Piracy and Small Game Developers

Maybe i focused on the piracy issue too much, i thought the comments about hardware vendors was particularly enlightening, sometimes it's easy to forget just how many pieces of hardware/software can make up a single PC, the possibilities are endless and to get a game that runs well must be mighty tough.

I remember back in the days of Elite 3 and Sensi Soccer you had to randomly type in a word from the game manual, admitedly all the crackers need to do is pdf the manual and supply it with the crack but surely there's some method out there thats simple yet moderately effective.

However i'm firmly of the belief that the hackers are more inventive than the developers, in which case i'd like to think that consumer education would be better, especially if they realise that in cases like this people and families are losing their incomes.
 
I do wonder about their numbers however.

There was a blog from Introversion (creators of uplink, darwinia and defcon) a while back that talked about similar issues, but they had a serious flaw in thier thinking. To assess the number of pirates they compared the number of patch downloads to the number of sold copies and found 3x as many patches downloaded as games sold. Simple no?

Except the major flaw is that there is absolutely no relation to the two figures. I know personally I downloaded uplink patches about 3+ times because of PC reinstalls and wanting to play it again 6+ months later.

So to the meat of that article. It seems the major problem was that they had very bad initial press due to "bugs" yet the bugs were initentional due to copy protection. I'm sorry but that is the most stupid thing I've ever heard. Why would you use copy protection like that? Sure it screws the pirates but at what cost? Insane. Bioshock is a classic example of this, the pirated version is actually better than retail because the lame "only install 3 times" protection is removed. Why??
 
If a game is 'drivvel' then why would you want to download it in the first place? Are you saying the likes of CoD4 is 'drivvel', and that is why people pirate it?
I am sure there are version of James Pond II (possibly the worst game ever created) available, remind me again what do you base that only good games are pirated on?

COD4 isn't exactly the perfect game, its scripted which some people do not like if they pirated it they will get to see first hand how scripted the game is and make their decision.


I also dont claim that all people who download software use it as a 'try before you buy', but there are a significant number who do, as shown by this forum


I don't see how I am forcing my opinion on others. No matter how you argue it, downloading a game is wrong.
You do so when you say
Because there are people that are deluded and believe they aren't stealing or causing anyone to lose money (just look at one of my previous threads on game piracy), or make up some bull about a way of testing whether a game is good
Aside from the obvious that you are downright wrong about companies losing money in every case of piracy, the above shows how of a condescending and of the attitude 'i am right, you are wrong' you are, rather than in a mindframe to promote productive discussion
 
Last edited:
Would be interesting to put a figure on subsequent sales after evalation of pirate games. I doubt it's a worthwhile figure though, especially on a global sales scale.

Another question is if user decided the game sucked, so you wouldn't pay to obtain it. Would that person still play the pirated game to completion, or a time period that would indicate it obiviously didn't suck that much as their still playing it.
 
i used to have a mate who download games because he coudlnt afford the new games. albeit he was 10 so that was the main reason, and that is most probably the main base of downloaders are under age.

as soon as you get a job, its nice to buy games. some people still dont see it that way. games with a certificate of 12 should be cheaper than games with a rating of 18.
 
While I often pirate games, I never do it from 'the small people'. I have all 3 of Introversions games, and pre-ordered AudioSurf too. While I also buy games from the larger companies (I recently bought NWN2 a game which I had pirated but enjoyed enough to buy it), I wouldn't pirate a game from a smaller company unless they didn't offer a demo for it, and even then I'd buy or delete it.

I realise that this may appear as me trying to justify my actions or something, I'm just saying what I do, nothing more nothing less.
 
I often download a game to see what it's like before I buy it, especially if there's no beta or demo, and I will download a game by a "small developer" if they don't give me a chance to try it before putting money down.

If a game is tosh then to me it doesn't matter if the developer is big or small, they won't get my support. If they make a quality game then they will and it's that simple.

And to the people saying that it's "BS" that anyone downloads a game purely for try-before-you-buy purposes, get off your horse and get a clue, not everyone is out for free stuff and it really is that simple.

I won't keep playing a game that's tosh, even if it's free. What would be the point?
 
It must be disheartening to get a position in game development, after years of study, work on a great game thinking people will love playing this, release it to have people not buy it. Sure they like the game but they don't respect you enough to actually buy it, so how good can it be? Did they really like it or did they just download it for the fun of it, afterall its free?

It's also a waste of time working on anything antipiracy wise, because everyone knows that every copy protection is hacked sometimes with lightening efficiency, and it doesnt seem to make a difference whether you spend a penny or a billion on your anti-copy it probably wont make a difference to how long it takes to crack.
 
Although they would sell more on consoles, perhaps MS see only releasing Halo 3 on the 360 as a way to increase revenue, you still get pirates but nowhere near as many as on PCs.
 
Although they would sell more on consoles, perhaps MS see only releasing Halo 3 on the 360 as a way to increase revenue, you still get pirates but nowhere near as many as on PCs.
Halo 3 only on 360 had nothing to do with increasing revenue on the game, more to do with increasing revenue on the console. Halo has always been the flagship Xbox title and it's always been that PC gamers have had to wait a year for it to appear on the PC platform.

