Videogame Piracy - Is a Stricter Approach Necessary?

Thanks to GamerDad for its editorial focusing on recent attitudes to videogame piracy, in which a change in approach is argued for: "The [ESA] should be less focused on the ratings system... and more focused on educating consumers that downloading games is theft, plain and simple.... Consumers only understand one thing, the game is available freely on the Internet with a minimum of work and that means they don't have to pay for it." The writer continues: "I can't bring myself to download games, even the things at a place like The Underdogs which specializes in supposedly 'out of print' games to download. Out of print used to mean something was rare and worth something. In the digital media world it apparently now means 'Ok to steal.'" He concludes by suggesting ways to make games more attractive again: "One great way to do that is including good stuff in the box. Give me a color manual or include a poster. Maybe a CD with all the music from the game? How about liner notes with each game describing some part of development?"

Comments

Easy?

[Snowmit]

Games (especially 0-day warez) are only easy to download if you're in the know. You need to know what site to go to, or a friend with an FTP server or you need to have a very reliable USENET hook up or something along those lines. Otherwise, pirating games online is a nightmare minefield of porn pop ups, links to other sites with more porn pop ups, viruses and mislabelled 600 MB downloads.

The 'consumer' does not find this easy or fun. The 'consumer' probably doesn't even know that they could be trying to do this. People who are downloading complete games illegally are fairly sophisticated users. I would guess that they all know full well that they're doing something illegal. I just think that they don't care.

Shipping games with stuff in the box

[dave-tx]

The coolest thing about Infocom games (other than the games themselves, which were not only fun but taught me how to type) was the trinkets that they shipped with.

Anyone remember the "evidence" that came with Deadline, including two "pills" that were actually Smarties candy (yeah, I ate 'em)? Maps, booklets, and other details like that really helped set the stage for those text adventures.

I personally won't download games from "warez" sites, but I'd bet that if more care went in to the final product, people might value them more.

Re:How about offering a game download?

[doctormetal]

What annoys me is that its often easier to get a download a pirated game than buying it in a shop.

And what about easier to get it running? Crappy cd 'protection' like securom and starforce annoys a lot of user: they buy a game in the shop, but the copy protection doesn't function properly on their hardware. You buy a game and have to find a crack to get it to work.

Abandonware -- Sell it or Lose It Copyright

[Jepler]

I honestly don't know exactly how it would work, but I believe that all or nearly all copyrighted material (books, music, software) should be "sell it or lose it": if the copyright owner doesn't care to sell copies of it, for instance because it is not deemed profitable, the copyright lapses.

Clearly, if it's not worth selling, the copyright holder doesn't lose much if the copyright lapses early, 5Nth anniversary precious metal editions notwithstanding. Of course, companies who are in the business of selling the same pile of tripe every few years with a different name would suffer. (Quicken 2005? No thanks, I like Quicken 2000 just fine and don't want to learn anything new. What, you mean I can't buy Quicken 2000? I think some music labels and book publishers would find themselves in the same bind)

This belief is what makes me feel not at all bad when downloading abandonware games to play on my Commodore 64 emulator, for instance.

Failing "Sell It or Lose It Copyright", I'd love to see a non-profit corporation in the business of buying the copyright to abandoned software, particularly games, and releasing it to the public domain. In my mind this would involve finding out what copyrighted items people were most interested in, reaching a deal with the owner, and then raising the money online. I have no idea whether it would work, but I'd love to see it tried. I'd put up a few bucks to see EA's 8-bit software collection enter the public domain, and surely a lot of geeks would do the same. Would it add up to the piles of cash Electronic Arts would demand? Well, I don't know.

