Author Topic: Digital Rights and Economics  (Read 50816 times)

MrMorley

  • Newcomer
  • Posts: 24
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Jason's Development Blog
    • Email
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #30 on: April 02, 2011, 07:51:39 PM »
Wait, you are saying an advocate would say "I don't like expensive AAA  games, so I'll download them illegally to play for free instead"? That's...okay...what? Does the contradiction not leap out to anybody else?

The "if I like it I'll buy it" argument is a better one morally, except bet your bones that market only makes up like 0.1% of pirates and falls apart somewhat with games with demos available and reviews that confirm the game doesn't drop in quality after the demo, or especially when they play a game through to the end and then not buy it (I mean, you finished the damn game! What, were you hoping it'd just get good 10 hours in?)...and still isn't legal. But we have also established legal and moral are not the same thing.

As for the AAA industry as a whole. Well, people are still buying enough AAA games to keep that ball rolling along. Otherwise they'd all fail and well, end of that entire industries economy fails I guess?

Now, I'm often the first to just assume people are stupid, and that's what I'm going to assume to explain why games like Call of Duty: Black Ops sell in such numbers despite a near identical game that most of them already own called Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 being available...

Still, indie games tend to have more niche appeal, and more unique gameplay and graphics. I may call that a good thing but since, as established, people are stupid it seems to have it's downsides. Also most indie games people play are good because only the good ones or interesting ones tend to make it onto services like Steam or attract enough attention to be noticed.

If you tried to turn indie games into a full-fledge industry instead of a cottage-industry (which would happen in a situation without the AAA industry) you'd have the same situation you do with AAA just with lower prices. Then competition, mistakes, increasing team sizes to try and do more and raise the scales, general market forces all of that stuff would raise the costs and bring us back to square one...
« Last Edit: April 02, 2011, 08:20:24 PM by MrMorley »
Jason's Development Blog
Nerds who program party hard

Fenrir

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 473
  • Karma: +1/-2
  • The Monstrous Wolf
    • View Profile
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #31 on: April 02, 2011, 08:33:47 PM »
Wait, you are saying an advocate would say "I don't like expensive AAA  games, so I'll download them illegally to play for free instead"? That's...okay...what? Does the contradiction not leap out to anybody else?
I don't see where Z said that.

The "if I like it I'll buy it" argument is a better one morally, except bet your bones that market only makes up like 0.1% of pirates
You just made up that statistic.

As for the AAA industry as a whole. Well, people are still buying enough AAA games to keep that ball rolling along. Otherwise they'd all fail and well, end of that entire industries economy fails I guess?
What was the point of this remark? Yes. The industry must be doing well enough if it isn't gone. I think we all realized that. This doesn't respond in any way to Z's point that your reasoning means that anyone who doesn't buy games at all is evil, whether they pirate them or not.

Now, I'm often the first to just assume people are stupid, and that's what I'm going to assume to explain why games like Call of Duty: Black Ops sell in such numbers despite a near identical game that most of them already own called Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 being available...
Maybe people like Black Ops better. You don't know.

Still, indie games tend to have more niche appeal, and more unique gameplay and graphics.
Do you see the irony in the fact that we're in a forum dedicated to mimicking the gameplay and presentation of Rogue? "More unique" indeed. "Unique" doesn't necessarily mean that a game is more fun anyway.

I may call that a good thing but since, as established, people are stupid it seems to have it's downsides. Also most indie games people play are good because only the good ones or interesting ones tend to make it onto services like Steam or attract enough attention to be noticed.
What is "good" or "interesting" is merely your opinion. You can't call someone stupid for having a different opinion, and mainstream games get more advertising anyway, so people might like independently-developed games if they only knew about them.

MrMorley

  • Newcomer
  • Posts: 24
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Jason's Development Blog
    • Email
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #32 on: April 02, 2011, 09:10:01 PM »
Wait, you are saying an advocate would say "I don't like expensive AAA  games, so I'll download them illegally to play for free instead"? That's...okay...what? Does the contradiction not leap out to anybody else?
I don't see where Z said that.

"An advocate of piracy could now say that if I downloaded the game, played it, then maybe I would like it and change my opinion on AAA games and buy the sequel, recommend it to my friends, just send my thanks to the authors, or whatever."

Nowhere did was it even mention buying the game downloaded if it was enjoyed. Maybe that's an oversight on Z's part?

The "if I like it I'll buy it" argument is a better one morally, except bet your bones that market only makes up like 0.1% of pirates
You just made up that statistic.
Yes. Yes I did. I figured that was obvious and it was just to get across the point that those people are most likely not in the majority.

As for the AAA industry as a whole. Well, people are still buying enough AAA games to keep that ball rolling along. Otherwise they'd all fail and well, end of that entire industries economy fails I guess?
What was the point of this remark? Yes. The industry must be doing well enough if it isn't gone. I think we all realized that. This doesn't respond in any way to Z's point that your reasoning means that anyone who doesn't buy games at all is evil, whether they pirate them or not.

