all types of pc games. They purposely focus on medium-graphics RTS that have a multiplayer component. They don't make big-budget single player games like Alan Wake which are the most vulnerable to piracy.
EA also has a very lucrative PC property called The Sims. But for some games it just doesn't makes sense to port to the pc when sales are low and piracy rates are high. If you look at Street Fighter IV on pc the piracy rate was outrageous so there are clearly a lot of people that want to play these games but don't want to pay for them. Why not expect them to pony up for a $200 arcade if they really want to play? I would bet that half of those pc gamers that pirated Street Fighter already have a console.
that's a fatalistic attitude that ignores successful cases.
A game with strong server side processing can eliminate piracy if done properly. All you have to do is have the client be dependent on dynamic data that only the server can create.
So your claim about piracy being constant is false. Your excuses for pirates are rather sad as well. You didn't mention another group which is people who pirate because they just don't want to pay.
as for Stardock the CEO has stated that he purposely targets a subsection of pc gaming that doesn't have as high of piracy rates.
But even he wasn't able to ignore piracy as planned. Pirates overloaded demigod servers after all:
http://drmnewsbits.blogspot.com/2009/04/demigod-servers-pounded-by-pirates.html
Big companies are not going to shrug their shoulders at 9:1 piracy rates on the pc when consoles and MMOs don't even come close. As the Unreal CEO pointed out there's a big overlap between people that install $200 video cards and people that pirate games. PC games like Nancy Drew have sales that aren't affected by piracy because a 12 year old girl is far less likely to pirate than a 24 year old male who has a gaming pc that is decked out with neon lights. The 'core' audience is pretty lousy when it comes to sales unless it is an MMO.
it doesn't matter if the game is DRM free and $20 as the World of Good developers found out.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2008/11/acrying-shame-world-of-goo-piracy-rate-near-90.ars
This type of DRM from Ubisoft is likely a last ditch effort by Ubisoft to support pc gaming outside of casual games and MMOs. Single player games like Splinter Cell are pirated like crazy on the pc. There's certainly a cultural problem with pc gaming where everyone dismisses piracy and just expects game companies to ignore the fact that most pc gamers are skipping out on the bill.
What isn't fair is that paying customers are subsidizing the entertainment of pirates, many of whom spend their money on gaming hardware instead of supporting developers.
unlike the USSR they allow capitalism. It's just a socialized form of capitalism where they take a large cut of the fruits from the most productive.
The rich getting richer is not a sign that capitalism doesn't exist. It's just a sign that the rich are getting richer.
Capitalism is a system of trade. There's no prerequisite involving distribution of wealth.
It's pretty sickening for so many to use such intellectual dishonesty when we all know what the site is for. The forums aren't filled with people discussing politics and religion. They're filled with people talking about how to rip a movie or crack an application.
Economists support intellectual property laws because they encourage the production of goods that couldn't exist naturally since all the cost is in the production, not the reproduction.
If you support piracy at least be honest as to why you think some of your fellow geeks shouldn't be compensated for their work. Explain why you disagree with the vast majority of economists instead of pretending this site exists for any reason other than to make pirating easier.
Certain types of software are only produced if there are strong intellectual property laws. Volunteer GPL programmers will not self-organize into groups of 50 and create games like Crysis.
You are free to produce whatever you want and give it away freely. However you take away options other from producers when you argue against copyright laws.
PC gaming used to be a lot more fun when it was about.....well.....fun and not benchmarks.
I for one welcome our new console overlords. PC gamers take themselves too seriously. You can see this in their constant dismissal of consoles. Games are about having fun so go cry to your mom if you're upset about game developers not caring about your renderstation 5000.
PC gamers don't put up the cash unless it is an MMO but they still seem to think that games like Crysis should built even if most of the people playing the game didn't pay for it. They forget that gaming is a business and the people with $200 video cards are pretty lousy customers. They're like the guy who expects luxury level service at every restaurant but stiffs the waiter most of the time for stupid reasons that he comes up with to rationalize being a cheapskate.