If they launched both at the same time you'd see that it would still sell very well on the PC, guaranteed, but it wouldn't be "an Xbox game" anymore and you'd probably even see a slight dip in Xbox console unit sales for that reason. Maybe not anymore though now that the 360 has established itself as a mainstream console product.

As for piracy on the PC being more common than piracy on the 360, that's pretty difficult to say as you don't have numbers to back it up. Also there's miles more PCs than there are consoles as well so piracy is bound to be much more obvious to outside observers. Either way piracy is utterly rampant with the 360.
 
Why would anyone want to want 7 days for a pc game to download (they're huge in size) instead of going out and paying £30 for it?!
... because it saves you £30 maybe? And I think you'll find the average connection (2 mb) does around 1 GB per hour, so how you are working out that a game would take 7 days I have no idea.

People pirate because it's easy and they know they won't get caught. It would be a piece of cake for the cops to pull up list of 10,000 IP adresses of people pirating games right now and take them to court. If that sort of thing happened regularly and there was a realistic chance of getting caught the amount of piracy woud drop by 95%. The other option is to have all games work like a MMORPG where the content is supplied by a server, even for single player.

The current status quo is no good for anyone, gamers, publishers or developers and it's hurting the PC gaming industry badly.
 
It would be a piece of cake for the cops to pull up list of 10,000 IP adresses of people pirating games right now and take them to court.
Actually it'd be nearly impossible for them to do that as ISPs don't have to give that information up in accordance with data protection laws, privacy laws and such. Those laws would need a total reform for what you're talking about and personally I'm glad I live in a country that protects the privacy of its media users even when I am not downloading games.

This is why companies like the RIAA take the law into their own hands and harvest IP addresses manually from people as they download, it's pretty easy to do if they upload fake files themselves on torrents or by browsing peoples files like they did with Kazaa, then they just send letters threatening to sue. Wouldn't fly in this country though as I said above, we have laws to protect against that sort of rubbish.

If anything you're pretty much only likely to be done if you're selling dodgy DVDs on a market or something.
 
An issue no one has raised yet would be that of not having enough time to play all the good titles on pc. I have shelves full of games, play 2 different MMOs, xbox 360, wii and some handhelds. I don't download any games other than that I have bought and plan to play. This is because I don't have time, if game devs want my time (money) they had better get a demo on the go. I don't want to waste my time on rubbish games never mind my money.
 
Actually it'd be nearly impossible for them to do that as ISPs don't have to give that information up in accordance with data protection laws, privacy laws and such. Those laws would need a total reform for what you're talking about and personally I'm glad I live in a country that protects the privacy of its media users even when I am not downloading games.
The apps themselves will give you the IP addresses, it's not hidden. Plus I'm sure ISPs could easily see who is using binary groups on usenet for instance. Why exactly any ISP needs to give their customers access to alt.binaries.games for instance is completely beyond me since the group (and many others like it) has no use apart from distribution of pirated games. I'm also pretty sure that if the police think someone is using their connection to commit a crime, they can force ISPs to reveal contact info. The movie studios have force many ISPs in the UK to cancel peoples connection/contract for downloading movies.
 
The apps themselves will give you the IP addresses, it's not hidden.
I already said that. It's how the RIAA bullies people who download music.

Plus I'm sure ISPs could easily see who is using binary groups on usenet for instance. Why exactly any ISP needs to give their customers access to alt.binaries.games for instance is completely beyond me since the group (and many others like it) has no use apart from distribution of pirated games.
If you don't like it, write to your ISP. And most ISPs offer very limited access, you'll find most people using it for downloading movies and games or whatever are doing it through a private hosting company.

I'm also pretty sure that if the police think someone is using their connection to commit a crime, they can force ISPs to reveal contact info.
You're wrong, and thank God. I'd hate to live in a country where the police could simply check everything I do on grounds of nothing but suspicion, even though I have nothing to hide.

The movie studios have force many ISPs in the UK to cancel peoples connection/contract for downloading movies.
Do you have a link to back this up? I am fully aware of the RIAA and MPAA, and various film studios, contacting people directly with threats of legal action but I've never heard of an ISP actually giving up information. At least not in this country.
 
Last edited:
.
The current status quo is no good for anyone, gamers, publishers or developers and it's hurting the PC gaming industry badly.

