Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Downloading a game and then attempting to profit from it are vastly different things, also attempting to sell goods that won't update easily to people who don't know better isn't a particularly nice thing to do either. Once again you're trying to equate entirely different things and equate them as equal to try and make pirates all the worst possible people with the worst possible motives because that is the way you want to portray them.
Also the world isn't as simple as you make out, mostly the world is entirely unfair. I have horrendously painful knees(and increasingly bad other joints), I can't work easily. Even if i could work from home I'm on pain medication often enough that working consistently is very difficult as well as the pretty natural depression and anxiety that comes along with being both in pain and mostly immobile. So what does that mean for me, that means my chances of having a lot of spare cash are very small and the amount of spare time I have is huge compared to most people. So a lawyer who gets paid 200k a year but only has 3 hours spare a day to himself outside of sleep has plenty of money to buy games and little time to play them. I have plenty of time to play games and little money. So because I was born unlucky (it's a genetic problem with my joints), if I run out of money I get to just sit around bored... is that fair?
Personally I hope to eventually move into making some small indie games, if I do what I'd like to do(though would be incredibly hard to implement) is a sliding scale of cost based on social situation. Someone in my position is able to get the game for free, someone on 20-30k a year pays £5 (for an indie game, call it £15 for a aaa type game), someone on 50-150k pays £15 indie/£40 aaa and someone who makes over 150k a year pays £30 indie/£80 aaa. Not everyone is in the same situation, not everyone has the same hobbies, not everyone is able to do other cheaper/free hobbies like simply going for walks around a local park, personally I think pricing of more basic things like home entertainment should reflect personal circumstances.
Like I've said before, I pirate games, and I buy almost all the ones I play and delete the ones I don't like. Sometimes some sit in the middle I play but can't afford to buy them, but if I have no money I wouldn't buy that game anyway so the only difference is I'm less bored for the time it takes to play the game while either way the dev wouldn't get money from me. I've also pointed out where game devs get to lie and screw over customers repeatedly without a huge amount of people saying they should be done for fraud. Again I ask why is it okay for game devs to lie to screw a gamer out of money, but a gamer screwing a dev out of money is somehow a million times worse.
Then you have games like the Witcher, I didn't want to buy the first one, I saw videos, the combat looked meh. I eventually downloaded and played it, fell in love with it, bought the Witcher 1 and as a result bought the Witcher 2 and 3 at relatively full price on pre-order deals... which had I never played the first game via piracy I'd never have bought any.
Effectively in my life, I spend most of the spare money I have on entertainment... there is no more money to spend, so regardless of how many games I would download there is no more money for me to buy more games. As with the way I'd like to price my own games should I ever make them, I'd like to see a Netflix for games, where you just pay a subscription and play whatever games you want, but the price you pay is based on provable income in some way. So a disabled person with limited money can pay £20 a month for a steam subscription and play anything, while a guy making a 2mil a year pays £5000 a year for the same subscription.
Also the world isn't as simple as you make out, mostly the world is entirely unfair. I have horrendously painful knees(and increasingly bad other joints), I can't work easily. Even if i could work from home I'm on pain medication often enough that working consistently is very difficult as well as the pretty natural depression and anxiety that comes along with being both in pain and mostly immobile. So what does that mean for me, that means my chances of having a lot of spare cash are very small and the amount of spare time I have is huge compared to most people. So a lawyer who gets paid 200k a year but only has 3 hours spare a day to himself outside of sleep has plenty of money to buy games and little time to play them. I have plenty of time to play games and little money. So because I was born unlucky (it's a genetic problem with my joints), if I run out of money I get to just sit around bored... is that fair?
Personally I hope to eventually move into making some small indie games, if I do what I'd like to do(though would be incredibly hard to implement) is a sliding scale of cost based on social situation. Someone in my position is able to get the game for free, someone on 20-30k a year pays £5 (for an indie game, call it £15 for a aaa type game), someone on 50-150k pays £15 indie/£40 aaa and someone who makes over 150k a year pays £30 indie/£80 aaa. Not everyone is in the same situation, not everyone has the same hobbies, not everyone is able to do other cheaper/free hobbies like simply going for walks around a local park, personally I think pricing of more basic things like home entertainment should reflect personal circumstances.
Like I've said before, I pirate games, and I buy almost all the ones I play and delete the ones I don't like. Sometimes some sit in the middle I play but can't afford to buy them, but if I have no money I wouldn't buy that game anyway so the only difference is I'm less bored for the time it takes to play the game while either way the dev wouldn't get money from me. I've also pointed out where game devs get to lie and screw over customers repeatedly without a huge amount of people saying they should be done for fraud. Again I ask why is it okay for game devs to lie to screw a gamer out of money, but a gamer screwing a dev out of money is somehow a million times worse.
Then you have games like the Witcher, I didn't want to buy the first one, I saw videos, the combat looked meh. I eventually downloaded and played it, fell in love with it, bought the Witcher 1 and as a result bought the Witcher 2 and 3 at relatively full price on pre-order deals... which had I never played the first game via piracy I'd never have bought any.
Effectively in my life, I spend most of the spare money I have on entertainment... there is no more money to spend, so regardless of how many games I would download there is no more money for me to buy more games. As with the way I'd like to price my own games should I ever make them, I'd like to see a Netflix for games, where you just pay a subscription and play whatever games you want, but the price you pay is based on provable income in some way. So a disabled person with limited money can pay £20 a month for a steam subscription and play anything, while a guy making a 2mil a year pays £5000 a year for the same subscription.
Last edited:
heh
.
). I buy one game a month, and i only buy it when i find it on offer. I might buy the odd humble bundle here and there and when i do i also pay over the target rather than mug them off and give them a penny but other than that it's one a month. I don't think that's much different to what you are spending. The difference is, i don't pirate. I haven't done for years. when i did i didn't make an excuse - i did it because i didn't want to pay for it. Now i don't do it, not because I have bundles of cash available, but because I'm old enough to know better and I want to help support the industry rather than contribute to bringing it down.