/v/ - Video Games

>>15970505

I know most people here agree with me, but I've seen a few anons claiming piracy is bad in the past. If you agree with me then obviously I'm not trying to convince you of anything

>>15970490

>>15970518

I'm not anti piracy but the hole in your argument is amount/number of players/buyers.

If (and I know about returned/resold games but hear me out first) every Second hand game had to be bought once before than the amount of people getting it for "free'/without paying the dev is the same, to an extent even games that are re-traded/resold over and over they have to be with one person at a time so people who want them quicker are left with less options I.E wait for someone else to give or get new.

where as with piracy there is no "cap" a hundred people can get it from one copy

You're wrong.

"Piracy is bad, but you shouldn't give a shit" is the only valid perspective.

n i g g e r s

are

d u m b

>>15970490

That's some pretty basic argumentation, but let me take it a step further: The people who made the game, the actual programmers, artists, designers, and writers, were already compensated for making the game. They got their paychecks and will often not receive a dime more if the game sells 10 copies or 10 million copies in the event of a typical, professionally made game. In the case of smaller indie games, then yeah, sales go right back into the pocket of the guys making it and that's different. Indie devs are also largely a gigantic gaggle of faggoty hipsters. It's better if they don't get money.

Furthermore, it could be argued that physical sales aren't exactly what they appear to be either. The games are already sold and paid for before they ever reach the consumer's hands. The way of business is that a distributor or store, like GameStop or WalMart, will order so many units of a game and pay for them up front, usually at a small discount. That transaction is the sale of the game. When it is resold by a retailer that is money being recouped by the retailer. Not the publisher. Not the studio. Not the employee who made the game.

Further still, with the advent of digital games, the production and distribution of games is easier than ever. There's even less cost and less investment. On the publisher's end of things, it amounts to uploading the game to one of many digital storefronts or simply distributing game Keys, which can be generated near infinitely. When a pirate downloads a game, they are actually not putting any strain or resource drain on the servers and services that the publisher has paid for.

>>15970567

PIRACY IS BAD

Debatable. For some cases, sure. But in today's market, it's almost a requirement if you're not a retard.

"Will it run on my machine?" Tusting the min specs from the publishers is rubish, since some people can handle hiccups and low framerate but some don't.

"Is the game stable?" Depends on each machine running it, doesn't it?

"Is the game fun for me?" Another point for piracy. It may look fun if you watch some shittubber stumble around, but will it be for you?

etc…

"Developer doesn't get paid" is a Jew term made by the publishers that fuck the developers in the ass. Developers don't make shit. If they did then why don't they all live in big ass mansions? The only ones that do are the lucky ones like Notch and Carmack.

>>15970572

this is a better argument but

>Indie devs are also largely a gigantic gaggle of faggoty hipsters. It's better if they don't get money.

Le fuck capitalism because soy. Either they made something worth playing and added value to the industry or they didn't if they made something so faggoty that it isn't worth buying it isn't worth playing either still try before you buy

>When a pirate downloads a game, they are actually not putting any strain or resource drain on the servers and services that the publisher has paid for.

the counter argument to this is that less sales make it a poor investment on the part of the publisher and if it's bad enough it'll insure no sequels/franchise death obviously an empty argument if what you pirate is already massively successful or old/dead

>>15970585

Best argument and objectively true

Stop being a poorfag.

>>15970518

piracy does nothing, this upsets some anons for some reason.

Pirate old roms and isos because some of these games will never get remade/re-released, especially with companies that went defunct like Quintet and Imogeepoch.

>piracy is theft

nobody makes this argument here unless they are baiting, who are you even talking to

>>15970490

Wow, really brand new insight!!

Let's have an abortion debate next, then an age of consent, and age of drinking discussion. This new amazing internet is really cool wow!

Also >>15970505 incorrect, since lunatics inhabit this shithole and depending on the thread, there might be faggots shouting about how u shud buy da game u cheepsk8!!

or lol I never buy games u cuk lol

Faggotry from all directions. But the biggest faggot is op.

incoming (((mark))) and his ban crusade against piratefags in

3…2…1…

This is guaranteed to be a retarded thread

>>15970658

Well, yeah, it was posted on /v/

>>15970567

Pretty much.

>>15970648

>Phil Fish is a colossal faggot

he also stole credit for making Fez and fucked over the actual dev

>the product is still shit and also surrounded by a distasteful air of hipster faggotry, then why should they get money?

Again this goes back to the earlier post if it's shit it isn't even worth playing in the first place

>>15970599

>le fuck capitalism because soy

and?

you know damn well they do all kinds of fucked up shit to corner the market.

they desserve ruin, and their financers too.

>We've been having this argument for so long it was even in the second musical

The ride never ends

>>15970675

This is why consoles were preferred by publishers at the time. It might be why there hasn't been more Carmen Sandiego games.

>>15970490

Allow me to help your point with a jewtube video.

>>15970732

that's anime industry not gaming

still valid though

Despite the fact that most devs make shit, as a software developer I couldn't say piracy isn't bad and feel morally consistent. However, I don't really give a shit if you pirate my software. Here's why:

I don't presume to know why you pirated my software. If you don't have the means, then it's the same as if you had never bought the product anyway, so who gives a shit?