You will find the industry is growing every year, so what do you base that 'it's hurting the PC gaming industry badly' on exactly? other speculation and propoganda, when in reality the opposite is happening

From a competitors s snippets
2007totals.jpg

Growth projections
theschwartz.wordpress.com said:
Total global game software market:
$23.1 billion in 2005
$35.4 billion in 2010
Compound Annual Growth Rate 8.9%

Mobile game software 2005 $1.67 billion
Mobile game software 2010 $6.5 billion
Compound Annual Growth Rate 31.2%

PC online game software 2005 $3.2 billion
PC online game software 2010 $9.1 billion
Compound Annual Growth Rate 23.2%

Console online game software 2005 $0.26 billion
Console online game software 2010 $2.95 billion
Compound Annual Growth Rate 62.5%

Handheld game software 2005 $3.84 billion
Handheld game software 2010 $2.7 billion
Compound Annual Growth Rate -6.8%

PC retail game software 2005 $3.1 billion
PC retail game software 2010 $2.7 billion
Compound Annual Growth Rate -2.7%

Console game software 2005 $11.0 billion
Console game software 2010 $11.4 billion
Compound Annual Growth Rate 0.7%

Online gaming drilldown:

2010 long session market (eg MMOs) $4.82 billion
Compound Annual Growth Rate 26%

2010 mid session market $4.72 billion
Compound Annual Growth Rate 29%

2010 short session market (eg casual games) $2.5 billion
Compound Annual Growth Rate 34%

Seperate source
6694.jpg
 
The apps themselves will give you the IP addresses, it's not hidden. Plus I'm sure ISPs could easily see who is using binary groups on usenet for instance.

Actually in every single instance where such action was tried, in Europe or US, the effects were less than satisfying and in some cases the public outlook was downright condemning - I'm sure most of us will remember EMI, Warner, Universal and Sony BMG starting their John Doe "caught by IP while torrenting" trial run, then taking some warez kido, 14 year old Brittany Chan into the court for sharing 829 files on her computer and then getting severly biten by press, spit bombed on TV and consequently lost in court, in quite spectacular fashion.

Drink or Die (software crackers) court case costed British side of operations over 20 million pounds, for just 6 people to be proven guilty of "conspiracy to defraud".

There is no satisfaction to be had from treating and chasing piracy as cyber crime, as it usually doesn't involve sales for profit or any definite, easily provable damage.

Why exactly any ISP needs to give their customers access to alt.binaries.games for instance is completely beyond me since the group (and many others like it) has no use apart from distribution of pirated games.

You ban warez and "pr0n" from internet and you might as well shut down the operations and let the last lost AOL user in world wide web switch off the lights. It would defeat the purpose. It would be like banning smoking and drinking in pubs. Hmmm... Having said that I can see now, how it would fit in British way of thinking.... ;)

Seriously though - it's just a buck - while lowering prices in ADSL wars ISPs were actively trying to regain control over their own market - currently almost every single ISP has "warez tax", in one way or another. It started with slow players, like plus.net, who oversold their network capacity and instead of buying extra lines employed elacoyas to actively throttle certain activities and introduce changes to usage policy, specifically so they could then offer "high volume" users special price plans. Today it is standard for most of the ISPs - they have that non profitable, heavy oversold, massively contended broadband for email and web users @ £6.99 and if you want your torrent ports unblocked and bandwidth limits lifted you have to pay extra. Whether it's the top buck "unlimited*" (*=subject to Fair Usage Policy not specified by anyone at any point until we establish what's convenient for ourselves and at what price) or paid per gigabyte of data deal, downloading loads and often is now packed into "special unlimited unlimited" plan - sold to you at extra profit to your ISP.

Interestingly enough, some of the ISPs, the more retarded ones, like Tiscali, which since rapid expansion and multiple takeovers is trying to convince everyone 56kb/s on 8Mbit line should be enough of "that unlimited interweb megahighway thing" for everyone and is desperately trying to shake off anyone using over 30% of their line capacity, actually signed the infamous three strike deal with British Phonographic Industry and agreed to rat their users out to "the authorities" and terminate contracts if they find repeated offenders downloading or sharing the "nasty warez thingy stuff". As a followup of selling their soul to devil Tiscali kicked out 4 users on BPI request and then discovered that BPI actually had no intention of covering the costs of logging, intercepting, gathering and going through the evidence against all the hundreds and hundreds of silly teenagers BPI dug up on various torrents and requested Tiscalli to investigate or check and so the deal - being effectively "Tiscali pay for kicking their own clients" is currently "oh hold" until someone wants to pay for it.

So effectively, on one hand you have this elusive "loss of revenue" to megalithic industry bodies, on the other, you have ISPs actually loosing their name and users. Because let's face it - as a principle, whether you download illegal content on your line or not - who actually wants dodgy ISP that will sniff around your tail and every byte you transfer and ring alarm bells every time you download nocd crack for your games, right? It's like asking nuns to run your night club.
 
Last edited:
If a game is tosh then to me it doesn't matter if the developer is big or small, they won't get my support. If they make a quality game then they will and it's that simple.

But what if the game is not a AAA title but rather pretty good fun for a couple of weeks, the sort of game that gets 80% in reviews.

You might play a pirate copy for a while, decide it was fun while it lasted and decide not to buy a retail copy. I believe that was the issue with Iron Lore, Titan Quest was a reasonably good game that sold moderate numbers yet was damaged by ill judged reviews and peer comments who played the pirate game.

A game like Bioshock was always going to sell with or without piracy, but for less prominent games the margins are much smaller. I guess i just don't see it in black and white, some games arn't tosh nor are they high quality, they're the ones who rely on sales margins more than anyone and are hurt the most.
 
Back
Top Bottom