Want to Stop Piracy? Charge Less, Says Report

38

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

Renaissance 2K

Every excuse people give to justify or explain piracy - high price, low quality, insufficent demos, restrictive DRM, inconvenience, sticking it to the man, etc. - completely gets shot to Hell when you learn how extensively World of Goo and other DRM-free indie titles are pirated.

You can't stop piracy any more than you can stop murder.  The penalties for murder are as severe as one can get, but it doesn't stop it completely.  You're always going to have that small batch of nutjobs that thinks killing someone to get what you want is a good idea.

The only ways to drastically reduce piracy are to make it extremely difficult - not in the form of DRM, but by moving it to the cloud like OnLive does - or by making it extremely easy for publishers to identify and prosecute those who do.  Neither of these are feasible.  A ridiculous percentage of the population doesn't have access to networking that can facilitate OnLive-esque gaming, and the scale of the latter option is dizzying...

...though that's really what the deal is.  I could pay money to obtain this, or I could obtain it for free.  There is no tangible consequence to obtaining it for free; no pain, no fear of prosecution, and in many cases, no guilt.  It hurts the industry - especially on this scale - but that's not enough for most people, especially those non-consumers who are too young to properly support their habit or understand the consequences of their actions, much less confront them.  Hell, I've read posts by people who have said, "Yeah, I know it hurts, and I know it's why {sucky gaming industry event} occurred, but whatever... There will always be someone out there making games."

I work in the software industry.  I used to be a gamer, but I've given up on that.  Gamers have this ridiculous sense of entitlement that leads the justification of things like these, and developers are taking the wrong defensive actions.  As far as I'm concerned, it's everyone's fault, but if you're going to ask me to choose between the side that feels driven to steal for something as monumentally important as a video game, and the side that's trying to make a living, it should be obvious what my decision will be.

avatar

illusionslayer

So if one doesn't pirate games like 'World of Goo' then one can use the excuses?

 

avatar

CaptainFabulous

Which is why your opinion is so completely biased. But thanks for playing anyway.

Last time I checked all the indie studios with big hit titles like World of Goo are still kicking and still making a tidy profit despite "extensive" piracy.

If studios and developers (including yourself) stopped viewing piracy as a lost sale (ie, stealing) you'd be better able to sleep at night. I hate to sound all callous and cynical, but people just don't care if you have a job or not. Certainly not enough to keep buying crappy $60 games, or risking $20 on an indie title.

So you have two choices -- adapt to a more realistic business model and survive, or stick to an old, outdated model that will eventually bury you while you continue to blame piracy for all your failures.

Until you and others realize that piracy isn't the problem, but merely a symptom of a much greater issue, you can never move forward. If piracy were to magically disappear tomorrow people aren't going to run out and empty their wallets at GameStop. Sales will NOT increase by any appreciable amount. And who would you blame then?

avatar

bling581

Duh!

avatar

JCViper

I avoided buying Splinter Cell Conviction because it required a permenant internet connection. What about those times when my internet connection goes down and would still like to fire up a single player game? 

These companies have to stop screwing with the legit consumer. I shouldn't have to find a crack for a game I just bought. Thankfully there's Steam and the games I have that are grouped in it are not at all intrusive. 

Then there's also the fact that more games are around $60 and contain little replay value. At least many PC games are still at the $50 mark, even if it's only for tje week a title is released at Best Buy.

avatar

maleficarus™

I always pay for vid games but I pirite movies all the time. They are just too exspensive for me and my family. I have downloaded the better part of 100 DVD+R full of movies, 4 movies to each disc. Do the math, even at $10 per movie that is still $4 grand+ I saved! Some rips are not the best quality but that is ok. I also mail my family copys of the movies I burn so really the savings can be incredible. I do support the gaming industry and always will though...

avatar

Ghok

I used to pirate games about 10 years ago, when I was in high school. I didn't make much money, but virtually all the money I did make went into buying games. When I didn't have enough for all I wanted, I'd pirate games to try them out, and would eventually buy my favourite titles. That doesn't make it right, but I do find it kind of funny that the time I was pirating games was also the time where I was spending the most on them.