Piracy in most forms can't exist without someone else buying the product first. Barring colossal fuck-ups like a leak of product keys, most products like games have to be bought by someone who can then reverse-engineer enough of the copy protection mechanisms to bypass them when he re-distributes the pirated game. In addition to that, piracy isn't perfect and can take extra time and effort. All of these things are great incentives to the average person to buy the product except in places like Brazil, which is a third world country with hilarious import taxes on foreign games so no one can get games legit anyway, or China which is China.

The whole scare of piracy is mostly a marketing scheme peddled by people that make software like SecuROM or Denuvo in order to get publishers to buy their products. The real problem, when you boil it down, is "people who have the means to purchase your software but don't out of stinginess," because bootleg products have been a thing long before internet software piracy was and it was never going to go away. This is a, as far as I know, virtually unstudied demographic which I can't imagine is larger than all the third-worlders that pirate software out of sheer poverty or lack of availability., so why spend the money on DRM?

>>15970739

The guy in that video talks about why exclusives as concept are cancer and the entire point of piracy is to action as an alternative to shitty products/services that aren't worth your money. The arguments are more applicable than you'd expect.

>>15970701

Assuming the game is good, by your own relative standards, but the dev is still a colossal cancerous cunt, I'd still say pirate it. The behavior of the dev is part of the investment, if you ask me.

Additionally, there's the misconception that funding someone or a company that made a good game is helping to guarantee that they will go on to make another game at least as good, if not better than the one you paid for, ensuring future paychecks for the actual staff who make the games, and future entertainment for you, the consumer. This is not true, however. What you are paying for at that exact moment is only the game you are getting. No future promises. No binding contract ensuring better games later. No job security for the dev team. The entire team might be fired and the sequel will be outsourced to some unskilled team or handed off to some newbie in the company who can suck a mean dick.

We've even seen what happens when we get a reversal of operations and a team demands money to make a good game like they used to make, only for the entire thing to be handled by clueless retards who gave us vidya abortions like Mighty No 9 or Mr. Shitface's Broken Age. And then there's situations where a game sells well, is well liked, gets positive reviews… and we never get a sequel, ever, or even a game on the same level as that first game, for all kinds of reasons. Some will be plenty successful, but go on to never again make a game that was even half as good as one of their originals.

>>15970675

all that matters to the profit of the companies is whether people buy their products or not. it doesn't matter whether somebody that wasn't going to buy their game anyway pirates it. the "lost profits" argument operates under the false assumption that everybody that pirates would have bought the product if they couldn't have pirated it

Piracy is copying and copying is not stealing. If developers/publishers think they're losing money then they should change their business model to adapt to the market, not try to force consumers to eat up their shit.

personally, I'll only buy a game if I want the multiplayer. otherwise, there's no incentive. I'm not just going to throw money away "because morals".

>>15970766

>The guy in that video talks about why exclusives as concept are cancer

again we have Steam and GOG the argument is much more limited in our field with the occasional Console exclusive but most of the time the vid just doesn't apply

Reminder piracy will never be theft because

YOU CAN'T STEAL NON-RIVALROUS, NON-EXCLUDABLE GOODS

So pirate away. There's no harm in it.

>>15970490

The terms of use say you can't make copies. If you don't like their rules, don't use their product. It's their product, they get to make the rules. You can't tell them what to do with their product, so you're at fault, not them.

>>15970878

But that's the issue. There IS no harm in it.

I fucking wish there was harm in it. If every time I pirated a game, the company was hurt financially, I would never consider a pirate "a waste of bandwidth" like I do so often now. Bring the fucking crash already, holy shit.

>>15970891

>leftist company makes TV

>says you can't watch Fox on it because it's offensive

>they get to do that because it's their product

>89ab9a would support this

No.

>>15970911

>Clothing store doesn't stock every single brand

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE, I can't believe Walmart doesn't sell Gucci sweaters, they're censoring the brand!

>>15970891

blah blah blah but millions of people pirate shit every day so hahaha

>>15970490

Used games still had a guy buy it at one point, and it's not creating another copy if you buy it off someone else. Companies couldn't care less what happens to the copy after it is sold. However, piracy creates infinite copies for free and none of it goes to the devs. That is an obvious problem for them. Sure, the guy who put it online may have bought it, but he's not selling his original copy, he's giving away infinite copies of it for free.

>>15970936

Fair enough, yeah. I think we're getting to a stage where fighting piracy is more costly than any alleged damages piracy could cause, and things are in equilibrium. But that doesn't make it morally just. Nobody's perfect. But the moral high horse piraters get on is annoying me.

Piracy is competition.

Competition to provide a game at the best customer-value possible. It is not only a tool for a consumer to act frugally and save money on a purchase, it also can provide the consumer with other services that the original publisher has not provided, especially for lower income customers. Smaller install sizes, for people who don't have ample hard drive space, removal of always online requirements, because not everyone has consistent high-speed internet, removal of drm that might be intrusive or even incompatible and cause the game to fail, etc.

the reason why steam is so successful as a platform is specifically because they provide additional services. Hosting dedicated servers, centralizing and providing a library of games, creating a cross-games social platform, etc. while requiring some rather minimal and easily exploitable DRM itself.

