Topic: The Piracy Thread -- Update: Valve speaks on Russian piracy market and etc

[Xessive]

I think with World of Goo they might be basing the numbers on how many users connect via the "Goo Factory" which is the quasi-multiplayer section in WoG. Basically you're trying to build a tower with your rescued Gooeys and you can see other players' towers in the background. They're probably estimating the "90%" based solely on the number users connected.

[MysterD]

According to TorrentFreak, these are the most pirated games in 2008

The Top 10 Pirated PC Games of 2008: Spore Leads

by Nick Breckon Dec 09, 2008 1:51pm CST tags: Piracy, PC Gaming, Spore
EA Maxis' Spore was by far the most pirated PC game in 2008, according to a list compiled by Torrent-tracking blog TorrentFreak. The title, surrounded by controversy over its anti-piracy DRM, was illegally downloaded over 1.7 million times.

Electronic Arts took a beating in capturing four of the top five slots, with EA Maxis' The Sims 2 taking the not-so-coveted second place by reaching over 1.1 million downloads. The EA-published Crysis and Command & Conquer 3 came in at fourth and fifth, respectively.

Ubisoft's PC port of Assassin's Creed grabbed a reluctant third place with over a million downloads. The game was leaked to torrent networks over six weeks ahead of its retail release in April. Ubisoft later sued disc replicator Optical Experts Manufacturing (OEM) for $10 million in damages, believing that an OEM employee was responsible for the leak.

The rest of the list follows:

   1. Spore / 1,700,000 / Sept. 2008
   2. The Sims 2 / 1,150,000 / Sept. 2004
   3. Assassins Creed / 1,070,000 / Nov. 2007
   4. Crysis / 940,000 / Nov. 2007
   5. Command & Conquer 3 / 860,000 / Mar. 2007
   6. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare / 830,000 / Nov. 2007
   7. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas / 740,000 / Jun. 2005
   8. Fallout 3 / 645,000 / Oct. 2008
   9. Far Cry 2 / 585,000 / Oct. 2008
  10. Pro Evolution Soccer 2009 / 470,000 / Oct. 2008

[scottws]

Moral of the story?  The more bullshit you try to foist on someone, the more likely they are to get a cracked copy.

Interesting to see GTA:SA and Pro Evolution Soccer 2009 on there.

[Ghandi]

Interesting that the top two games are EA games.

And I'm guessing that Pro Evolution Soccer is due to international piracy, considering everybody hates soccer here in the U.S.

[idolminds]

I would guess GTA:SA is up there since up until recently it was the newest GTA, but also it was most likely the unedited Hot Coffee version. Also it seems that MultiTheftAuto only worked on that unedited version.

The soccer one...you got me.

The Crysis one is funny. Didn't the crytek guy say it was a 20:1 ratio of pirate copies to legit? Crysis sold rougly 1.5 million copies. I know torrents arent the only way to get pirate copies and these numbers probably ignore the downloads made in Nov/Dec last year right after the game released...but still interesting.

[Pugnate]

Moral of the story?  The more bullshit you try to foist on someone, the more likely they are to get a cracked copy.

Interesting to see GTA:SA and Pro Evolution Soccer 2009 on there.

You could say that about Spore, but Crysis, The Sims and Assassin's Creed had the most basic of copy protection schemes.

The Crysis one is funny. Didn't the crytek guy say it was a 20:1 ratio of pirate copies to legit? Crysis sold rougly 1.5 million copies. I know torrents arent the only way to get pirate copies and these numbers probably ignore the downloads made in Nov/Dec last year right after the game released...but still interesting.

Well, considering the game sold a million copies during those two months, it is fair to assume that the bulk of piracy also happened during that period. But it was probably still a far cry (no pun) from the 20:1 ratio.

[Ghandi]

This isn't directed at anyone in particular, but I still don't buy the argument that people who pirate games wouldn't have bought the game in the first place. Are you then saying that, if console piracy were readily available to the populace, that sales wouldn't drop?

[gpw11]

Moral of the story?  The more bullshit you try to foist on someone, the more likely they are to get a cracked copy.


I'd say the moral is that the more people want your game the more they're willing to steal it.  I don't think DRM has a (notable) effect on piracy in either direction.  Sure, it doesn't really work, but anyone who claims they stole the game because of copy protection would have just stolen the game anyways.  That or they're a complete dumbass who doesn't realize that not only does it send the completely wrong message to publishers about DRM, they also could have bought the game and just downloaded the crack in 99.9% of the cases.

Sure, a shitload of people have pirated Spore, but at the same time it was the highest profile game to come out for PC for a few years.

This isn't directed at anyone in particular, but I still don't buy the argument that people who pirate games wouldn't have bought the game in the first place. Are you then saying that, if console piracy were readily available to the populace, that sales wouldn't drop?

