them zero doller, (large hardware manufactures supply hardware deals as publicity, and can easily afford to), he/she arent doing you (personaly any favours) although you still benefit.What this idea is suggesting is hey LOOK almost everyone at some point has an illegal copy of software somewhere
so why not tap into this, especialy with the increasing broadband capabilitys, i think this a matter of conditioning, the mentalty that scream the damn (insert swear word here) didnt play for it could be used against the pirate, most are casual anyway, they look at it and if its usefull they struggle with the copy protection and other anomilys because its worth it, as they find the software usefull, if they had the option as the post says, to then purchase a genuine Key (whatever) this would reduce the piracy on that particular software, how, by dealing with the pirate,. there will always be your die hard collectors but they hardly ever use the software, they simply collect stuff, in fact its probably a medical condintion lol, but these people would then help the producers by supplying the illegal copys of which 3 % would then purchace a key adding revenue to the software company, it is a fact that any copy protection can be cracked, so what this post suggests is that stop fighting against the "weather" we cant change it, so why not benefit from it, this post isnt directed against you Greg i just noticed your veiw and have extensive experience in sales and was able to throw some light on to the suject, (i hope).
To Sum up: many know that you cant stop piracy (all code thats assembled can be dissassembled and reverse engineered) just like you can (if your carefull) demolish a building and use the same materials to build a replica excluding the crappy statue at the front (ie the copy protection) that doesnt do anything usefull, selling a legit key or serial to someone at a reduced price (considering the virtual zero cost involved) would increase the companys revenue and in someway combat the piracy problem, those that collect software would then propagate this by getting more consumers interested in your product, affectivly biting their own arse.
at least i think thats what the post is trying to put across.
#12
10/12/2002 (1:56 pm)
I don't even know what YOUR post was trying to get across...perhaps if you could write more clearly, I could respond to it.
#13
Primarily it addresses this paragraph.
Let's say I already have the software. We won't say how I got it; that's not the point. The point is, I have in my possession a burned copy of the game. Who loses here? Well, it's pretty useless cause I don't have a key, so nobody in this case has the upper hand. What if I could go online and buy the key for a price? The CD + jewel case + key cost $20...it's gotta be cheaper than that. Which brings me to the point: why don't software companies have a system in which users can purchase only the CD key for a fair price?
10/12/2002 (3:16 pm)
In simple terms jim, instead of fighting piracy use it to our advantage letting the pirate help distribute the game/software, then charge the pirate user a nominal fee to make their copy legal, this reduced fee could be then offset against zero distriution costs, so producing the lower fee for the game/software and gaining more revenue for the developer/producer,(as apposed to warez) basic buisness managment realy, my post was more of an elaboration of how i thought the topics method could work.Primarily it addresses this paragraph.
Let's say I already have the software. We won't say how I got it; that's not the point. The point is, I have in my possession a burned copy of the game. Who loses here? Well, it's pretty useless cause I don't have a key, so nobody in this case has the upper hand. What if I could go online and buy the key for a price? The CD + jewel case + key cost $20...it's gotta be cheaper than that. Which brings me to the point: why don't software companies have a system in which users can purchase only the CD key for a fair price?
#14
-Tim aka Spock
10/12/2002 (3:25 pm)
Id say the developer gets somewhere from $5 - $8 off of a sale. But I dont know that for a fact and it probably varies publisher to publisher. ALso don't forget part of that $50 goes for the store so the publisher/developer never see any of that. ALthough Im not sure what the wholesale price on a $50 retail game is.-Tim aka Spock
#15
Scenario:
I have broadband (note: i dont)
i can download XYZ software (supplyed buy a pirate)
or i can buy it for 50 $ from a publisher
i decide to download and think hey i could realy use this
publisher says ok you can have a key making your software legal for 15$.
the point is, i know and understand that it costs to develop and produce this software, i also realise this would affect boxed sales, but the company has no distribution cost no packageing cost, if the key is lost you could be charged to reregistar your copy at the same price, surely good buisness sence tells us i would rather have 15 $ than zero, if you weigh that against no distribution or production cost (excluding dev) against zero because they all have warez copys, and include the nominal fee to make it legal, this may help to combat piracy by making it less attractive.
10/12/2002 (4:03 pm)
Regardless, Tim zero % of 20 or 50 $ is still zero, as most realize for whatever reasons fighting piracy is at best, very expensive and at worst a complete waste of Dev time, so turn the stakes and at least convince the pirate "user" to pay something. The biggest prolem with this concept is everyone would then use the "buy the key" scenario, but if this is then considered and adjusted against distribtion and software cost (carefully) i think the publisher/developer would gain, through redused distribution costs.Scenario:
I have broadband (note: i dont)
i can download XYZ software (supplyed buy a pirate)
or i can buy it for 50 $ from a publisher
i decide to download and think hey i could realy use this
publisher says ok you can have a key making your software legal for 15$.
the point is, i know and understand that it costs to develop and produce this software, i also realise this would affect boxed sales, but the company has no distribution cost no packageing cost, if the key is lost you could be charged to reregistar your copy at the same price, surely good buisness sence tells us i would rather have 15 $ than zero, if you weigh that against no distribution or production cost (excluding dev) against zero because they all have warez copys, and include the nominal fee to make it legal, this may help to combat piracy by making it less attractive.