Now pirating just isn't worth it. Convience was a big factor to pirating, but with Steam that's now a non-issue. Not to mention there are games on sale a few times a week so cost isn't a reason to pirate either. Truthfully, I give most new releases a miss and wait until they go on sale. They are expensive, and rarely worth it. I wouldn't buy any of the titles that have crept up to 60 dollars. Sorry game industry, most of your titles aren't fun past a few hours. Maybe I've just gotten old.

Releasing games at a lower price is a good idea. I remember a few years back, new retail store game releases dropped about 10 bucks here, and it was pretty good for business. The first Serious Sam was released at a budget price when they probably could have gotten away with being full priced. It just  wouldn't have been anywhere near as popular.

I love to download music, but most of the artists I like now release their albums free for streaming on their websites or something, so I don't even have to any more. I buy plenty of albums from independent labels, but overall hate the old order of the industry for the reasons others have described. The RIAA has really killed itself. No sympathy.

In all my experience, pirates are either people who want to be customers, or disadvantaged who aren't going to be buying your games anyway. There are a few people who are just cheap skates, but fuck them. Again, they weren't buying the games to begin with.

avatar

Jasker

The wait and see approach works out for me too.  When I was younger and single I had a lot of time and money on my hands.  Now I have kids and a woman.  I only have a short amount of time to afford a non-productive hobby such as gaming.  I won't waste it on gimmicky or just plain crap games.

I have no problem paying $25 or less for a game but $60 GTFO.  The last game I paid full price for I completely regret.  Since then I've learned my lesson.  Used console games and Steam PC games are the way to go.  Not being a mindless consumer that has to have the next best thing NOW, really pays off.

avatar

Angelman0401

TommM

"Grossly overpriced?  I guess it doesn't matter to you that most mainstream games now take a upwards of 250 million dollars to produce.  A grade "B" movie takes that much too.  A blockbuster movie takes nearly a half-billion dollars."

 

There's no way that you're not a kid. You have to be a kid because only a child would believe the figures that you posted. Just a little FYI video games don't cost nearly as much as you think to make. Halo 3 is estimated to have cost  $25 million to $40 million to produce, Call of Duty Black Ops is estimated to have cost $18 to $28 million to produce. Average estimates put game development at 5-10 million dollars to produce per console. Recently released Movie Rango had a production budget of $135 million, Battle:Los Angeles $70 million, Mars Needs Moms $150 million. A "B" movie like paranormal activity cost $15,000 to make. You have a gross misunderstanding of cost.

 

Anyway, to understand piracy is simple. First, there is no one cause to it. There are several causes and a user may be affected by all or just one. Several but not all causes include: Cost, availability, sense of unfair pricing, and feeling entitled to "free" entertainment-or just cheap people that can really afford it but are to cheap to buy. There are many more causes but these stick out the most to me. Several posts suggest that reducing the price will not eliminate pirating and this is true. But what is also true is that reducing the cost will reduce pirating especially when considering high end software packages (Adobe CSx products, Video Editing Suites, etc.) Those are not exclusively used by professionals and may be utilized by hobbyist who want to produce a high quality product but can't afford $2,500 plus to buy Adobe CS5 master suite or $680 for Sony Vegas 10. In my opinion these packages are way overpriced for the hobbyist but not so for the professional that will have these paid for in one or two projects. Even then let's be real. Using the above examples, the newest versions of these packages are incremental improvements over their predecessors and still cost an arm and a leg. I would agree that it is unfair to charge so much for a product that has just a few improvements. Believe it or not I have been in places where some software/games are not available and that leads to pirating because it might be the only way they can get it. You shouldn't assume just because someone has internet that they can afford it or even get to it. Travel a bit and you will see this. It is true that people feel like they deserve software\games for free or at a price that fits there budget or liking. I think that a realistic approach towards piracy is this: First is that it will NEVER EVER EVER be completely eliminated. You could torture someone on TV and it will just motivate pirates to get better. Because it will not be eliminated, reducing piracy should be the focus. In my opinion I think that reducing the price, expanding payment options, increasing availability, and re evaluating standards in pricing would help greatly. The law enforcement agencies along with software companies and customers need to come together to come up with a viable solution to REDUCE and not eliminate piracy.