A Catch 22

[Slyght]

The whole piracy issue is sort of a Catch 22: People say that they pirate games to try them out before they buy them as not to waste their money on a bad game/cd/movie that they can't return, and most stores won't let users return opened games/cds/movies because of piracy.
Somebody brought up a point that many movie theatres will offer refunds to people that walk out of a movie early because they don't like it. Of course, they won't refund you if you sit through the whole movie, I believe they only will refund if you walk out in the beginning. Perhaps a similar system could be set up for games?
Here's an example: When users install a game, they can register their copy of the game online. Up to a certain point in the game decided by the developer (whether the point be measured by how far they have progressed, or how much time they have spent playing, how many rounds they have played, etc), they will have an option to request a refund. If they chose this option, they could print out some sort of form that they can bring back to the store they bought it from and return it, and at the same time the software would be uninstalled from the machine. The store would honor the return, refund the customer his money, and mail back the game/form to the company and get their money back.
I know my example's not perfect, but it's an idea. There will still be people that will want to get the entire game for free without paying, but if you at least give customers the option to return games they don't like, then there will probably be a large amount of customers that will do that instead of illegally downloading the game to try it out.

Re:How about offering a game download?

[Boronx]

An RTS came out came out a few years ago, it was a Star Craft ripoff, but it had multiple maps connected by warp points and you had to keep you units supplied.

I downloaded a bootleg and loved it. After a few days I decided to throw some cash their way, so I bought a CD. Never could get the legit copy to run.

Re:If it's worth playing

[mausmalone]

If it's worth playing, it's worth supporting.

Unfortunately, with the relative absence of demos for obscure games, pirating is usually the easiest way to see if it's actually worth playing. Furthermore, it's sometimes (as mentioned in the article) the only way to get a game to play on your system. And, for me, I wanna know if the product I buy will run at all. 85% of the time, the answer is no.

Pirating isn't all evil and theft... a lot of it is test driving. Just not officially sanctioned test driving.

Hypocrisy?

[cluke]

Funny this article coming up now, just an hour ago I was reading this article by UK games journalist Stuart Campbell, saying that the whole industry's holier-than-thou approach to piracy doesn't stand close scrutiny since historically such a large part of it is basically based on ripping off other people's ideas.
Stuart Campbell writes a lot of thought-provoking stuff on piracy... his main gist is that if games were cheaper and the industry didn't treat us with such contempt then they might sell more copies.

My two cents on this subject:

[cmdrwhitewolf]

"He concludes by suggesting ways to make games more attractive again" Some things that would make games "more attractive again" to me are - 1) REASONABLE prices at release, not two or three years later in the bargain bins. (Where the game might not even be, and thus forcing us to go hunting in the OOP sites...) 2) Games that actually WORK as advestised on installation, not waiting 6 or 7 months later for multiple patchs & Bug fixes to do so. (If you can't hire somebody to fix your cr*p, don't complain when we have to resort someone who can...) 3) REASONABLE Recommended system requirements, and not having to dump practically half a grand to supe up pc before the game becomes decently playable each time. (If you can't hire somebody to program your cr*p tightly, don't be bitchin when we find someone who can...) 4) GOOD playability, and replayability, Not just play it once and discard like another milk carton. (We're trying to keep them from heading into the landfills, but you ain't us helping any by making non quality stuff that isn't fit for a freebie box at a garage sale.) 5) Either STANDARDIZE player interfaces or make them more configurable, so I don't have keep re-learning strange Keyboard/mouse/joystick setups as I move across titles while playing them. Carpal tunnel be damned! Getting Gamer's hand cramps sucks worse! (You wanna pay our Medical bills? I thought not.) . . . 6) Oh yeah, I almost forgot - STOP making silly arse Yet Another Year/famed one, and instead sell modules in which players can add in their own choosen "flavoring". (Hey, you know something? I've been so sick of the 'Yet Another Sports Title' game syndrome, that I won't even bother looking at those titles anymore... Can't live without marketing them ? Go ahead and make them, I'll just keep ignoring them, But don't be complaining that the game industry is 'tapped out' or whatever when you keep on making those stupid decisions.)