I agree.  Obviously some of them wouldn't have been able to buy the games in the first place (coincidentally, people who want things but lack the means to purchase them is a key factor of supply and demand that confuses the hell out of a lot of kids in first year econ classes). But there are obviously a shitload of people out there downloading games who, if getting them for free without consequence wasn't an option, would end up buying them.

[Ghandi]

Well, the real moral of the story is that people will pirate your game regardless of what you do. There will be a certain number of people that pirate your game. It's a fact of life. Now, beyond that, you may try to control those numbers. But the reality is, at the moment, no one can do a good goddamn about piracy. All they end up doing is pissing of people that would legitimately purchase their games. And what does that drive those people to do? Pirate their game. Not all of them, but some of them. The end result is that these measures that they are implementing don't do anything. For every person that they actually stop from piracy, they drive 10 more to commit it. It's pointless. And I'm amazed that they can't think of more creative ways to stop it. I'm certainly not for piracy, but I'm not for what they have been doing either.

In the end, I'm amazed by their complacency. It's inane. DO SOMETHING. Jesus.

[gpw11]

For every person that they actually stop from piracy, they drive 10 more to commit it.

This is the part I don't wholeheartedly agree with.  I'm not saying DRM does anything to prevent piracy, it doesn't and it's detrimental to sales, but I have a feeling that most of the people who either claim or outright convince themselves that they're only pirating because of a publisher's decision to include some form of DRM would have found something else to bring themselves to that decision anyways, whether it be the price of gas, traffic, the length of the game, or the fact that it's raining outside.  I could be wrong, and there could be a percentage of people out there who buy games because it's more convenient or what not, but really I think it comes down to a moral choice, and if anyone is swayed that easily, well.....

[Ghandi]

Well, I do agree with you on that, but only because my wording wasn't correct. What I was trying to get at is the fact that DRM and what have you only increase the drive against total anti-protectionism on the part of these companies. It's a failed policy in it's current implementation.

Now -

I'm not saying DRM does anything to prevent piracy, it doesn't and it's detrimental to sales,

I have to think that the fact that DRM has continued for so long means that it actually helps sales. If not, we would see it no longer. The people running these companies aren't completely stupid, and they understand the results of their actions. DRM has some effect. It's just hard to see it here, on overwritten.net. We aren't exactly sympathetic to their cause.

[Quemaqua]

I don't think that has anything to do with it.  I think this stuff is implemented in part because of stubbornness, i.e. the inertia of early efforts has simply carried them along this road like a current, and now they find themselves at the end of the road, realizing more and more as they slow down that what they're doing just isn't working.  That, and they're still more or less bound to try and do something to protect their product so that they aren't sued by their shareholders.

Ultimately, I think this will someday result in government control and legal penalties where P2P is concerned, and that's what I'm most afraid of.  But as with many things on the internet, I think eventually the ignorant will vote it into chains while the protests of the more informed go unheard.

[Pugnate]

As much as I love torrents etc, how much of it is used for legit. purposes?

[Xessive]

As much as I love torrents etc, how much of it is used for legit. purposes?

It's true the majority do use it to acquire large amounts of illegitimate files. However, I think BitTorrent is an excellent distribution method. A few sites use it as one of their download options, I think more ought to put it to good use.

MGS Online (the multiplayer part of MGS4 on PS3) uses BitTorrent to download updates and content.

[gpw11]

I have to think that the fact that DRM has continued for so long means that it actually helps sales. If not, we would see it no longer. The people running these companies aren't completely stupid, and they understand the results of their actions. DRM has some effect. It's just hard to see it here, on overwritten.net. We aren't exactly sympathetic to their cause.

It's probably impossible for them to measure in any way.  As such, I've kind of always just assumed that they've stuck with DRM and copy protection methods simply because they look at the piracy numbers for a game and understand that there is a lot of interest in that product.  Now, if only there was some way they could make all the people downloading it pay....

[MysterD]

It's probably impossible for them to measure in any way.  As such, I've kind of always just assumed that they've stuck with DRM and copy protection methods simply because they look at the piracy numbers for a game and understand that there is a lot of interest in that product.  Now, if only there was some way they could make all the people downloading it pay....

Well, some downloading it do pay -- through Steam, Direct2Drive, Impulse, Metaboli, etc...

[scottws]

As much as I love torrents etc, how much of it is used for legit. purposes?

Percentage-wise, I have no idea.  But I always download things like Linux distros and OpenOffice.org releases from torrents.  Oftentimes when a game has a large patch, I grumble to myself that there is no torrent.

Torrent is a completely legitimate and useful method of download.  But because of pay-to-download services like Fileshack charge for extra bandwidth and shorter queues, it doesn't get a lot of mainstream support.

DRM may or may not drive people to piracy, but I think it drives away more customers from sales than people think.