>>15970891

>company dictating how you can use a good you purchased

You must live in some commie dystopic shithole

>>15970943

Piracy isn't morally unjust. What is unjust is companies treating their paying customers like shit, and it's useful idiots like you who enable them.

>>15970758

Upvoted

The only reason I think piracy is bad is that it gives you complacent faggots a comfort zone to keep consuming the same degraded newshit and letting it normalize your expectations because yeah it's shit but it's free shit. How much time do you anons spend torrenting and playing games you probably don't even like instead of finding a more enjoyable way to spend your time such that the industry might start to worry that they're losing their grip on the market and start capitulating to you instead of you filling your PC with their proprietary software infrastructure? People justify doing piracy all the time by saying "it doesn't cost the developer/publisher any sales" and I'm like okay then what's the fucking point of piracy? Free spyware? Regardless, anyone who pirates modern games while having any kind of a backlog has soy tits imo.

>>15971004

>How much time do you anons spend torrenting and playing games you probably don't even like

I don't spend any time torrenting shit games. If a game is shit I simply don't play it.

>>15970490

>even though it's logistically identical

It's not. Only one system at a time can be running a used game. Regardless of how many times it's been passed around, there's still only one of it. With piracy, there are unlimited copies. A single copy of game can go to many more people that companies consider potential buyers.

>in the way the piracy=theft argument is framed

<My argument only works against a specifc strawman

Nigger, piracy is great and you are shit at advocating for it. There was a UN study on it that found that piracy acts as advertisement, like demos, and thus boosts sales for products in all mediums with the sole exception of newly released blockbuster movies. Also >>15970505

People need to stop trying to justify not paying for the media they consume. I don't care if you pirate, just stop acting all faggoty and thinking your some sort of big brained philosopher.

TO REPEAT, PIRATE ALL YOU WANT JUST STOP ACTING LIKE FAGGOTS

>>15970572

>They got their paychecks and will often not receive a dime more if the game sells 10 copies or 10 million copies in the event of a typical, professionally made game.

<The "They were already paid" argument

Wew lad. If their game sells like shit the chances of them being fired increase and if it sells well they may get paid well to work on larger future projects.

>That transaction is the sale of the game. When it is resold by a retailer that is money being recouped by the retailer. Not the publisher. Not the studio. Not the employee who made the game.

And if it doesn't sell well that affects the retailers which will then affect the pubs/devs. Your arguments are basically that the consumer has no power because everyone involved with the game was already paid, and thus piracy has no effect on anything. The reality being that piracy serves as free advertising.

>When a pirate downloads a game, they are actually not putting any strain or resource drain on the servers and services that the publisher has paid for.

Who the fuck argues that they are?

>>15970769

>Additionally, there's the misconception that funding someone or a company that made a good game is helping to guarantee that they will go on to make another game at least as good, if not better than the one you paid for, ensuring future paychecks for the actual staff who make the games, and future entertainment for you, the consumer.

>What you are paying for at that exact moment is only the game you are getting.

That is also a sort of investment. The one you make by buying new and buying at or near releasing date, as opposed to buying used long after release for cheap. The latter case is the one where you're only paying for the game. And if they continue to make good games, you're more likely continue to invest in them with near release non-used purchases. If they start making bad games, you're more likely not to. The return is the availability of similar good games. If there is a return.

>>15971112

>Wew lad. If their game sells like shit the chances of them being fired increase and if it sells well they may get paid well to work on larger future projects.

Anon the industry has high turnover rate regardless of success you would be more accurate if you said the game might get sequels/imitators

>>15970505

/thread

>>15970490

>because you get to use the product without the people who made it being compensated.

In all fairness people tend to mistake developer with publisher, developers are being paid to make the game and sometimes bonuses are "promised" if the game gets positive reviews which is quite a grey legal area, the only one not getting compensated at that point is the publisher, and no, more sales doesn't guarantee funding for the next project, some publishers just close the studios to keep the IP.

>This doesn't make any sense, because what about used games?

Same deal but people will still think is the same or worse because they hate gamestop.

>>15970620

Piracy is advertising.

>>15970675

Can you provide arguments not in the form of a dancing nog?

>>15970490

I was agreeing with you until this part:

>Companies don't give a shit

>every major company would have the same type of anti consumer policies

<hurr durr ebery company iz ebil

Just fuck off with your anti-capitalist faggotry, commie. Not every company is the devil.

>>>/leftypol/

>>15971004

But what if you only pirate old shit because new shit is trash?

>>15971170

>Fun

That shit was unfun and obnoxious.

>>15971171

>But what if you only pirate old shit because new shit is trash?

have it hoss

>That shit was unfun

ok

>>15971128

>nobody takes issue with pirating music

The soundcloud hacks I've encountered around the net who think they're going mainstream will shill against even fair use of music let alone piracy. I'm sure there's also alot of aspiring devfags who are inclined to shill for the game industry because they like to think it affects them. People who are paranoid about getting their ideas stolen often gravitate to that position. It's funny because when those types actually publish their grand idea it usually just ends up turning them into a lolcow.

>>15971171

Pirating old shit is good for posterity, restores old games to a more playable condition, and gives perspective on how great this hobby once was. You should make a point to do this before nintendo pulls the plug on it permanently.

