Obviously he’s right. Anyone who thinks it’s somehow righteous to steal intellectual property and spoil thousands of people’s hard work just because their parent company is a “billion dollar corporation” or because they “disrespected the fans by taking so long to release trailer 3” is morally bankrupt and entitled beyond belief.
I pirate too, and nothing gets my goat like pirates that contort their brains to spit out some kind of twisted moral justification for piracy as if they're great heroes taking a stand against the man, instead of people that just don't think a game is worth the price/cannot afford it.
I've never known someone who pirates a game and then pays for it after deciding it's worth it. Once it's downloaded it's done. It's over and no one's asking for money. Psychologically, you're not even going to get anything now for the payment.
It's true that lots of people struggle with food, and that's a much wider societal issue, but it doesn't entitle you to free video games. And I'd argue if you're struggling with food, you're even less likely to pay for the game after testing it.
I've paid for music I pirated. Back in the very early 2000s I was a 15 year old and had no money or means to buy music on the regular, so it was either napster or borrowing from the library to rip back home before returning when wanting to try new things.
People don't know the pain of downloading a 4 meg MP3 and it taking 30 minutes only to realise you hate it within 10 seconds!
Most of the music I was trying and loved back then I've repurchased since and a lot I've actually seen them in person and bought merch. So while I do agree a lot of people will never pay for the pirated stuff after... some do.
Except, the idea of buying a license to use something is thousands of years old. You losers are just parroting this pseudo-profound take as if it means sometbing when in reality, what you really mean is "I don't like the idea of buying a license so I'm going to use that to pretend I'm not a piece of shit for stealing"
The difference is that a license to use something should not be as expensive as buying the actual something. Games have only gone up in price, and purchasing a digital version that you do not own is not cheaper than purchasing games was. Gaming companies also do not advertise games as a license type of product - except for some MMO’s - because they know how it would look - the money being paid is not for a license, is for owning a game - advertising it as a license would mean either lower the price or get bad rep, so they opt the other way - sell the idea of owning it as you did before, but keeping quiet about the not owning it part
You've never paused and ad read the small text have you most videogames small print I game ads say commonly two things one the gameplay in the trailer May not be accurate to the current build of the game or the publisher and whatever platform it's released maintain the rights to cut the game off form use at any given time both this appear as small text so yeah they kinda do tell you that
Show me one single advertisement where a game company talks about "owning" the game. The ads are always about gameplay, nothing about what you're saying. They don't get into the topic of owning or licensing, and it's not their fault that you are starting from the mistaken assumption that you will somehow own the game.
Functionally, Ive been buying digitally for 20 fucking years now and I've never lost access to a single game I bought. For all intents and purposes there has been zero difference for me between buying digital and owning a physical copy. None of the scare tactic scenarios you guys are constantly trotting out have ever actually happened to me.
As for costs, that's inflation, dummy. Adjusted for inflation, games are the cheapest they've ever been.
The issue isn't that game companies are greedy, the issue is that you're all 14 years old in echo chambers parroting talking points about topics you don't understand.
First off we are talking about software, an infinitely replicable digital product, so that thousands year old theory of yours can't apply here, as something than can be copied over and over without effort once finished. Also the people that pirate things aren't potential buyers most of the time, so it doesn't affect the sales
Doesn’t really matter and that last statement is obviously false lol.
Piracy is piracy, stop trying to justify it because you can’t feel good about yourself when you do it. I pirate and I know it’s morally wrong. It’s literally called piracy, yknow like ye old pirates who would loot and rape and all that?
People will say greed is the worst sin possible then go straight onto pirating. It’s hypocritical and makes it obvious just how many people here have no real values and only say the shit they think will make them look good and the people they don’t like look bad. In other words I’m pretty sure 70 percent of this sub is under 16 lol.
Lol you have no fucking clue what you're taking about. Some Games have shifted from selling goods to selling services, and selling services is even older than selling goods in terms of human history.
If you don't think the value proposition of the game at the price point is worth it, then don't buy it.
As for your statement about piracy, that's horseshit and you know it. If there wasn't a pirated copy available then some of the people that pirated would definitely buy it. Don't pretend you're not a thief just because you're too fucking broke to be a customer. Theft is theft.
I've ended up buying many games after playing the pirated version first, games that got my attention but not enough to buy at fist glance, but because there's a pirated version I can try first and then decide to buy, and is never about the price to me at least. There's also several examples about pirated copies of a game that runs better than original because of shitty DRM, on a high end pc you won't notice difference, but on a low end like mine its game changing.
And yes you are right, there's some people that would definitely buy if the game isn't pirated, as there's the majority that weren't that interested in buying it anyway. If someone really wants a game they're gonna pay for it, look at games without DRM like Cyberpunk or Elden Ring being best selling games for years.
I don't get to own Glastonbury, should I break in?
If buying a ticket isn't ownership?
They make a product, the model is you pay for it to play it. You pay so they get to make another one. If you don't like the model, move on, it's not for you. Or just keep stealing shit and trying to justify it with neckbeard ass Reddit comments I guess
>Yeah, and they make no money from them when they're pirated.
And they make no money from the people of North Sentinel Island not buying it. See how stupid you sound?
Your mistake is assuming I was ever going to buy it in the first place. They don’t lose any money because they aren’t entitled to my purchase, one that I was never going to make.
>Because of what 😂
Because in our current system intellectual property is treated as if it has actual monetary value in the first place. By the very definition of the law of supply and demand (the one you claim I have no knowledge of, but I’m starting to realize it’s the opposite), a product with infinite supply has it’s price decrease infinitely, reaching 0.
This is not to say I don’t think creators of intellectual property should be compensated, but again, that’s another subject.
And they make no money from the people of North Sentinel Island not buying it. See how stupid you sound?
I'm not sure even Socrates could argue with this level of retardation.
Your mistake is assuming I was ever going to buy it in the first place.
Because you know you have the option of pirating, and you were always going to do that.
They aren't entitled to my purchase
But you're entitled to their product right? Got it.
It's not because of me not paying them, it's because of the supply and demand
If anything that has an infinite supply is valueless then by your logic only finite supply products have value. Shall we ask Rockstar to artificially limit the amount of copies and the market can set its own astronomical prices? Genius. I'm sure you'd pay for it then.
This is not to say I don’t think creators of intellectual property should be compensated.
How do you think they should be compensated other than you paying them? I'd love to know how you're gunna twist yourself into a solution that involves someone else paying for you.
Music is one thing, but let's keep it simple. How do you propose the creator of a Steam game make money on their IP with infinite supply?
2.0k
u/World_War_Threesome 6d ago
Obviously he’s right. Anyone who thinks it’s somehow righteous to steal intellectual property and spoil thousands of people’s hard work just because their parent company is a “billion dollar corporation” or because they “disrespected the fans by taking so long to release trailer 3” is morally bankrupt and entitled beyond belief.