Piracy versus PC Gaming [Mar 09, 2007, 8:23 pm ET] – Share – Viewing Comments
Next Generation recaps a GDC talk titled "The Videogame Piracy Problem:
Fifteen Men on a Dead Man’s Chest" by id Software CEO Todd Hollenshead about the
impact of piracy on the game industry. They outline how Mr. Hollenshead says the
estimated $3 billion economic loss caused by piracy in 2004 does not include
piracy that takes place on the Internet. There is also an article about this
talk on
Joystiq that focuses on the statement that piracy is a factor in id's
embrace of consoles, quoting Todd as saying "Piracy has pushed id as being
multiplatform." On a related note,
Can PC
Gaming Survive in a Console World (thanks
Digg) recaps a panel discussion on the topic that brought up a similar
point:
Part of the problem is piracy. Big titles get stolen by cyber thieves, and it hurts revenue. "The market," said Capps, "that would buy a $600 video card knows how Bittorrent works."
Does that mean casual games, which exponentially outsell what PC gaming traditionalists think of as A-list titles, will one day rule? Hilleman made a point: casual is a poor choice of words. The average player on EA's Pogo "casual" game network plays "for 24 hours a week. There's nothing casual about that."
There is some light in the PC gaming world. World of Warcraft, for instance, is a massive hit, and the upcoming Spore looks not only creative and different, but promising. The MMO and other social networking games could become the norm for PC gaming, with big-ticket titles growing rarer with each passing year. Johnson added that MMOs are "successful because you can't pirate WoW. You cannot pirate an MMO. Period." Therefore, he said, "game design on the PC is going to bend toward persistence."
You have no need anyways, since you have no "need" for the game in the first place.
Okay, now we're arguing philosophy. No, I don't have any need for the game. Or any game. I have no need for television either. Or movies. Or this computer. In reality, all I need is food and shelter. That's all anyone else needs. Everything else is fabricated by society.
Again, your "logic" is horribly flawed since it implies a need you don't have, and the fact is their is no connection between the actions of the publishers and the actions you subsequently take.
Here's the connection:
1) I like good games.
2) Publishers release games.
3) Publishers don't always release good games.
4) If a game is good, I buy it.
5) The only way for me to truly tell if a game is good is to play it extensively.
6) The only way to play the game extensively without buying it is to pirate it.
Understand? Really quite simple. And logical. And by logical, I mean that each step is clearly connected.
Second, you still haven't offered any solid logical reasons for piracy.
Um, must I repeat myself so often? Refer to post 31. Refute those points logically so that your aforementioned statement is accurate.
But you won't. Instead, you'll say: "I don't need to refute any your points because they are all based on a fallacious premise. You are not entitled to play anything you haven't bought. You have no right." Again, what rights are talking about? It's obviously not a natural right, since nothing in nature is preventing me from doing it. It's not a divine right, since no deity is striking me down. This "right" you speak of doesn't exist.
Your argument is not based on reason, it is based on the irrelevant philosophies of men who lived in a time where digital piracy did not exist. You can regurgitate them all you want, it won't make your argument any stronger.
Date
Subject
Author
Copyright © 1996-2024 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Privacy Policy. Manage Cookie Settings.
News CGI copyright © 1999-2024 James "furn" Furness & Blue's News. All rights reserved.
Chatbear v1.5.0/blue++: Page generated 6 October 2024, 22:47.