I never made that point. I called them selfish, and trying to get something for nothing, but isn't everbody? I call myself selfish and trying to get something for nothing and damnit I'm dragging you all down with me! :) Heck, if you look I even "offended" people who give to charity.

Unless you are of the opinion anything "morally wrong" is evil? Is it? I always thought evil required something extra...

Unfortunately I don't understand talks of morality very well so I just go by what I think seems to be other people's concept of it. Since stealing seems to fall under morally wrong, and I addressed that in the the whole "stealing a design by using it without permission"  part of an earlier post, I just assumed most people have that concept of morality and find it "wrong" even if willing to do it. The people who don't tend to be zealots, and any honest zealot in my world view is obsessed about...well, to reuse the phrase "stroking their ego" regardless of what they claim. That or they are so afraid of the hypothetical worst-case alternative they have withdrawn completely into the protective shell of their zealously regardless of the world around them.

Now, I'm often the first to just assume people are stupid, and that's what I'm going to assume to explain why games like Call of Duty: Black Ops sell in such numbers despite a near identical game that most of them already own called Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 being available...
Maybe people like Black Ops better. You don't know.

I address my "people are stupid" concept a bit further down.

Still, indie games tend to have more niche appeal, and more unique gameplay and graphics.
Do you see the irony in the fact that we're in a forum dedicated to mimicking the gameplay and presentation of Rogue? "More unique" indeed. "Unique" doesn't necessarily mean that a game is more fun anyway.

Indeed I do ^^ But games here still have that niche appeal so hey, that's 1/3? Also the big roguelikes all have something quite unique about them and small ones are generally developed by hobbyists. And we aren't expected to pay money for most of these, they'd just hobbyist projects. It's a lot more forgiveable when you're not trying to sell the result.

I may call that a good thing but since, as established, people are stupid it seems to have it's downsides. Also most indie games people play are good because only the good ones or interesting ones tend to make it onto services like Steam or attract enough attention to be noticed.
What is "good" or "interesting" is merely your opinion. You can't call someone stupid for having a different opinion, and mainstream games get more advertising anyway, so people might like independently-developed games if they only knew about them.

True, and yes I can because I am god *que rock music*. But yeah, my god complex aside I was using the word stupid in the "slow to learn and disliking of change" sense. Since unique gameplay often means some major changes, it's a risk publishers don't like and yes, could cost sales even if it works. Maybe I'm wrong, people aren't slow to learn and disliking of change, but that's a moot point since the publishers seem to assume this anyway ergo the Viewers Are Morons trope.

I do smack down indie games as well. A good percentage of them aren't good at all, but we don't tend to see them because...well, they don't get much attention. It's all about the advertising, like you said.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2011, 09:39:37 PM by MrMorley »
Jason's Development Blog
Nerds who program party hard

Slash

  • Creator of Roguetemple
  • Administrator
  • Rogueliker
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
  • Karma: +4/-1
    • View Profile
    • Slashie.net
    • Email
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #33 on: April 05, 2011, 09:08:54 PM »
I see walls of text that could be better translated into roguelikes's LOC ;)

siob

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • blit(brain)
    • View Profile
    • gamejs

languard

  • Newcomer
  • Posts: 41
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #35 on: April 07, 2011, 02:23:35 PM »
I'll have to go and re-listen to that talk.  I remember Notch saying that he didn't consider it a lost sale, but I don't remember the 'not theft' line.

Fenrir

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 473
  • Karma: +1/-2
  • The Monstrous Wolf
    • View Profile
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #36 on: April 07, 2011, 02:42:04 PM »
He just states the same pro-piracy things that have already been presented in thread. The fact that a famous developer says that piracy isn't wrong doesn't make it true, so the link you have provided doesn't really support your point or contribute anything meaningful to the discussion.

languard

  • Newcomer
  • Posts: 41
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #37 on: April 07, 2011, 04:58:22 PM »
He just states the same pro-piracy things that have already been presented in thread. The fact that a famous developer says that piracy isn't wrong doesn't make it true, so the link you have provided doesn't really support your point or contribute anything meaningful to the discussion.

See that's what bugs me about that article.  I was at the GDC and in that session specifically, and that's not the message I got from Notch.  I didn't get the feeling that he was saying the piracy is OK, but rather the concept of 'lost sale' is wrong.  He points out (rightly, I think) that a pirate isn't a lost sale because you never had that sale to begin with.  Instead of punishing your honest customers, figure out a way to convert the pirates into a sale.  As I said, I need to go to the vault and re-listen to his part.  Could be a case of remembering what I want to remember.

Oh and just because it isn't a lost sale doesn't mean that it isn't theft as far as I'm concerned.  If I go into a store with the intent of stealing something, I'm not a lost sale.  I never intended to buy the item.  I'm still a thief though, I took something that doesn't belong to me.