If you compare piracy stats for a multiplat release you'll see the rates are much higher for the pc version. I'm not talking a 10 or 20 percent difference but more like 1000%. This doesn't bode well for the pc when the pc version of a multiplat usually sells the worse. It's no secret in the gaming industry that the pc is the platform of choice for pirates.
they're just sick of Gamestop selling $55 used copies a couple days after release.
Gamestop is in every mall in America and they push a low buy / high resale model. They basically operate like a pawn shop.
DLC can be used to encourage consumers to buy a game early instead of a competing product that comes out at the same time.
When Gamestop sells a 2 day old game for $55 the people who made that game don't see a dime. Is it wrong? No there is nothing wrong with used sales but you can't be upset with game companies that are tired of seeing sales go to Gamestop. I've never liked how Gamestop will push a used sale even when the price difference is 5 or 10 dollars.
The video game business isn't as lucrative as people assume. Like many industries you have a handful of giant corps making big money while medium and small companies really have to watch their budgets. Gamestop has been aggressive with used game sales and DLC is how game companies are pushing back. Gamestop is like Wal-mart in that they so widespread that they have an effect on the market.
Digital content is special, just about everyone has a fond memory with a movie or game.
The real delusion is on the part of people like you that assume digital content production will exist at nominal levels without intellectual property laws.
We've seen this is not true in Asian markets where piracy has restricted the growth of software markets that depends on such laws. Piracy disrupts working economic models and leaves digital producers with fewer options.
Or perhaps you think open source developers will just pick up the slack. Sorry but Tux Racer and Quake III mods can't compete with games like Alan Wake.
.NET has been a success for Microsoft and they never cared about putting it anywhere else than Windows. They don't want you to use other platforms, Windows is where their money comes from.
Slashdot Mirror
all types of pc games. They purposely focus on medium-graphics RTS that have a multiplayer component. They don't make big-budget single player games like Alan Wake which are the most vulnerable to piracy.
EA also has a very lucrative PC property called The Sims. But for some games it just doesn't makes sense to port to the pc when sales are low and piracy rates are high. If you look at Street Fighter IV on pc the piracy rate was outrageous so there are clearly a lot of people that want to play these games but don't want to pay for them. Why not expect them to pony up for a $200 arcade if they really want to play? I would bet that half of those pc gamers that pirated Street Fighter already have a console.
Mac sales are actually down and they have a long way to go before dominating the home.
http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-200903-201004
they make pirating the client pointless and keep the server code secret.
so there is nothing to repeat.
that's a fatalistic attitude that ignores successful cases.
A game with strong server side processing can eliminate piracy if done properly. All you have to do is have the client be dependent on dynamic data that only the server can create.
someone here already posted a link from a piracy forum talking about it. It's a degraded experience.
and many MMOs don't have piracy either.
So your claim about piracy being constant is false. Your excuses for pirates are rather sad as well. You didn't mention another group which is people who pirate because they just don't want to pay.
as for Stardock the CEO has stated that he purposely targets a subsection of pc gaming that doesn't have as high of piracy rates.
But even he wasn't able to ignore piracy as planned. Pirates overloaded demigod servers after all: http://drmnewsbits.blogspot.com/2009/04/demigod-servers-pounded-by-pirates.html
Big companies are not going to shrug their shoulders at 9:1 piracy rates on the pc when consoles and MMOs don't even come close. As the Unreal CEO pointed out there's a big overlap between people that install $200 video cards and people that pirate games. PC games like Nancy Drew have sales that aren't affected by piracy because a 12 year old girl is far less likely to pirate than a 24 year old male who has a gaming pc that is decked out with neon lights. The 'core' audience is pretty lousy when it comes to sales unless it is an MMO.
it doesn't matter if the game is DRM free and $20 as the World of Good developers found out.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2008/11/acrying-shame-world-of-goo-piracy-rate-near-90.ars
This type of DRM from Ubisoft is likely a last ditch effort by Ubisoft to support pc gaming outside of casual games and MMOs. Single player games like Splinter Cell are pirated like crazy on the pc. There's certainly a cultural problem with pc gaming where everyone dismisses piracy and just expects game companies to ignore the fact that most pc gamers are skipping out on the bill.