>>15971182

Better not steal my shopping cart motherfucker

Funny thing is that most entertainment products would be free since they mostly work as vehicles for propaganda and distraction, but it would be too obvious so they go to great lengths with marketing in order to make it seem like a real venture for profit.

Piracy is ok but only for indiecuckery

>>15971314

and to come clean i've pirated hotline miami 2, factorio, and audiosurf 2 and paid for each one when i didn't immediately delete them and went back to them willingly. between being poor as shit i finally found a chance each time.

>My ability to buy property from someone who purchased it and therefore has the right to resell it means that it isn't immoral to illicitly acquire property without purchasing it from anyone at any point.

>giving away a physical medium is the same as copying the content therein and producing and distributing it in competition with the original owners

>There is no difference between giving my friend a book and copying the book word for word and giving the copies away outside a book store.

>>15970970

See the article in

>>15970948

The actual data disagrees with you. If it were competition, the statistics would show that.

>>15970891

My copy of the product didn't have the legal terms and neither did the original I copied it from, I guess whoever removed them if they were ever there was behind 7 proxies, checkmate atheists.

Don't copy that floppy.

You wouldn't download a car, right anon?

i would

>>15970891

The terms of use are not legally binding:

It is rarely possible to review them prior to point of purchase

It is impossible to verify who agreed to them

It cannot enforce or even legally define a value as a requisite payment for it as that would negate purchasing software as a gift and sales/bundle deals as well as be in violation if right of first sale

I do pirate games occasionally but.

>store buys game from devs

>you purchase the game from the store at a marked up price

>you play the game then sell it as a secondhand product

in the end the developers get paid for one item and that one item has just passed through multiple people.

some people will only purchase a game with the knowledge that they can sell it for some of their money back. this means the ability to resell becomes a buying point for a game and can generate more income.

would you purchase a new car if the car salesman told you that you were never allowed to resell it in future?

>>15970490

good argument. If you ever borrowed a video game, a CD, a movie, a book, a car or even ate out of a plate/used cutlery that wasn't yours, etc. then it's time to mail some money to someone. If piracy is bad then restaurants shouldn't exist.

>>15970564

I mean, it's an argument but it doesn't really make what OP said untrue. It's true that IRL game trading only makes the copy available to one person at a time but the subsequent people playing it still haven't given any money to the devs and publisher for the game. The only differences are that it takes longer to reach more people and it's a less practical way to share the game. In all honesty, it doesn't even really make sense why anyone would have a problem with piracy. It's a natural evolution. People used to share ideas and creations throughout history to progress. Of course we'd figure out an efficient way to share video games via the internet. I mean, you're kind of a stupid fuck if you thought this technology from which you're making a game won't also be able to transfer all those bits to other computers and this somehow surprises you. Really the only "problem" with piracy is that it's too convenient and the money-hungry jews can't think of a way to compete. Netflix is an interesting platform to look at since they kind of managed to get their foot in the door by being more convenient than piracy for a decent price but they're starting to slowly lose ground (or they will, at least) because copyright laws are so convoluted at this point, they're fucking them too and due to the fact that they're a politically driven corporation who refuse to provide a service without trying to force their ideals down the user's throat. Piracy has none of that so it wins, yet again.

Piratefags can do what they wish, I just hope they have the self-awareness to not complain too much when the video game industry doesn't cater to them.

>>15971061

>There was a UN study

>using a (((UN))) study just because it reinforces your beliefs

You want free shit, you don't need some faggots laundering research money to give you some higher rationale like a kike.

>>15970505

>>15970505

>>15970505

>>15970505

this thread is just virtue signaling in an anonymous imageboard

>>15971170

>only triple A publishers make video games

there is no such thing as intellectual property and property rights cannot be applied to information because it isnt real

information is not a resource that scarcity can be applied to, supply and demand does not work for calculations on things that are infinite, it can work on potential infinites aka "give me money or I will not tell the secret" but it cannot be applied to already existing infinities "I told you the secret now you are obligated to give me money"

Here's my arguments to anti-piracy pussies

>waaaaah ur stealing da gaem!!!1

I don't care lol

>heh u pirate cuz u poor

I'm a merchant navy officer and make more in a month than you make in a year lol

>waaaaah u are bad person :(

whatever lol

Everyone either acts in their own self-interest or gets fucked by those who do. Morality is nothing more than a tool to keep you contained so that others can exploit you.

>>15971708

imagine actually being this intensive over purchasing electronic entertainment

>>15970490

In 2019 piracy is a revolutionary statement against jewish usury.

>>15971112

>>15971130

>If their game sells like shit the chances of them being fired increase and if it sells well they may get paid well to work on larger future projects.

This is the lie you're told, but even teams the worked on games that sold well get fired. Regardless of what you feel about Kojimbo, Konami axed their entire games division even after MGSV sold well, despite Konami's interference cutting out large chunks of the game.

>That is also a sort of investment.

Buying shares in the company is an investment. Buying a game is buying a game, you delusional retard.

>>15970675

>i know you love cames but the people make them love them too

35 seconds in and its already wrong.

>>15971629

Rough sketch sempai seems fun so far in for me. This is somewhat unrelated but on topic of the whole sharing art thing, fire punch was a fun manga. I dunno if anyone has read it as only like one dude told me about it. If it's actually super popular excuse me I don't pay attention at all really.

