Ubisoft: EndWar PC Impacted by Piracy

Videogaming247 quotes Ubisoft Shanghai creative director Michael de Plater on how piracy is a reason Tom Clancy's EndWar is appearing on consoles first, with plans for a PC edition remaining vague (story). He says this of a PC version of the voice-controlled RTS game: "To be honest, if PC wasn’t pirated to hell and back, there’d probably be a PC version coming out the same day as the other two," also saying: "You know, the level of piracy that you get with the PC just cannibalizes the others, because people just steal that version." He goes on to agree with dire predictions about the impact of piracy on PC gaming: "But at the moment, if you release the PC version, essentially what you’re doing is letting people have a free version that they rip off instead of a purchased version. Piracy’s basically killing PC."
View : : :
81.
 
Re: ...
Oct 9, 2008, 11:39
81.
Re: ... Oct 9, 2008, 11:39
Oct 9, 2008, 11:39
 
"PC game piracy is a serious problem and it - not DRM - is the single factor that is going to KILL PC gaming."

How many people people have you heard say they won't buy a game because it was pirated? How many people have you heard say they won't buy a game because of DRM? Is the industry losing more customers or gaining more through the use of DRM? You sound pretty sure. I hope you have more than anecdotes. Since they don't ADVERTISE the restriction of use that come with DRM on television and in ads, i have to think they realise DRM is not in the best interest of the individual customer. Word getting out about these restrictions PROBABLY isn't winning over any hearts and minds. It sure hasn't stopped the illegal downloading, that's for sure. 1,000,000 downloads of Spore indeed...

Guess how long that would take - assuming it ever happens if you are losing even 50% of your sales to piracy.

Speaking of numbers pulled out of asses and foolish assumptions...

Yes. ".001" was a number to illustrate a point but I call your assuption that "50%" (you're suggesting it's higher...) of sales are LOST due to piracy equally braindead, foolish, and without merit. I do belive it's impossible to prove intent except on a case by case basis and you're suggesting it's SO OBVIOUSLY even higher than 50% of sales that are lost to piracy.

(the number .001 was made up to illustrate CONSOLE GAME sales lost because the PC VERSION was pirated. Spore piracy numbers prove dick since that isn't a console release. Please don't tell me you mean the DS version, for the love of god...)

The mcdonalds analogy was intended to imply a concept of "intent" - which you seem to have a super human understanding of. So go ahead and come up with a better one or just simply explain how you KNOW FOR A FACT that more than 50% of sales are regularly LOST to piracy. That is, a person who downloaded the game WOULD HAVE BOUGHT IT. And please don't quote numbers of times Crysis or Spore was downloaded without actual PROOF that those numbers would have acutally BOUGHT THE GAME.

It is already a KNOWN fact that more and more triple-A games are coming out first on the console and then on the PC.

I don't even know how this "fact" is supposed to refute what I claimed about poor sales being related to things other than piracy. It's an argument for something, i think, just nothing that I said.

no matter HOW to slice and dice it, if piracy wasn't a problem in various mediums (music, movies, games) that DRM wouldn't even be an issue.

You arent that naive, I know you don't believe that. It has been admitted by people at the RIAA that various forms of copy protection and their hardline stance against copying music from a CD you own onto your ipod is intended to create NEW REVENUE streams, by selling you the content more than once, ie: ringtones, DRMed copy for your ipod AND a physical CD. It also serves to squash out the second hand market by not allowing you to resell your CD or DVD, forcing others to buy new store bought copies.

This comment was edited on Oct 9, 2008, 12:21.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
2.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
4.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
3.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
12.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
5.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
6.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
7.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
8.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
9.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
11.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
14.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
17.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
18.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
20.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
10.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
13.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
16.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
15.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
19.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
21.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
22.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
23.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
25.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
32.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
24.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
27.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
26.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
28.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
29.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
30.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
31.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
33.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
36.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
34.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
35.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
37.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
38.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
39.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
43.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
44.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
45.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
42.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
40.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
41.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
46.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
47.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
48.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
49.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
51.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
53.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
     Re: No subject
50.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
52.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
54.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
56.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
57.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
58.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
59.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
   Re: ...
60.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
   Re: ...
61.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
    Re: ...
62.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
63.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
64.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
67.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
69.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
70.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
71.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
74.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
65.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
66.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
68.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
72.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
73.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
75.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
76.
Oct 8, 2008Oct 8 2008
77.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
78.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
79.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
80.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
 81.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
  Re: ...
83.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
84.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
85.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
   Re: ...
86.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
    Re: ...
87.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
     Re: ...
88.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
    Re: ...
89.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
    Re: ...
91.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
     Re: ...
92.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
     Re: ...
93.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
      Re: ...
94.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
       Re: ...
95.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
       Re: ...
96.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
        Re: ...
97.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
         Re: ...
100.
Oct 10, 2008Oct 10 2008
         Re: ...
101.
Oct 10, 2008Oct 10 2008
          Re: ...
102.
Oct 10, 2008Oct 10 2008
           Re: ...
103.
Oct 10, 2008Oct 10 2008
           Re: ...
104.
Oct 10, 2008Oct 10 2008
            Re: ...
109.
Oct 12, 2008Oct 12 2008
110.
Oct 12, 2008Oct 12 2008
   Re: ...
82.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
90.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
98.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
99.
Oct 9, 2008Oct 9 2008
105.
Oct 10, 2008Oct 10 2008
106.
Oct 10, 2008Oct 10 2008
107.
Oct 10, 2008Oct 10 2008
108.
Oct 10, 2008Oct 10 2008
111.
Oct 12, 2008Oct 12 2008
112.
Oct 12, 2008Oct 12 2008
113.
Oct 12, 2008Oct 12 2008
114.
Oct 14, 2008Oct 14 2008
115.
Oct 14, 2008Oct 14 2008
116.
Oct 15, 2008Oct 15 2008