Splinter Cell Conviction PC requirements emerge, so does the drm

[Farinorco]

Some of you are talking about bad moral and ethics..isn't it also a really bad ethic to sell an unfinished product? Do I have to wait for a patch in order to enjoy something I have paid money for it?

Yes, it is. But one thing doesn't make the other any better...

Dude, it's like you didn't even read what i said... i said i stopped purchasing and so did others... Industry whores are publishing those lost sales as, sales lost to piracy... which is wrong...

Sorry if I misunderstood, but you have to notice that saying things like "I understand downloading stuff when you can't buy it in the market... due to its unavailability, due to it being unreasonably priced, due to products not having acceptable levels of quality" make you look like defending ilegal downloading because of high prices or low quality. Which is absurd and is what I was trying to refute.

Then again, downloading and raping , and you want me to believe that you aren't employed with MPAA/ RIAA? Either that, or you really need to check on your tolerances mate.

I think it was a pretty good paralelism to show through an exagerated case that understanding the reasons why someone might do something, and considering it an acceptable thing, are not the same thing. And I don't think there's room to make any other interpretation, but I might be wrong .

Anyway, no, I can tell you that Motion Picture Association of America, and Record Industry Association of America, have low probabilities to have nothing to do with an spaniard living at Spain (or at least, that's what I think). I don't know exactly what kind of associations are those, but I can tell you that here at Spain, we have some similar associations, being the biggest one (I think) the SGAE (Sociedad General de Autores y Editores = Authors and Editors General Association), and I won't tell you much about what I think about them, but I'll tell you that they are a private company, that covers some authors, that has managed to (don't ask me how the hell the government has allowed something like that) impose a tax on every product susceptible to be used to vulnerate copyrights (CD's, DVD's, optic drives, hard drives -yeah, 12€ per unit-, printers, and lots of other things, they wanted to fish in Internet connections as well) which is in many cases higher than the benefits that the end sellers have per product "as a compensation for the losts due to piracy" (so what are you trying to tell us, SGAE, we all should pay to you because there's people breaking the law??? It seems that the answer is: yes). So you might make an idea of what do most of us think about them.

Yes, I agree that some people are basically predating on the excuse of piracy. That doesn't make the piracy itself any better, and sometimes those "predators" use indeed rational arguments about the piracy topic to (most of times irrationally) sustent their own ambitions.

And I think my tolerances are OK, thanks.

[Aerwidh]

Personally, I don't see much reason for any developer to be innovative any more. People don't want to show any appreciation for the effort that goes into a game no matter how good or bad it is.

Or, people don't appreciate the fact that there has already been little/no innovation from the industry since years back. Typically, there seems to be more effort put into hyping things to the stratosphere than making a product with real, lasting value (which is, at least partially, something to blame on the giant publishers).
Why should people appreciate effort that goes into a game, if the game is not good, not for them, or hardly even a game anymore?
I'm not saying "piracy" is a good thing, I'm just saying that if developers want people to appreciate their efforts, they had better make sure they make something that people want to buy, otherwise they don't deserve appreciation.

Besides, the industry's companies don't need "piracy" to kill them, they are already well on their way to doing so, themselves. How? Well, pushing increasing amounts of hype onto their customers (making them more and more jaded towards games), while simultaneously declaring war on them by trying to kill the used games market should be enough. If not, I'm sure they will find more ways to destroy themselves, they are good at that

[tifosi]

I think it was a pretty good paralelism to show through an exagerated case that understanding the reasons why someone might do something, and considering it an acceptable thing, are not the same thing. And I don't think there's room to make any other interpretation, but I might be wrong .

SGAE (Sociedad General de Autores y Editores = Authors and Editors General Association), and I won't tell you much about what I think about them, but I'll tell you that they are a private company, that covers some authors, that has managed to (don't ask me how the hell the government has allowed something like that) impose a tax on every product susceptible to be used to vulnerate copyrights (CD's, DVD's, optic drives, hard drives -yeah, 12€ per unit-, printers, and lots of other things, they wanted to fish in Internet connections as well) which is in many cases higher than the benefits that the end sellers have per product "as a compensation for the losts due to piracy" (so what are you trying to tell us, SGAE, we all should pay to you because there's people breaking the law??? It seems that the answer is: yes). So you might make an idea of what do most of us think about them.