 

 

avatar

Gumby

I do not know what the answer is but I do know a couple of things:

1. People should get paid for what they create and others buy

2. Treating your paying customers like theives (by using draconion DRM) will not encourage them to buy more stuff. 

 

I am more than happy to pay for music, movies, and games.  But not at the expense of limiting my fair use or installing something like SecureROM on my PC.

avatar

alabasterdragon

You know the most stupid thing about most of the copy protections is that they punish the legit buys and not the pirates. An Example, I bought a couple of second hand games, neither of which would run after installing on windows 7. I had the games legally, I even contacted support on the games. The games wouldn't play because the drm was not compatible with Win7. Knowing some sources, I hit the web and downloaded "cracks" for the games. Copied the hacked exe files file over and played the legal games I owned but was prevented from play by the stupid copy protection.

The moral of the story is that if I had pirated the game I wouldn't have had any problems, but I paided for it like I supposed to and I find I'm on the wrong end of the $h!t stick.

I support paying for the games/apps under the idea of trying to help support the poor slub that spent hour after hour of his life at a keyboard programming the thing. I don't support paying the initial price of these games. I never buy a new release, I either wait for the price to drop or buy it second hand for half.

On another note...Who would bother pirating the games in the $10 game bin? It's cheaper and easier to buy it than it is to spend hours tracking it down and waiting for the download. That in mind, reducing the cost of software I believe would reduce the percentage of piracy. How hant $.99 phone apps get pirated? Even pirates have standards and laugh at the people that are THAT cheap. Even the ones looking for $10 games get laughed out of pirate scenes.

avatar

reutnes

To me, it isn't because of cost.  I already spent $1200 on my computer, a $50-60 game isn't going to hurt me much... that's like buying a $400 phone and then freaking out because angry birds costs a whole $0.99.  What bothers me are the stupid hoops I'm expected to jump through in order to play the games that I chose to spend my honest hard-earned cash on.  That's right, another whiner about DRM.  I still haven't forgotten about Assassins's Creed 2, guys.  If I wanted my game to crash when my connection goes flakey, I'd be playing WoW.  Of course, if I just pirate the game, I suddenly don't have to worry about it.

Video games are an industry and the industry needs money to keep going.  I can respect that, but when your anti-piracy measures hurt me, the customer, well that's just too bad.

That's not to say DRM can't be done well.  I mean, just look at Steam.  I have to let steam validate and manage my games, but then again I can download my games onto every computer I own and it keeps all my games and drivers updated.  It restricts the stuff I bought to me, yes, but the way it does it turns it from being something to loathe into being a feature to be celebrated.

avatar

alabasterdragon

Have you ever considered that some of us may blow $1200 on the computer after saving up for it for a few months. Once that $1200 is blown, that's the end of their funds? Some of us have other things to concern ourselves with beyond spending 23 hours a day six days a week playing video games, while being passed out the rest of the week. Some of us spend that kind of wad on a pc every 2 or 3 years rather than every six months. Some people have jobs, families, and other things and can't always afford $50-60 for a game after spending that kind of cash on the system. Not everyone lives in Mom's basement living a free ride with little expenses.

The said thing is copy protection has not proved to stop any piracy. It might slow it a bit. Ever hear the saying "Locks are to keep honest people honest" theives will get what ever you locked up.

avatar

POMF2K

I'm going to agree with you about the price, partially.  I spent over $2000 on my desktop.  Did I pay too much?  Obviously, but it is exactly what I wanted and built exactly to my specs.

So no, $50 isn't too much for a game for somene in my situation.  But $50 is way too much for some of the games I've played recently.  Especially considering what a rarity it is to get a free demo for a PC game these days.  Where is the entertainment? I realize that we paid just as much, if not more for the hotest new games ten to fifteen years ago, but even with pitiful graphics and AI that doesn't compare those games were truly entertaining.  I honestly think that something is lost with such a focus on the newest technology.  I often revisit old games, but after fifteen minutes stop and say, "Damn, that could make a great game were it developed with one of today's engines."

I would rather go out and spend $50 on a bottle of wine or a really nice steak than buy some of these games.  And if we don't take into account the experience of memory, those will only provide one evening of enjoyment. 

What games are big right now? 