What isn't fair is that paying customers are subsidizing the entertainment of pirates, many of whom spend their money on gaming hardware instead of supporting developers.
unlike the USSR they allow capitalism. It's just a socialized form of capitalism where they take a large cut of the fruits from the most productive.
The rich getting richer is not a sign that capitalism doesn't exist. It's just a sign that the rich are getting richer.
Capitalism is a system of trade. There's no prerequisite involving distribution of wealth.
most of it sucks and doesn't "further the species" in any way.
You're free to listen to last.fm if you don't want to pay a measly buck per song.
But if you want a rationalization for piracy then at least come up with one that doesn't make me gag. Furtherance of our species? Really?
It's pretty sickening for so many to use such intellectual dishonesty when we all know what the site is for. The forums aren't filled with people discussing politics and religion. They're filled with people talking about how to rip a movie or crack an application.
Economists support intellectual property laws because they encourage the production of goods that couldn't exist naturally since all the cost is in the production, not the reproduction.
If you support piracy at least be honest as to why you think some of your fellow geeks shouldn't be compensated for their work. Explain why you disagree with the vast majority of economists instead of pretending this site exists for any reason other than to make pirating easier.
Certain types of software are only produced if there are strong intellectual property laws. Volunteer GPL programmers will not self-organize into groups of 50 and create games like Crysis. You are free to produce whatever you want and give it away freely. However you take away options other from producers when you argue against copyright laws.
but high-end pc exclusives are on the decline due to poor sales compared to consoles.
Non-casual single player games have been in a slump for years.
You are putting your head in the sand if you think it is not having an effect.
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/09/id-software-ceo-piracy-pushed-us-multiplatform/
PC gaming used to be a lot more fun when it was about.....well.....fun and not benchmarks.
I for one welcome our new console overlords. PC gamers take themselves too seriously. You can see this in their constant dismissal of consoles. Games are about having fun so go cry to your mom if you're upset about game developers not caring about your renderstation 5000.
PC gamers don't put up the cash unless it is an MMO but they still seem to think that games like Crysis should built even if most of the people playing the game didn't pay for it. They forget that gaming is a business and the people with $200 video cards are pretty lousy customers. They're like the guy who expects luxury level service at every restaurant but stiffs the waiter most of the time for stupid reasons that he comes up with to rationalize being a cheapskate.
When long time pc developers say it is a problem you should listen to them
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/09/id-software-ceo-piracy-pushed-us-multiplatform/
If you compare piracy stats for a multiplat release you'll see the rates are much higher for the pc version. I'm not talking a 10 or 20 percent difference but more like 1000%. This doesn't bode well for the pc when the pc version of a multiplat usually sells the worse. It's no secret in the gaming industry that the pc is the platform of choice for pirates.
they're just sick of Gamestop selling $55 used copies a couple days after release. Gamestop is in every mall in America and they push a low buy / high resale model. They basically operate like a pawn shop.
DLC can be used to encourage consumers to buy a game early instead of a competing product that comes out at the same time.
When Gamestop sells a 2 day old game for $55 the people who made that game don't see a dime. Is it wrong? No there is nothing wrong with used sales but you can't be upset with game companies that are tired of seeing sales go to Gamestop. I've never liked how Gamestop will push a used sale even when the price difference is 5 or 10 dollars.
The video game business isn't as lucrative as people assume. Like many industries you have a handful of giant corps making big money while medium and small companies really have to watch their budgets. Gamestop has been aggressive with used game sales and DLC is how game companies are pushing back. Gamestop is like Wal-mart in that they so widespread that they have an effect on the market.
Digital content is special, just about everyone has a fond memory with a movie or game. The real delusion is on the part of people like you that assume digital content production will exist at nominal levels without intellectual property laws. We've seen this is not true in Asian markets where piracy has restricted the growth of software markets that depends on such laws. Piracy disrupts working economic models and leaves digital producers with fewer options. Or perhaps you think open source developers will just pick up the slack. Sorry but Tux Racer and Quake III mods can't compete with games like Alan Wake.
.NET has been a success for Microsoft and they never cared about putting it anywhere else than Windows. They don't want you to use other platforms, Windows is where their money comes from.
It's the only way to know for sure.
Will it also synergize market driven realities? Or will it cause partial irrelevance?