As i see it, there's nothing wrong with people wanting stuff and finding means to get them... it is their nature and one may as well begin to accept the inevitable and learn to work it for your benefit. What corporations can do is either vilify them, as i mentioned in my last post, or profit from it like Levi's in India did. The latter, i think is the better approach. Of course there are going to be some people who'll never buy stuff, but they aren't customers. If because of them a company actually does something stupid to its paying customers, then well, they have a right to go out of business... customers have a right to choose what they buy, like i made a choice and businesses have only themselves to blame for it.

Then again, did you or did you not know that it is not just Spain, but across the world, that every blank cd/ dvd or any other recordable media comes with an extra charge, piracy tax if you will, which goes to the industry... don't ask me how and who. It doesn't make piracy correct, but pardon me, when i add it all up, it looks like i paid for stuff, so why not get it :P Just trying to be cheeky, since those bastards are taking my money anyways...

Ah well, does not matter how you cut it, raping and downloading are not the same... However, i do know that your heart was in the right place. Also, i think it is one of the examples that one RIAA/ MPAA exec used... and yes you should read them, just for fun... Now, are you able to see where i start to think you sound like one of them?

Last, but certainly not the least, i meant you no offense mate, and if i did, i apologize unconditionally... we may have different beliefs and we all have a right to do so (even the downloaders), and i understand that...

Cheers!

[randomizer]

Or, people don't appreciate the fact that there has already been little/no innovation from the industry since years back. Typically, there seems to be more effort put into hyping things to the stratosphere than making a product with real, lasting value (which is, at least partially, something to blame on the giant publishers).
Why should people appreciate effort that goes into a game, if the game is not good, not for them, or hardly even a game anymore?
I'm not saying "piracy" is a good thing, I'm just saying that if developers want people to appreciate their efforts, they had better make sure they make something that people want to buy, otherwise they don't deserve appreciation.

Every game, innovative or not, gets pirated like crazy. If you don't think a game deserves appreciation, don't buy it. Pirating it means you perceive some value in it but refuse to pay for that value. This is like me trying to sell you a book with smudged ink such that it is not much good to you and you think I'm charging too much. You still want it anyway, so you photocopy the whole thing and don't pay me a cent for my work.

Hooray, I just managed to put piracy into an analogy with tangible objects without resorting to the "stealing" from the supermarket one.

[zalbard]

Is it me or we have the same talk over and over again in such topics?
Anyway, I suggest you guys to chill some...
If the game is good, buy it and support the developers. They are not responsible for what publisher is doing with their game.
If the game is meh, don't play... If you can't afford it or hate to pay cause of DRM then don't worry, nothing takes long to crack these days.
I can't think of anything to do regarding DRM but signing petitions or not playing such games at all, really...
If you start pirating like crazy DRM will just get even worse, that's it.

[Aerwidh]

Every game, innovative or not, gets pirated like crazy. If you don't think a game deserves appreciation, don't buy it. Pirating it means you perceive some value in it but refuse to pay for that value. This is like me trying to sell you a book with smudged ink such that it is not much good to you and you think I'm charging too much. You still want it anyway, so you photocopy the whole thing and don't pay me a cent for my work.

Hooray, I just managed to put piracy into an analogy with tangible objects without resorting to the "stealing" from the supermarket one.

Most games have been copied, one way or another, for a very long time. I'm not promoting "piracy", but it's not really the biggest issue for the game developers or publishers.

I was merely trying to point out that while you seemed to be arguing that noone appreciates developers effort anymore, therefore there is little reason for developers to be innovative, I would argue that a big reason for the lack of appreciation is lack of innovation. I don't see why anyone should appreciate the same games being rehashed over and over again by an industry that is afraid to try new ideas, new content.

And saying that "piracy" means you perceive some value in it, but won't pay for it is a generalization I cannot agree with. A lot of people do it for that reason, I suppose, but many do not.

And, if I don't like what the game seems to offer, I already don't buy it. I also don't go download it. If it ain't worth my money, why would it be worth my time?

Still, you get a cookie for the somewhat more original analogy

[inCore]

Yes, cookies for the analogy. It's a much better than the supermarket analogy anyways, because you've only photocopied it and then given it back, as opposed to stealing it and not giving it back.

I'm sorry but when discussing things such as innovation and piracy of video games, I find it really hard to argue with people that are principally against/for piracy. You can simply look at it in too many ways. Either you take the general approach of stating that piracy leads to this and that, mostly negative things, or you judge it on a game-by-game basis. There are some games which are simply not worth the price which you'd need to pay for it, which raises the question of what would be the right thing to do if you're only ready to pay half the price. Waiting for the price to drop is oftentimes not an option, the popularity of video games cycles at previously unseen speeds. Back in the days of Counterstrike, you could buy the game two-three years after release with the assertion that you won't be out of servers in a few months. Nowadays, Modern Warfare 2 is already becoming less important due to other games such as Bad Company 2, and this trend isn't likely to end. If you buy second hand, the developer/publisher is getting nothing out of it anyways, so in the short term, the economic similarities to piracy should be obvious, and yet it's legal.