>>15971769

go back to where you came from

>>15971772

To put it short

The purpose of copyright law in regards to consumer software is largely the same with other commercial creative works which is to secure a period of market viability to allow organizations to continue commercial level production.

This however does not excuse the abuse of copyright law to effectively rob consumers of products they have purchased by means of ownership of the intellectual property, and was never a factor in the purpose of the concept of copyright in the first place.

Rape is pussy piracy

>>15971802

Rape damages the original so it is clearly not an equal comparison.

>>15971821

Damaged feels and saltiness are not an economic matter.

>>15970490

This but it was not worth making a thread about.

>>15970490

I'll admit it's bad on the basis that you're forcing a loss of sales that wouldn't exist anyway

>>15971802

>>15971821

>>15971841

>>15971856

This all depends if we're talking about actual brutal, violent, forced rape or (((rape)))

>>15970505

best post

My position on piracy is generally against, but PUNISHED. On a moral level, I disagree with pirating and just don't do it myself, but I don't care if others pirate games. The game industry is so shitty and abusive that I just stopped caring enough to argue about it. Pirate all you want, they are the enemy of the people and need to be defeated.

>>15970525

Nature abhors a vacuum. The moment people stop talking about piracy and how it's utter bullshit to compare it to theft will be the moment anti-piracy shills immediately pop up out of the woodwork and go ham on a population that doesn't seem to outright reject them. Bet ya money on it.

>>15970675

Get back to me when you manage to revert the world to a state where data isn't freely and easily transferable and reproducible. Because that's all games are. Data. Ones and zeroes.

stealing from people who exploit you is ok

>>15972300

>star of David

The true irony is that a.) that's a hexagram and b.) it's still an occult symbol (true name star of Remphan) on the level of a pentagram even if it doesn't have the circle

>>15972273

most people here don't have a basic grasp of economics and are basically communists

The "problem" with piracy isn't piracy itself, but an economy that has no idea how to handle the absolute lack of scarcity that digital media presents, other than by trying to enforce artificial scarcity. While piracy isn't theft, I wouldn't say it's a victimless crime, either. People put money, time, and effort into making digital media, and piracy is, basically, enjoying all the benefit of that hard work without giving anything back in recompense. It's essentially a parasitic relationship between the pirate and the creator, assuming A: the pirate doesn't eventually buy the game or send an envelope full of money to the people who made the game, and B: the developer didn't distribute the media for free, anyway.

It's a tricky issue to solve, though, because there's no logical reason to try to limit distribution of a good that has no cost to produce, after the first initial one is created, other than greed, but then you run into the issue of how exactly to convince people to repay you for the entertainment you provided, without artificially limiting access to certain features of the product. Crowdfunding could have been a solution, except it's just too exploitable for screwing funders over, and being a funder is taking a gamble on whether the result will be worthwhile or not. I'm honestly not smart enough or knowledgeable enough to think up anything near a good solution to piracy that benefits both producers and consumers, though.

>>15972635

Good post. But the same can apply to almost everything these days. Most jobs could be done by AI even now, for example. Capitalism has run its course - but its useful to keep people in chains…

>>15972172

>>15972555

>>15972639

>>>/cuckchan/

>>15973274

whine until you leave

>>15970490

I'll make it more complicated.

What if the same guy you're arguing with also says that buying second hand games is also stealing?

>the reason Nintendo and Sony made fun of Microsoft when the Xbox one was revealed was because they knew consumers won't stand for it, but if they could get away with it, every major company would have the same type of anti consumer policies.

What if he uses this as proof that second hand purchases are morally incorrect? He could say that companies know it's wrong, as evidenced by Microsoft trying to stop second hand purchases, and the only reason the other companies went along with them is because they knew consumers are immoral and wouldn't stand for it.

>>15971629

For faggots that are wondering about this she wins.

>>15971751

>fire punch

>fun

>not suffering all the way through

You sure you read the same thing I did?

Piracy is good because it's stealing… from numale faggots who hate you and everything you stand for.

>>15970490

Who are you arguing with?

>>15973268

It's cheaper if you factor the inflation into it, but most jobs do not factor inflation into how much you get paid, so people are making less money today compared to the 70's and 80's.

It's also worth taking into consideration that the infrastructure needed to produce cartridges and consoles back then was more expensive, compared to today where infrastructure is cheaper to set up and specialized hardware is rarely needed, just mass produce several thousand stripped down PCs running custom firmware and mass produced dvds that cost as much as blank cds did some years ago (now we don't even have the dvd in some cases, just a plastic case with a redemption code).

>>15971629

> never mentions it again, forgets it

>Complains that more games like it don't exist

I see a contradiction here.

>>15973353

You've never completely forgotten about a game only to have some random Anon mention it later, then you remember it and bitch about how there are no other games like it?

>>15973358

If you complain about it later then it's not true that you never mentioned it again.

Even passing complaints can help someone else discover a game.

I stop pirating games because for a few dollars I could get the games I want plus patches.

Stop caring, stop trying to justify it, it doesn't matter, it never did, no-one cares, play your shitty 'stolen' games and throw them away like the trash they are.