Bulletstorm.  Lame arcade style action with uber-simplistic controls (YES, "streamlined" IS a bad thing), crappy dialogue, and total lack of immersion.  I wouldn't pay $19.95 for that.  That is one really sorry ass case of consoles ruining the gaming industry. 

Assassin's Creed 2.  Lacks immersion, story gets old fast, gameplay gets old fast, and as you said it is loaded with DRM. 

Mafia 2.  I was a huge fan of the original.  Wasn't really that fun.  I feel like I was watching a good mafia movie.  The difference is a good mafia movie doesn't leave you feeling like you actually pushed down the pedal in every car chase or lifted every snitch into and out of the trunk.  And it's not a feeling of immersion either, it's mind numbing in its tediousness. 

avatar

POMF2K

Everyone knows that the price we pay for games, music, movies, etc is way too high.  It's almost not worth mentioning. 

I can't speak for people in other countries and in other economic situations, but I can speak for myself and people I know. 

At least as far as games go. . . stop putting out garbage!  Stop releasing mediocre games with a $60 price tag.  Let us try the experience.  Free demos are a good thing.  Additional downloadable content is a good thing (in many cases). 

I'm a very discerning gamer/consumer.  A publisher may release a fine title, but at a price like that I will recall their last "big release" that left me feeling buyers remorse and might never give it a shot.  If I didn't have the respect I do for game developers (for they are the poor rock stars of the gaming world) I might be compelled to download it for free. 

Remember when the hottest new games came on floppies?  Remember shareware?  Remember when a FPS had four or more episodes and the first one was free to distribute?  Bring that back.  Let us see that you've created a good product and then maybe we'll buy the whole game. 

As far as DLC, I'm torn.  I don't believe you should pay $50 for the full game and then pay substantial amounts for "quests" or "side missions."  I don't believe that some online players should have an unfair advantage because they spent more money, that's a bit too much like real life for me.  For the most part, I don't think you should have to pay out the ass only to feel like you did not receive the whole package.  I do however feel that games should be released at reasonable, competitive prices and that publishers/developers would benefit from releasing additional "episodes" or "expansion packs."

 

avatar

alabasterdragon

"Everyone knows that the price we pay for games, music, movies, etc is way too high."

 

Funny thing about this. It's true. How is it that a DVD sells for $20 here, but a new legal copy in Indea of the same movie sells for under $5. If they came afford to sell it for $5 there, then why not here. That tactic is usually refured to as maximizing profit. While I support a companies right to make a profit, I don't support them screwing a particular market just because they can.

avatar

aarcane

I've been preaching this standpoint for years.  Noone cares.  they'd rather punish you for not paying what they ask and spend money, than take less money than asking price and see a profit from the deal.

avatar

overmind87

I could see the reasoning behind this,  When I was still living in Colombia, buying games was something worth celebrating, cause it was so rare.  I remember having to pay what would translate in that economy to about $100, for n64 games, since they were hard to pirate, because of the cartridge.  But then you caould turn around and get PS, and later, dreamcast games for like $5 bucks.  It was risky for the vendors to sell those illegal copies, but you can't deny the appeal. Pirated copies cost much less to acquire, be it from the materials required or purchasing the copies from the pirates themselves and the prices they are sold at more than make up for it, creating a much bigger return for the vendor than selling official copies ever could.  It's capitalism at is worst, or finest, if you choose to look at it that way.

avatar

Xodin

If they don't want to lower the price just sell them for a equal price around the world because a xbox 360 game costs 120$ in Latvia.

avatar

Xodin

Sorry double post.

avatar

tony2tonez

I havent paid for music in 10yrs even though its 99cents now. I will spend the money on games or movies that i feel are worth having. Others that dont i could easily pirate. What pisses me off the most about this whole priary is, why can people all over NYC sell what is clearly bootlegged and copied movies on the streets. While some girl in BK who downloaded songs gets sued for millions by the MPAA (or what ever they are). 

When the most blatent and obvious forms of priacy is the reselling and done on the most popular streets of the world, or on the subway train, or the haircutters of NYC. Maybe then I would actaully condsider buying legit stuff. 

avatar

tony2tonez

I havent paid for music in 10yrs even though its 99cents now. I will spend the money on games or movies that i feel are worth having. Others that dont i could easily pirate. What pisses me off the most about this whole priary is, why can people all over NYC sell what is clearly bootlegged and copied movies on the streets. While some girl in BK who downloaded songs gets sued for millions by the MPAA (or what ever they are). 

