NKD wrote on Feb 13, 2016, 17:56:
I don't believe anyone who says they pirate a game, play it, and then buy it if they are satisfied. Yeah, maybe they buy it on a Steam sale 2 years later when they want to re-play it, but they aren't slapping down $50-60 when it really counts in the first critical couple weeks of sales.
Well, lots of players do buy it at release if the pirated copy works well. Case in point is the Call of Duty games, which these days are notorious for being horrible PC ports. Plenty pirate the game (offline play only of course), test it, then if it runs well, they buy it so they can play online.
So many games that have Achievements, Leaderboards, Coop, or Multiplayer still have strong incentives to legally buy it even if you can pirate.
But yeah, a lot of people will pirate and never buy. Those people also would be very unlikely to buy in the first place. But that's the classic debate that has raged for decades.
El Pit wrote on Feb 13, 2016, 15:11:
Brumbek trying his best to justify what he intended to do from the beginning... Obvious.
Brumbek orders a pizza. The pizza is not okay, so he asks for a refund. Problem solved.
Brumbek buys a game from Steam. The game is not okay. so he asks for a refund. Problem solved.
But Brumbek says Nooooo, not good enough. I need to eat at least half of the pizza, ahm, play hours of the game.
I admire your attempt at creativity. And your liberal use of Brumbek.
I just think a lot of gamers aren't mature business-minded people. In business office settings it isn't uncommon to get a new printer/scanner/equipment and use it for a week or even a month before deciding on a final purchase decision.
And yet, I'm accused of being a greedy pizza jerk because I also want assurances the game functions as intended after 5 or 10 hours of play.