The proper argument for piracy is that piracy is more convenient to play games you want to play and how you want to play them. DRM hinders system performance with bloatware and prevents modding on purpose to entice microtransaction purchases. Also look at the marketplace. It's all dumpsterware with no way to try before you buy. Meaning buying good games is a crapshoot. And journos are to busy shilling CoD AAA trash or fucking literally whos in return for favorable reviews. There's no way to know what is good outside of word of mouth. But good luck finding genuine users from shills on both chans and social media.

Software piracy let's you explore the open seas and go on adventures yourself with very little monetary investment despite the risk if you get caught. Vidya pirates live life on the edge because they can. Simple as that.

>>15971577

>>using a (((UN))) study just because it reinforces your beliefs

The UN tried to suppress the study when it didn't get the results they wanted. It was unbiased. Some faggot who knew about it tried to cite the one part about piracy being bad for new big movies in an anti-piracy paper though and this led someone questioning that paper to demand the source, their demand being met after much bullshitting due to some freedom of information act.

>>15970490

You can't steal what can only be copied.

Copying hurts no one, except for greedy jews who want to see you burn in hell for not being their wageslave.

Stealing makes you cool prove me wrong

>>15970490

>buy game

>game is my property nao

>I share my property with whomever wants to take it

>this is bad

lol no

>inb4 "muh copyright"

There is no such thing as "intellectual property"

The real question when discussing the rightness or wrongness of piracy is the validity of intellectual property. Do you have a right to the labor of your mind when you create something unique? Everything else is besides the point and doesn't affect the rightness or wrongness of piracy. If you own the labor of your mind you have the absolute right to sell, give away, or to refuse to sell (what people have termed 'abandonware'). It gets a bit more complicated since most people working on video games are selling their mental labor to a firm who actually owns the intellectual property and then some create a game then sell their intellectual property to a third party (not the actual copy of the game). But this isn't any different from paying someone to build a house for you or buying a house from someone else, you may not have actually labored in the construction but you own it because it was transferred to you. You pay someone for their labor or pay someone for the product of someone else's labor.

So piracy is not bad because it has negative effects i.e. not compensating the developer, but because you've violated their right to their creative labor or the labor that was sold to them. If you want to say that it is not wrong then you have to argue that creative labor is fundamentally different from labor that transforms the physical world. Of course, I haven't bought a copy of windows in 13 years and I'm never going to fork over the cash for a legitimate copy of Photoshop but I also am not going to say that it isn't wrong, which a few people have already said itt.

Itshould have ushered in a new era of interconnectivity buinstead iushered it ushered in some bullshit era of hyper legalese

>>15975439

Only if you're a nigger. Piracy isn't stealing, tho

>>15975770

So why aren't you paying royalties for breathing, eating, shitting, riding a bike or doing anything that you didn't invent yourself? Because intellectual property doesn't fucking exist and its just a retarded method to create artificial scarcity. You can't keep someone from using their own property to reproduce something just because the guy that did it first didn't like it; there would be no civilization otherwise.

The house comparison is also retarded; If we had perfect 3D printers or something that could copy houses ad infinitum like we can do with data, you'd be defending that the original designer of the house (which in turn did not invent "houses" so he's not even creating anything besides a new arrange) be paid everytime someone builds it by themselves with their own resources.

TL;DR IP is a retarded concept that only exists to create monopolies, and it gives incentives for people to slow down overall technological progress

>SJWs do not buy games, that's why companies shouldn't listen to them!

<I'm a pirate and proud lel, please companies listen to me!

The real underlying problem is that after the socjus invasion, reflexively we started to cement the notion that gamers are right and smart. They're not, this place is full of drooling retards you would never associate with IRL.

>>15971769

This anon is right. You can pirate: we get it, there's so much to play that you would need a king's ransom to buy it all. This attitude was first started by bibliophiles, who believe that stealing books is more of a lover's excess than a crime.

What you shouldn't do, is be a duplicitous hypocrital faggot about it. Don't try and pretend it is the right thing to do. Don't be proud of what is a small or big vice. Don't make up reasons as to why you're better than non pirates. Don't sell you're some kind of healer who cleanses the market from bad devs. Because it shows bad faith.

>>15971570

>I mean, it's an argument but it doesn't really make what OP said untrue.

I kind of does and you didn't really give a counterargument. People care about piracy because unlike a used game (or fucking anything really) you can make as many copies as you want. So it becomes a case where actual market value and desire on behalf of the consumer isn't adequately compensating the creator.

To roll with your (and OP's analogy) say you wrote a book. Your book was so shitty that only one copy was sold. Every now and then the person who bought it gives it away as a gift because they can't stand to have it. Over the course of 1,000,000 years eventually everyone has passed your shitty book around and read it one at a time. You only ever in your lifetime made money off the first sale. Perhaps a few dozen people read your book who never paid you for it in your lifetime.

Now compare that to: You have wrote the best most popular book the world has ever seen. More popular than the Bible, Koran and the Communist Manifesto put together. Unfortunately the first (and only) person to buy your book owns a printing press and thinks your book is so balls to the walls awesome that he is going to print and distribute it for free (because he's independently wealthy and owns a magic printing press that requires no raw materials). In the span of a year he distributes copies of your book to everyone in the world and everyone agrees it was the best book ever written. So within your lifetime you have sold one book but in this scenario everyone has read it within your lifetime despite you only being compensated for it once.