In the end, I think it's a little pretentious to state that a person who doesn't want to pay the full price shouldn't be able to buy the game at all. In my opinion, that's a case of failed pricing strategies, although it should be mentioned that I do not have an answer to the problem.

[yngndrw]

In the end, I think it's a little pretentious to state that a person who doesn't want to pay the full price shouldn't be able to buy the game at all. In my opinion, that's a case of failed pricing strategies, although it should be mentioned that I do not have an answer to the problem.

It's a case of supply and demand - If there isn't enough demand at that price then the price will be lowered, otherwise there is obviously enough demand for it at that price from other players. With that in mind, if you value it lower then other people are willing to pay for it, what gives you the right to get the game "on time". If you think the game is worth more when it's released than when the price later drops, you should pay that extra value. You're paying a premium for getting the game when it's released - If you don't want to pay the premium then by all means don't, but also don't expect to play the game right away.

[zanzabar]

It's a case of supply and demand - If there isn't enough demand at that price then the price will be lowered, otherwise there is obviously enough demand for it at that price from other players. With that in mind, if you value it lower then other people are willing to pay for it, what gives you the right to get the game "on time". If you think the game is worth more when it's released than when the price later drops, you should pay that extra value. You're paying a premium for getting the game when it's released - If you don't want to pay the premium then by all means don't, but also don't expect to play the game right away.

how dose that work on printed media, if the price is to high then the game is deemed a failure, its not printed anymore and the price slowly goes down but its normally shipped back to the distributor before the price falls sub $45. the only place with price cuts is digital distribution but steam had to fight with publishers to get price cuts even affter the 1st holoday sale that gave huge sales on older games or new ones with 25-33% off.

if games are supposed to be art then something has to give, publishers are making the games inaccessible through pricing, drm, and time in the market.

a question for yngndrw, how do you feel about downloading a game that is not for sale anymore or is hard to find as its available in common channels.

[yngndrw]

I've seen lots of games drop their prices lower than that over time.

As for your question, if it's not for sale any more or is not available in your country / region and won't ever be then I have no problem with downloading them, personally. However, if it's a question of the price never dropping to the price you want to pay, but it's still for sale then I don't think that's okay to download. (As the company still value it at more.)

[randomizer]

I'm sorry but when discussing things such as innovation and piracy of video games, I find it really hard to argue with people that are principally against/for piracy.

I've been principally on the fence for a while, sometimes leaning towards piracy, sometimes leaning away from it. However, when I re-examined the reasons for why I supported piracy in a limited number of cases, I realised that those reasons were purely me justifying why I deserved to get something for free (ie. using "for the greater good" reasoning to support a selfish motive). The available data does not support my previous reasoning, so I tend to be anti-piracy now.

[Farinorco]

Last, but certainly not the least, i meant you no offense mate, and if i did, i apologize unconditionally... we may have different beliefs and we all have a right to do so (even the downloaders), and i understand that...

Cheers!

Don't worry at all, mate.

<snip>

There are some games which are simply not worth the price which you'd need to pay for it, which raises the question of what would be the right thing to do if you're only ready to pay half the price. Waiting for the price to drop is oftentimes not an option, the popularity of video games cycles at previously unseen speeds.

<snip>

The thing is: who's the one who make that appretiation?

It isn't the consumer right to decide how much to pay for a work. It's the one who's selling the good/service who has the right to decide how much to ask for it. The consumer, then, may decide if adquiring the product/service at the price it's being asked is worth it or not.

If you take away the right of people to put a price for their work, then that system (working for a payment) doesn't work.

If the price is too high for what people will get of what is being offered, then it's their problem. They will lose money if they don't drop that price. That's how offering and demand work.

I think one common misconception here is that we all tend to think we have the right to have anything we want to have, just because we know of it, and that the deal has to be convenient for us. Given that we are talking about entertainment products, that's not this way. What about the one who is actually offering the good/service? Maybe he thinks that making the work/investment for any less isn't worth it... and he should have the right to decide whatever he wants, is his work/investment/risks after all.

So, to that question of what would be the right thing to do if you are not ready to pay the full price of a given product/service, I think it's pretty obvious that don't purchasing/contracting it.