When the most blatent and obvious forms of priacy is the reselling and done on the most popular streets of the world, or on the subway train, or the haircutters of NYC. Maybe then I would actaully condsider buying legit stuff. 

avatar

steevonson

Before an actual solution to piracy is implemented the industries under attack will have to downsize and at the rate they have been complaining that kicking and screaming process has already begun.

avatar

tornato7

People don't want to pay $500 for photoshop or $3000 dollars for Maya. I'm confident that around 90% more people would buy it if they lowered the price 90%. That said, they might make more money by putting it at a higher price and forcing a bunch of people to pirate.

avatar

Tenhawk

Maya and Shop are special cases. They're both marketed to professionals, people who rarely if EVER pirate their software because the risks to them are extreme. Photoshop is, probably, the most pirated application anywhere but almost all of the pirates are just people playing with the software for fun.

It's actually beneficial to Adobe to have those pirated copies floating around, because every year some of those amateur pirates become photoshop proffessionals... and at that point they BUY a copy, because running a business with pirated software is very risky and it's not worth taking that chance just to save 500 bucks.

 

avatar

Jox

This is true, and for many years (you'll just have to trust me on this) I've been saying that the exhorbitant prices charged for movies/music/games is a major factor in the piracy problem, but it is not the entire problem.  Lowering the cost of those 60+ dollar games (and it would have to be a global price drop, or the problem will remain) will go a long way toward ending piracy, but the other half of the problem is the ridiculously draconian DRM schemes imposed on us.  The pirates don't have to deal with this, of course.  It's only the poor saps who try to play by the rules that have to suffer.

Of course, I can't promise ALL piracy will end, but solve the 2 problems noted above and piracy will become barely worth mentioning.

-Jox

avatar

TommM

B.S.  Total b.s.  People steal because it's easy and they have the anonimity of the Internet.  That's been shown time and time again.  You could drop movies down to a dollar and if there is a way to get it free, there are "x" amount of people who are going to steal it.

And about the "disadvantaged" people not having the money to purchase media.  Funny in that they can't afford to buy the media, but they certainly can afford the equipment and Internet connection to do just that (which normally requires a fairly beefy system).

Not saying that prices aren't high and there isn't some media out there that's just plain crap and not worth a nickle.  But the whole notion of "reduce the price of your media and people will stop stealing" is ridiculous.

avatar

CaptainFabulous

Yeah, you should quit while you're behind.

There will always be people that will pirate, either out of some sense of "sticking it to the man" or because they simply can't afford to buy anything. That's a fact of life. But what we also know for a fact is that *most* people are willing to pay for content once the price matches the perceived value.

And those "disadvantaged" people you're referring to don't do the pirating themselves. They are talking about places in the world where most people don't have computers, and they're lucky to have a TV and cheap DVD player. These people get their content from stores that are stocked from floor to ceiling with pirated copies of DVDs that are sold at a fraction of the cost of the real thing.

Bottom line is this study hits the nail right on the head. It specifically deals with piracy, but that issue is really an adjunct to the larger issue of grossly-overpriced media in an age when we are absolutely flooded with content and inexpensive (and legal) ways to get it. You either adapt or die, and it seems most companies are refusing to acknowledge this paradigm shift and are just burying their heads in the sand, hoping that consumers are going to somehow see the light and start buying $60 games and $20 DVDs again. It's just not going to happen.

avatar

TommM

Grossly overpriced?  I guess it doesn't matter to you that most mainstream games now take a upwards of 250 million dollars to produce.  A grade "B" movie takes that much too.  A blockbuster movie takes nearly a half-billion dollars.  So what's a fair price for those products?  Don't bother answering because the answer is "it doesn't make any difference what the price is" in today's environment.  People are going to steal it regardless because of - again - anonimity and ease.  You can also toss in we live in an era of self-entitlement.  It's all about ME and MY instant gratification.