[idolminds]

Another article.

I didn't really read it, but I liked this quote:

Don't blindly support Steam. Steam is a good digital distribution platform, but at the moment Valve has an effective monopoly on digital games distribution. In the absence of a real competitor, prices will remain high and Valve will have no incentive to pressure publishers to both lower digital prices and remove redundant DRM on Steam-protected games.

Theres like 10 pages if you're bored and want to read it.

[MysterD]

Idol, that was absolutely hell of a goddamn article.
Thank you for that great find.

[Cobra951]

Physical Theft vs. Copyright Infringement

One significant difference between intellectual and physical property rights is that physical property is composed of finite items, and can only exist in a single place at any time. Intellectual property on the other hand can be effectively infinite in quantity, and can exist in as many places at the same time as required. In practical terms, this means that if you own a car and it's stolen for example, you can no longer use it. However if you own a game and someone copies it from you, this doesn't affect your ability to use that game. This is actually a fundamental issue because it underlies much of the debate surrounding software piracy. In essence the argument is that piracy is a 'victimless crime' because there's no actual loss of property, no loss of the materials used to produce a good or service, and no affect on other consumers of that product. We examine these types of claims in more detail in the Economics of Piracy section, but for now it does bear noting that strictly speaking, it is correct to say that piracy is not theft. As noted earlier, piracy is copyright infringement, and this is distinct from theft of physical property.

You don't see that in print very often, especially worded so well.  Reading on . . .

[MysterD]

Is This Really a Problem?

After all the information above, I can imagine people might be saying something along the lines of "So what if developers focus on making games for consoles... let them. As long as we get a PC version, what's the problem?". The problem is that there are already several observed negative impacts stemming from this shift in games development. The problem with multiplatform games is that the PC versions are usually hamstrung with the design decisions intended to accommodate the hardware and control limitations of ageing consoles, as well as suiting the more casual gaming style of many console gamers. This results in potential issues for PC gamers such as:

# Fewer options for properly configuring and adjusting the various graphics and audio parameters in a game. Consoles are a fixed hardware platform, hence don't require as much fine-tuning as PCs, nor have as much scope for improving visuals.
# Framerate caps built into the engine.
# Poor performance because the engine is optimized for fixed console hardware not a variety of PC hardware.
# Graphics compromises necessary for consoles but not for PCs. Examples include lower resolution textures, forced texture streaming and aggressive distance LOD systems, resulting in less immersive graphics.
# A lack of modding tools, often a complete lack of even the ability to apply basic modifications to the game engine, resulting in even less flexibility and longevity.
# Inappropriate or unmappable control layouts due to the controls originally being designed for console controllers not a keyboard/mouse combination.
# Console-orientated user interfaces resulting in awkwardly large or badly placed HUD or menu elements on the PC for example.
# Artificially restricted areas, less complex gameplay and storylines, highly scripted linear gameplay, automatic aiming systems, and shorter games with far less replayability. All designed to satisfy not only the hardware limitations, but more importantly the more casual gaming style of the mainstream console audience.

A-freakin'-men.

[PyroMenace]

Is This Really a Problem?

After all the information above, I can imagine people might be saying something along the lines of "So what if developers focus on making games for consoles... let them. As long as we get a PC version, what's the problem?". The problem is that there are already several observed negative impacts stemming from this shift in games development. The problem with multiplatform games is that the PC versions are usually hamstrung with the design decisions intended to accommodate the hardware and control limitations of ageing consoles, as well as suiting the more casual gaming style of many console gamers. This results in potential issues for PC gamers such as:

# Fewer options for properly configuring and adjusting the various graphics and audio parameters in a game. Consoles are a fixed hardware platform, hence don't require as much fine-tuning as PCs, nor have as much scope for improving visuals.
# Framerate caps built into the engine.
# Poor performance because the engine is optimized for fixed console hardware not a variety of PC hardware.
# Graphics compromises necessary for consoles but not for PCs. Examples include lower resolution textures, forced texture streaming and aggressive distance LOD systems, resulting in less immersive graphics.
# A lack of modding tools, often a complete lack of even the ability to apply basic modifications to the game engine, resulting in even less flexibility and longevity.
# Inappropriate or unmappable control layouts due to the controls originally being designed for console controllers not a keyboard/mouse combination.
# Console-orientated user interfaces resulting in awkwardly large or badly placed HUD or menu elements on the PC for example.
# Artificially restricted areas, less complex gameplay and storylines, highly scripted linear gameplay, automatic aiming systems, and shorter games with far less replayability. All designed to satisfy not only the hardware limitations, but more importantly the more casual gaming style of the mainstream console audience.

Hahahaha, what a load of shit.

[gpw11]

You don't see that in print very often, especially worded so well.  Reading on . . .