#16
Now, one thing to realize with manuals, boxes, and CDs is that making 1 of them is not significantly cheaper than making 1000. Making 30,000 is not much cheaper than making 50,000. Most of the costs for manuals and boxes are artwork, layout, design, and legalese. For CDs, most of the cost is making a master and from that making stamps. So, while you don't have direct distribution costs to supply these pirated versions, you still have to pay for all of this work that's been done for the legitimate version.
One thing to be aware of is that if you blur the line between legitimate and pirated in a customers' mind, they may stop caring about paying you altogether.
10/12/2002 (4:38 pm)
I notice tensions on this thread are a bit high. Take a deep breath, good.Now, one thing to realize with manuals, boxes, and CDs is that making 1 of them is not significantly cheaper than making 1000. Making 30,000 is not much cheaper than making 50,000. Most of the costs for manuals and boxes are artwork, layout, design, and legalese. For CDs, most of the cost is making a master and from that making stamps. So, while you don't have direct distribution costs to supply these pirated versions, you still have to pay for all of this work that's been done for the legitimate version.
One thing to be aware of is that if you blur the line between legitimate and pirated in a customers' mind, they may stop caring about paying you altogether.
#17
Argue it all you want, those are the facts. Whether or not you would have bought it is irrelevant. You're playing a game you didn't pay for (freeware not included). That's stealing.
Deal with it how you will. It doesn't change a thing.
10/12/2002 (4:38 pm)
The bottom line is this: A game is a product. The code is a product. It's a useful thing. And in the economy, you pay for products. If you don't pay for products (and they aren't gifts), that's classified as stealing. Period.Argue it all you want, those are the facts. Whether or not you would have bought it is irrelevant. You're playing a game you didn't pay for (freeware not included). That's stealing.
Deal with it how you will. It doesn't change a thing.
#18
10/12/2002 (4:43 pm)
Did you even read the post Brian, or are you too busy standing on your "anti-piracy" soapbox. The point is that the user would be paying for the key. The key activates the software. The user, ultimately, pays for the software. He doesn't pay for the CD that it came on, nor the case the CD came in, nor the box the case came in, nor the manual and other useless ads that came inside the box.
#19
Yep Taron, I realised this was a marketing ploy :) (and a good one too). That was my point. As a consumer it doesn't matter how much the whole sale cost is unless you are able to haggle with the dealer. For games this isn't an option. So when I go to the store and get two things for $70 when if I had have bought them individually I would have had to pay $140, I think I got a good deal.
I would say though that it is better to encourage people to buy something then to force them to in order to keep playing. I never suggested the model wouldn't work, just that you would probably end up making less money.
Alc
10/12/2002 (6:21 pm)
What I was getting at in my post was that your not getting around software piracy by offering pirates an option of buying it after they pirated it, you are encouraging it. More people will likely pirate your software because they will end up leagaly owning it in the end anyway. In other words instead of making more money you are loosing money you could have been making. Which kinda defeats the purpose.Yep Taron, I realised this was a marketing ploy :) (and a good one too). That was my point. As a consumer it doesn't matter how much the whole sale cost is unless you are able to haggle with the dealer. For games this isn't an option. So when I go to the store and get two things for $70 when if I had have bought them individually I would have had to pay $140, I think I got a good deal.
I would say though that it is better to encourage people to buy something then to force them to in order to keep playing. I never suggested the model wouldn't work, just that you would probably end up making less money.
Alc
#20
11/19/2002 (6:52 pm)
I don't see how the marketing ploy of selling the key for $15 (or whatever lesser price you set on it) would help the developer. Number 1, they still had to pay all the programmers,artists, designers, and authors for the game, the manual, the cd, and the box. Next, if the publisher doesn't get to see any of the money spent this way (not sure if you meant that or not) then there will be a decrease in the amount of publishers and thus a decrease in the amount of games. If a developer can't get supported then there going to have to do it indie style (not that there is anything wrong with that) but without another job that doesn't really bring the bread home. Also, selling games through this method would cause and increase in the amount of piracy. Once every joe somebody on the street can download it, it's not to hard a step for them to find a crack or a cd key. If you haven't noticed most companies use patterns for the cd keys on their games. One example is Westwood. I was playing Nox with a friend over LAN, but we didn't have a cd key for the second copy on his old computer. Well a cd key from C&C Tiberian Sun worked just fine! Even if devlopers and publishers left this method of cd key creation, crackers would find another way to get around it. I feel that game companies should use the Blizzard/Tribes/MMORPG style. Anyone can download Tribes 2, but they aren't going to enjoy it much playing against the bots. I think another good thing is the play before you play idea. Demos are one way of doing this, but to actually let the user get a taste of the real game, I think ideas like Yahoo's game rentals are a good idea. If someone goes out and rents a game on yahoo, plays it and likes it, they will go out and spend $50 on it so they don't have to pay the rental fee every other time they play it. It works for console games doesn't it? Anyway just my thoughts. 
Torque Owner Max Robinson