Look at tony2tonez's post on this thread. "I havent paid for music in 10yrs even though its 99cents now. I will spend the money on games or movies that i feel are worth having. Others that dont i could easily pirate."  And I'm sure he does.

He's the norm, not the exception. He openly admits to stealing, doesn't have a problem with it and will continue to do so at whim regardless of price.

A couple of years ago "Braid" and "Plants vs. Zombies" were wildly successful indie games.  If you caught them on sale you could buy them for 5 dollars.  That's FIVE DOLLARS.  But guess what?  They were also two of the most pirated games that year, having been illegally downloaded tens of millions of times.

So you can continue to believe that dropping prices is going to resolve piracy.  It's not.  It's going to require some attitude adjustment of the self-entitlement group. It's going to require some form of non-invasive DRM or file-transfer blocks that don't punish the honest purchaser. And yes - depending on product - it's going to require some pricing adjustment so developers can make a profit, continue to invest and create new products and the consumer feels they're getting their money's worth.

avatar

TenzoMonk

 

Can I get some links to your information?  According to GameRant (http://gamerant.com/homefront-must-sell-2-million-units-seb-72881/) 2 million copies of HomeFront needs to be sold in order for THQ to turn a profit.  Checking most retailers, the game is $49.99 for PC, and $41.99 for PS3/XBOX.  So let's call it $50... that means @ 2 million copies, we are talking $100 million (to start turning profit).  Let's not forget that HomeFront is running ALOT of commercials, etc on TV, and that advertising isn't cheap.

Also, according to IndustryGamers (http://www.industrygamers.com/news/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2s-launch-budget--200-million/), COD:MW2 "cost between $40 million to $50 million to develop."  They continue on to say, "When factoring in the production and distribution of materials on top of marketing expenses, the launch budget was somewhere around $200 million for the game. This number is shockingly high for a video game, but shows the confidence Activision had in the game being a global hit."

So I'm not sure how that translates into "most mainstream games."  I'm positive that most games don't have the budget that the COD franchise has to produce commercials with the likes of Kobe Bryant's, etc.

Also, I'm very interested to see the figures on B-Grade movies that cost $250 million to produce.  I'd like to how many you can name :)  (I can't think of any B-Grade movies off the top of my head that have ever made $250 million... let alone cost that much!).

Not really debating anyone here... I just want to see the #'s... and sources  :)

 

avatar

CaptainFabulous

Yes, GROSSLY OVERPRICED. As others have pointed out, games don't cost nearly that much to make. Even if they did it doesn't really matter. It's very possible to make more money while selling copies for less. What you lose in per-item pricing you make up in volume.

And no one has said lowering prices will completely eliminate piracy. It won't, and there will always be people who pirate just cause they can. But they are the fringe minority, not the norm (and has been proven so), despite what you believe.

As for tony3tonez, let's refrain from using the word "stealing". It's copyright infringement, not theft. If you want to have an adult discussion stick with the facts, otherwise no one is going to take you seriously. He's a perfect example tho. Read exactly what he said. He's willing to spend money on things that "are worth having." So for the things he perceives as having value he's willing to pay. It's clear he places no value on music, and just won't pay for it at any price. That's his personal valuation, and there is nothing wrong with that. He downloads music simply because it's available. Back when I was a kid we'd accomplish the same thing by recording songs off the radio even though 7" singles only cost a buck. Sometimes you have enough interest to want it, but not enough to justify the cost. And that can happen just as easily at $1 as it does $60. We make these kinds of valuation judgements all the time with everything we buy.

Your Braid and PvZ examples are good ones, but you again don't have all the facts. These games were not $5 all the time. They were typically $15-$20, and would occasionally go on sale for $5. And guess what? When the games went on sale for $5 they sold a shitload of them. Why? Because most people have the perception that $15-$20 is too much for a casual game. But $5, now that's a good price and they sold like hotcakes. And while both games were heavily pirated, you have no way of knowing how many of those pirated copies turned into legitimate purchases when the games went on sale. I'm betting there were a lot.