I don't personally think I've ever seen it worded so well.  I remember covering a class on price theory that brushed over the differences between physical theft and what it referred to as 'non-article based' theft (or something like that).  Horribly, horribly worded and focused entirely too much on opportunity cost and lost sales.  I mean, both do factor in, but I guess the question is (and always will be), where does that line get drawn and should anyone ever bother trying?

Framerate caps built into the engine.

While this is true, I personally don't see any problem being locked at 60.

# Artificially restricted areas, less complex gameplay and storylines, highly scripted linear gameplay, automatic aiming systems, and shorter games with far less replayability. All designed to satisfy not only the hardware limitations, but more importantly the more casual gaming style of the mainstream console audience.

I agree with Pyro - this point is just total bullshit.

[MysterD]

While this is true, I personally don't see any problem being locked at 60.

Same here. 60 should be fine.

Though, I do believe I should be given the option to have a Frame Cap Limiter ON or OFF -- and set it the max framerate to be whatever I want.

[Cobra951]

# Artificially restricted areas, less complex gameplay and storylines, highly scripted linear gameplay, automatic aiming systems, and shorter games with far less replayability. All designed to satisfy not only the hardware limitations, but more importantly the more casual gaming style of the mainstream console audience.

I agree with Pyro - this point is just total bullshit.

Of course it is.  But isn't that exactly his point?

The problem is that there are already several observed negative impacts stemming from this shift in games development. The problem with multiplatform games is that the PC versions are usually hamstrung with the design decisions intended to accommodate the hardware and control limitations of ageing consoles, as well as suiting the more casual gaming style of many console gamers.

He's agreeing with you that it's bullshit.  You get a product dumbed down from what the same game would be if targeted to PC gamers first, to accomodate the kiddies and the rest of the Great Unwashed.  It's definitely evil bullshit, because as more of us migrate to consoles, there will be an increasing market for less spoonfeeding, not that there weren't console players with brains in their heads before.  But instead, the trend continues toward the likes of Prince of Persia (the new one), good as it otherwise may be.  Think about that game for a minute, then read the offending bullet point again.

[gpw11]

I can't really say, I haven't played it.

[MysterD]

I can't really say, I haven't played it.

About making games more accessible, there's those game gimmicks many have when dealing with "death."

With PoP, I think what Cobra is referring to is Prince's helper, Elika. I don't think there's an option to turn off her support for help -- it would be a good idea for veteran PoP players and hardcore gamers who want more of a challenge to be able to turn her support off. Anyways, any jump you miss or if you need some sort of assist -- boom, she magically grabs you and saves you. As interesting as that mechanic might be and as cool as that might be, in some regards -- do veteran PoP players and hardcore gamers need her saving you every single time? Doesn't that kind of stop the challenge of the game? If a patch came out which allowed the player to turn her support off, I'm sure platformer veterans would rejoice to have the option to throw more challenge in their platforming.
No, I don't have PoP 2008...yet -- but I know plenty about the Elika mechanic already.

When you die in Assassin's Creed for whatever reason -- whether you get killed in battle or say miss a huge jump which takes a wicked long fall to crash to your death -- it sends you back to your last auto-save. Basically, the game auto-saves anytime you perform a side quest, find a flag, and do a main quest thing. I think many hardcore gamers would prefer that kind of mechanic.

Bioshock's another example here. The Vita Chamber -- anytime you die, you get sent back to the nearest one -- which are littered all over the gameworld. And also, when you die, whatever remaining health the enemy has left, it still remains. So, you could die 15 times on Hardest difficulty, it'd only be a matter of time before you slay same enemy you're battling. In a patch though, 2K Boston did give the option for those chambers to be turned off -- since people wanted it so bad. Kudos, 2K.

About inaccessible areas, see Fable/Fable TLC. All these areas in the game, you can really only move around on a "pathway/road" to get to another area. You can't actually walk in the actual woods itself in some areas, but can only walk on that "pathway." It's not like an open world Oblivion where you can walk basically anywhere on the map -- even in the woodsy areas littered with trees galore around you while not walking on some "road" to get you to your next area.

[MysterD]

Jason Holtman of Valve talks about piracy; digital sales and regular retail sales; pirates are undiscovered customers; and about sales and piracy in Russia; etc etc.

"We take all of our games day-and-date to Russia," Holtman says of Valve. "The reason people pirated things in Russia," he explains, "is because Russians are reading magazines and watching television -- they say 'Man, I want to play that game so bad,' but the publishers respond 'you can play that game in six months...maybe.' "

"We found that our piracy rates dropped off significantly," Holtman says, explaining that Valve makes sure their games are on the shelves in Moscow and St. Petersberg, in Russian, when they release it to North America and Western Europe.

There are, concludes Holtman, "tons of undiscovered customers," because publishers look very narrowly at the Western market.