Edit:  Just listened to Notch's portion of the session.  He does state piracy is not theft, but he does say that it is copyright infringement.  So Notch is not saying piracy is OK to do, just that the AAA industries approach to it is wrong.  Of course I still disagree with him, I still hold that piracy is theft in the moral sense at least.  You are taking something that doesn't belong to you.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2011, 09:27:34 PM by languard »

Krice

  • (Banned)
  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 2316
  • Karma: +0/-2
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #38 on: April 16, 2011, 05:42:32 PM »
Notch owns 23 million euros. He can say anything he wants.

siob

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • blit(brain)
    • View Profile
    • gamejs
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #39 on: April 17, 2011, 08:11:58 AM »
I didn't get the feeling that he was saying the piracy is OK, but rather the concept of 'lost sale' is wrong.  He points out (rightly, I think) that a pirate isn't a lost sale because you never had that sale to begin with.  Instead of punishing your honest customers, figure out a way to convert the pirates into a sale. 


That's how I understood it too.

siob

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • blit(brain)
    • View Profile
    • gamejs
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #40 on: May 03, 2011, 12:16:21 PM »
this post about an unhappy (book) author http://www.davidflanagan.com/2011/04/javascript-the-1.html

triggered this interesting response: http://diveintomark.org/archives/2011/04/29/the-book-is-dead

Imo the following - as argued in the latter article - is very true:

If I pirate a game or a movie, then I *get the better product* compared to buying the DVD. For the content industry to survive the digital age, they must catch up and make buying content at least as easy, and the product I buy as good as the pirated version.

For example: I started buying games after I discovered Steam. I almost exclusively pirated for a decade but with Steam it's again easier & more convenient to buy the game then to look for it on a torrent site!!

Fenrir

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 473
  • Karma: +1/-2
  • The Monstrous Wolf
    • View Profile
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #41 on: May 04, 2011, 03:01:13 PM »
So you pirated because was more convenient? If stealing would have been more convenient, would you have done that too? If not, convenience isn't a good reason.

Quote
15 years is a long time. What a blessing to have been able to do something you love for that long, and get paid for it.
So this is trying to justify piracy by implying that getting paid for something for 15 years is long enough? That isn't sufficient reasoning. Apply that elsewhere, and you'll see why. "Having a good car for 15 years is pretty sweet. I'll just take that from you now." "It's pretty cool that you got to live for 15 years; I'll go ahead and murder you now."

No, before you ask, I'm not equating software piracy and murder. I'm demostrating that "you benefited from it for 15 years" isn't a good enough reason to obstruct those benefits or violate agreements.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2011, 03:35:21 PM by Fenrir »

siob

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • blit(brain)
    • View Profile
    • gamejs
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #42 on: May 05, 2011, 07:52:44 AM »
So you pirated because was more convenient? If stealing would have been more convenient, would you have done that too? If not, convenience isn't a good reason.

stealing isn't socially accepted and can have harsh repercussions. I think convinience is a good explanation of why people do things.

Quote
Quote
15 years is a long time. What a blessing to have been able to do something you love for that long, and get paid for it.
So this is trying to justify piracy by implying that getting paid for something for 15 years is long enough? That isn't sufficient reasoning. Apply that elsewhere, and you'll see why. "Having a good car for 15 years is pretty sweet. I'll just take that from you now." "It's pretty cool that you got to live for 15 years; I'll go ahead and murder you now."

No, before you ask, I'm not equating software piracy and murder. I'm demostrating that "you benefited from it for 15 years" isn't a good enough reason to obstruct those benefits or violate agreements.

mh, I don't think he tried to justify pirating. I understand his post as 'it's not a big deal and google is already working against it'

Fenrir

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 473
  • Karma: +1/-2
  • The Monstrous Wolf
    • View Profile
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #43 on: May 08, 2011, 12:52:51 AM »
stealing isn't socially accepted and can have harsh repercussions. I think convinience is a good explanation of why people do things.
We already know why you did what you did, as you have already confessed to pirating for convenience, but I am questioning whether that is a good enough reason for you to do it. Unless I misunderstand, it seemed to me that you were trying to justify your piracy by saying that it was more convenient to be a pirate. If you were not trying to justify what you did, then you are merely stating that being a pirate has benefits. Of course being a pirate has benefits! If it didn't, it wouldn't be a problem, because no one would do it. That doesn't mean that it is in any way excusable.

mh, I don't think he tried to justify pirating. I understand his post as 'it's not a big deal and google is already working against it'
He is still telling the original author to not complain, because the author got fifteen years out of it. Shall we not be angered by injustice, simply because we have already reaped benefit? My above point yet stands.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2011, 12:58:43 AM by Fenrir »

siob

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • blit(brain)
    • View Profile
    • gamejs
Re: Digital Rights and Economics
« Reply #44 on: May 09, 2011, 10:01:26 AM »
i still don't think its about finding someone to blame, who needs to excuse himself.

i want people to not pirate and we should find incentives, new ways to make buying content attractive. and I think both articles point to a problem and possible solutions in how we currently sell content.

ps.: the problem is that bought content is often intentionally made unattractive. if that wasn't clear. it's not so much about pirating being more attractive, it's about bought content being degraded, less usable.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2011, 10:03:15 AM by siob »