That last paragraph clearly shows you really don't have much of a grasp of the issues. It's ok, for people who think in black and white it can be very challenging to understand issues that aren't. And this is one of those issues that's very very grey. The only way to prevent or reduce piracy is to understand the reasons WHY people pirate and adapt to address them. The answer isn't more DRM. The answer is developing new business models that are appropriate for the 21st century. You can't force people to buy stuff they don't want to pay for. Trying to do so is only going to drive people to pirate MORE, not less.

avatar

thegreatcerebral

When it comes to large companies in large industries, the reason it cost $250M + to make games and movies is because of the ungodly amount of $$ the executives of these companies make (actors in movies as well).

Braid, PvZ didn't cost nearly that; I'd venture to say VERY LOW BUDGET.  If you look at the initial argument in the article that will explain why people pirated PvZ.  It is sold as a "casual game" and on iPhone that people see as very casual they want to pay $0.99 so it was overpaid.  Also you said "on sale you could get them for..." and I believe that Pop-Cap was selling PvZ was selling at $10 which it isn't worth considering that after the initial 25 levels there is zero replayability and nothing to keep you coming back.  

I'm pissed at the "next gen tax" that came with the Xbox360 and obviously PS3 followed suit (why not).  Sure some of the games deserve that but there are pleanty of games that do not.  There should be games released for $29.99 (not just Platinum titles).

Also not only that but we now pay $60 for a crippled game that has DLC BUILT INTO THE GAME.  This has been verified by people that have cracked the DLC which has revealed that in most cases it simply unlocks something already on the disk.  Sure there are map packs etc. that are addons but here's what I really hate.  You have a game that everyone is paying $60 for which has glitches and needs to be patched 0 Day and yet a month later they release some DLC with map packs which they clearly were working on BEFORE RELEASE.  In reality for the "full game" we now pay up to $100 (in the US) for all the map packs and addons.

Yes there will be people that will always pirate, but yes the majority of the reason is because of cost.

avatar

illusionslayer

Did piracy drop drastically after RedBox rolled out?
No.

Price has nothing to do with the matter.

avatar

CaptainFabulous

How would you even know if it did? Do you subscribe to Pirate Tracking Monthly magazine?

What we DO know is that Netflix and Redbox have cut into DVD sales, which is why the movie studios are now delaying new releases for both these services. They want you pay $20 for a DVD, which it's clear the buying public doesn't want to do.

The very fact that Netflix and Redbox are so successful means that people are still willing to pay for content, just not what the studios want to charge for DVDs. Otherwise they would just pirate the movies and not pay anything, and Netflix and Redbox would go belly-up.

avatar

nmanguy

I had no idea Redbox was so huge in Mainland China and Russia.

avatar

Jox

And about the "disadvantaged" people not having the money to purchase media.  Funny in that they can't afford to buy the media, but they certainly can afford the equipment and Internet connection to do just that (which normally requires a fairly beefy system).

The people with the "beefy" systems are the ones downloading and burning the discs, but they are not necessarily the end-users.  They are taking the $15 (or 75-Russian dollar) movies and selling rips for a fraction of the cost for people to play in their cheapo DVD players.  If the market dries up, the dealers switch to something more profitable.

-Jox

avatar

RUSENSITIVESWEETNESS

I enjoyed AllofMP3.com while it was around, thought someone had finally gotten it right, charging less for electronic media than physical media. If the industry copied that model, instead of fighting it, I'd be buying music from them, instead.

Hard for some people to understand it is possible to be too greedy.

After reading how the industry strips all rights away from artists and maintains the rights to artists' works for all time (they paid a congressional insider to slip the legislation into another bill during a late-night session of Congress), I wouldn't feel the slightest bit of guilt for downloading all the available music in the world. For free.

avatar

thegreatcerebral

Thier downfall was when the DRM was cracked on the player with the free downloads.  IDK if you know but you could download the DRM tracks (all you wanted) for free and they only played on their player but someone cracked the DRM so you could then do what you want the issue then was they were random filenames like 545106542asdf5ve.mp3 then someone created a program that would strip the drm then get the info from the song and rename the track properly.  It just didn't have the ID3 tag stuff but there's programs for that :)

They quickly shut down after that.  They relaunched under http://www.alltunes.com but most stay away from that site now because you can't just "pay as you go" so most don't want to load up an account with $$ and leave it there etc.

I love the fact that on their site you were paing for "bandwidth" really being that you would pay more for the larger file sizes; and thus better quality.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.