>tl;dr see

>>15971785

That is in a nutshell the difference between selling used things vs. pirating them. An exaggerated example but the fundamental difference between the two. This also doesn't take into account that real tangible goods degrade and break over time hence why buying used is cheaper but also inherently more risky than pirating where you get a perfect copy of something that is free of damage/wear.

Like others have said in this thread though.

>>15971769

If you want to pirate stuff, just do it. You don't need to feel morally justified or make excuses.

>>15976347

Agreeing with every percieved authority is the most ethically sound ideal in their minds, regardless of what the actual outcome is. Much easier than thinking for themselves.

>>15970706

You can be against capitalism like most of /pol/ and still shit on commies. Especially nu-commies who enjoy all the benefits of capitalism but act like they hate it because of virtue signalling and, of course, soy.

Anyone who does not pirate in this industry is supporting white genocide.

>>15975443

>Software

>Property

Wew lad. You can't own a program.

>>15976619

>Wew lad. You can't own a program.

Sure you can. Legally, you can own a software and transfer this ownership to someone else. Technically, a company can own a software (e.g., Google Translate) and only offer it to you under their terms.

>>15970490

With all the lawyering you sound like a jew.

No, it's not the same. You give away what you bought to a friend. The same disc or steam code that the maker already recived copensation for.

Actual piracy is giving more than you bought, thus out of 1000 people that pirate the game that you "gave" them, the makers didn't recive anythig back from 999 of them.

So no. And I ate fag like you who try to make themselves look righteous and justify their faggotry. Half of the game I have are pirated, and if you want to pirate things, go ahead. I sure as hell am not stopping you, it would be hypocritical. But at least be honest with yourself.

>>15970585

>I want a guarantee that this will be fun

There is no such thing, retard.

Do you ask for refund from the cinema if you don't like the movie?

Do you return a book to the bookstore if you didn't like it?

Don't be an entilted, spoiled little shitter.

>>15977279

>Do you ask for refund from cinema

The theater in my town gave refunds to anyone who asked for The Last Jedi

>>15977331

>can't read

No selfies, please.

>im insecure: the thread

>>15976347

>I dont't understand how the gaming companies did this while the other media/software companies couldn't

Microtransactions, or how you condition the goyim to undervalue their own currency's worth. The only thing I can think of that is more Jewish is commercial licensing for fonts.

>>15975993

Why not? Defend your fucking value judgments before you start speaking in platitudes. Why isn’t piracy morally neutral or a moral good? What ideological framework are your working with that says copying that floppy is a sin?

I don't care. I don't try to justify it or anything, the fact is virtually nobody gets caught doing it and the industry not pirating supports is rotten to the core to the point that the decent people in it are extreme outlier exceptions and not even remotely close to the rule.

I feel like I've been in this thread before and yet it was made today

>>15977293

I wish they had done it for the second Ron Burgundy movie.

>>15977279

>entitled spoiled little shitter

Y'know if you devs didn't shit on gamers so often I'd be more inclined to pay for games.

Piracy gives power to the common person and takes power away from mega-corporations, it could never be bad.

>>15980271

>3 days ago

>today

I feel like this is your first time on an image board buckaroo

>>15981259

>Blue Eyes and Red hair

Goddamn you oddly specific preference

>>15970675

If you pay $15 for a glorified, polished flash game, then you are a retard.

>>15973068

Was with you up until here

>there is less work required from the developer than in the 80's

Patently false.

And besides, paying for new games hurts the industry. Publishers and developers have figured out that games sell because of hype and marketing and not because of creativity, inspiration, passion, or diligent programming and play-testing and buying their games encourages this malignant business model.

>>15970675

One of the programmers featured in this Don't Copy that Floppy video, Craig Dykstra, is a pedophile. Save the children; copy that floppy.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/local-breaking-news/maryland/va-man-accused-of-secretly-tap.html

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/crime-scene/fairfax/former-aol-exec-arrested-for-a.html

nice blog

>>15970567

>Piracy is bad

Only when you are hurting good game developers, it's not if you are denying money to marxists kikes like Warner Bros, Ubisoft, Sony, or anti-consumer cunts like Activision, EA, Capcom, Bamco.

Because in that case, piracy is indeed a good thing.

>>16011905

>Warner Bros. are marxist kikes

Literally. Warner Bros. is run by marxist kikes.

I'm surprised anyone still disagrees with this.

Even putting OP's very reasonable used game argument aside, we learned a couple years ago that piracy actually increases sales by virtue of word of mouth, and because piracy inherently deals with software, there is zero cost to the manufacturer: https://www.please use archive.is/2017/09/22/eu-suppressed-study-piracy-no-sales-impact/ Similarly, the movie industry has been breaking sales records constantly despite piracy structure/infrastructure getting better and better. I would mock them for failing to hide this fact in the media but (((their))) hubris is probably (((them))) mocking us, in a way.

The plainly observable fact is piracy either doesn't hurt and possibly helps their bottom line. Plus it lets companies save money on marketing. Indie devs working out of their kitchen don't seem to have much problem becoming millionaires. If the dinosaurs can't compete, maybe it's time for them to evolve.

I suspect the crux of this cultural cognitive dissonance is people think that stealing from a company is the same thing as stealing from themselves. If some fag steals the cheeseburger out of your hand, it's not about the money. It could be some nearly inedible bullshit from burger king that you got for free, will fuck you from the inside, and will shorten your lifespan: if *you* are stolen from, you will feel bad. It's human, nay, animal nature. You assume that whenever a larger organization is "stolen" from en masse, it's the same negative feeling but exponentially worse.

That's great you have functional empathy….I guess…but it's not applicable here. Companies don't have that retarded human sentimentality. The goal is to produce money. Think about it. The whole point of any company that produces things is to: a) give that thing away to other people, and b) receive money. Not having that the thing was never even a concern. The only thing that matters is that they receive money. When it comes to software, piracy, there is 0 cost to the company for other people receiving the thing.

100% of the research we have shows piracy is negligible to the bottom line or it's free marketing. No one is missing out on sales. And let's be honest: even if they were, the worst case scenario is **garbage ceases to exist and 100% of new releases are passion projects like Cave Story or the original Counterstrike. And if you want some fancy bullshit? Thanks to the magic of the internet, we have a system in place where a bunch of people can kickstart a project.

>>15971160

>Can you provide arguments not in the form of a dancing nog?

I second this

>>15970490

shouldn't it be more like :

"Piracy is bad because it doesnt offer support or compensations for the creator" ?

>>16012065

Piracy is a total misnomer. You are letting them fuck your mind when you use that term and think about the subject in terms of looting and being looted.

Copying is nothing like that. When you copy something you increase information, you spread knowledge. That's what copying is, it's a torch, lighting other torches to replace darkness with light.

Piracy causes cancer; 4chan cancer.

There. Thread over.

Knowledge is power limiting information is oppression. The current attempts to ban copying are no different than the attempts of churches and monarch to destroy books and printing presses.

Anti-copying is code for slavery.

The internet allows us to distribute information from a single instance into billions of instances in a few seconds, We could and should copy everything that is worth copying. That's the easiest and cheapest way to improve ourselves and the world around us.

>>15970490

Piracy is bad, because it's a misnomer

COPYING IS GOOD

because it spreads information and knowledge at almost no cost.

>>16012109

filtered.

>>15970490

Every single person in this thread has copied things.

He copied the english language from his parents, teachers and fellow human beings, the memes from other Anons, his habits from his idols, his ideas from books, etc. etc.

COPYING IS LIFE

You can't live without copying, don't these anti-human scumbags suffocate you.

>>15970490

Moralfagging about piracy is possibly the gayest shit ever. Just pirate and shut the fuck up. No one cares.

>>16012340

I'll your mom. What now, fagmeister? Not so tough anymore, huh?

ps Karen is ashite girl. Alice masterrace.

>>16012403

I'll tell you mom

I fucked up, but yea.

>>15971629

this is me with martian gothic. but I actually fucking saved the goddamn ISO file from a torrent that took me almost a month to complete. i normally upload it to a file locker every once in a while

>>16012340

There is nothing wrong with making copies.

>>15970675

>unironically defending anti-pirate corporate faggotry

>pedo nig

ok i'll just DL some game i've been eyeing on for a while

>>16012804

I didn't call it theft, dumbass.

>>16012812

I guess to explain my stance on piracy, I think it's a symptom of poor service, many people are willing to put down money if it means circumventing the hassle of piracy and I think it's healthy incentive for digital distribution platforms to improve on their service so more people choose it over piracy. For instance, I pirate anime because Crunchyroll and other anime distribution services suck ass, so I'd rather just download torrents of anime rather than using their substandard services.

That, and piracy can actually contribute to a games financial success, Terraria is a good example, when it was leaked on 4chan back before it was released, it generated a lot of interest in the game and the publicity snowballed from there.

>>15973068

The libraries near me used to let you rent computer games when PCs didn't rely on keygens to kike the second hand market.

Blame Steam.

>>16014223

There's nothing wrong with piracy. It's not our job to sell their game.

>>16014537

> It's not our job to sell their game.

Who said it is?

you can't steal what doesn't physically exist. it's called filesharing for a reason, ones and zeroes get exchanged. that's all.

>>16018736

you're free to support devs if their crap is working and good, but i have not come unto such a program in the last 30 years so i will keep sharing.

Technically, sharing things cant be piracy, ethically speaking and by international interpretation of plagiarism and piracy, downloading games is not considered neither of the 2.

Plagiarism would imply use of some other persons work as yours and piracy would imply making money with some others persons work.

Internet fucked up things by creating digital property you can infinitely copy without much work and be distributed en masse.

It isnt a crime by international ethics and any constitution interpretation that protects peoples works. Copyright laws were created because it needed to protect entertainment industry money from internet, companys want to use all benefits of the digital world as they can, but have no damage of they money, thus, you shouldn't benefit from it, only they and they dont want to reconfigure they way to sell shit to avoid loses, they want to use the corrupt state to fuck you.

TL;DR: Technology that doesn't infringe human rights used in certain way benefits you, but damages the jew, and the jew is to lazy to change its modus operandi, so fuck you.

I can't wait Google and co. to fuck everyone in the ass collectively.

>>16018827

you can fuck your own ass

>>16012720

I thought a shitty music video would give away that post is a joke, but I didn't take dense people into account.