Viewing Thread:
"Piracy (Crap Title, I Know)"

Everyone has their own views on copying games. Some agree with the process and others disagree. Personally, I think the majority agree to copying games due to two pretty simple and worthy facts - it's cheap and quite reliable!
Everyone has their own views on copying games. Some agree with the process and others disagree. Personally, I think the majority agree to copying games due to two pretty simple and worthy facts - it's cheap and quite reliable!

When gaming entertainment actually evolved into something worthy of playing, Nintendo in the late eighties, many were drawn into gaming. Years went by, technology transformed and a lot of brain boxes started to appear in the far horizon of the industry. Hackers! The ultimate evil!
Basically, these were very clever people who manoeuvred with certain consoles making it possible to play copied games for the console. This era didn't arrive until consoles that read on discs arrived (not sure about the Mega CD though). You see when the industry really started cartridges were commonly used, which were virtually impossible to copy. This was a huge advantage for cartridges, but as well these advantages came many more disadvantages than discs.

The 'chipping' dilemma really got a boost when Sony's Playstation was released. The Playstation gave hackers a huge money-making opportunity, which was simply to copy games and sell them to many willing gamers in the public. Copyright laws were firmly created restricting anyone from copying, but it still went ahead. When you load most consoles you can clearly see what's stated. Copying is illegal, but once again hackers refused to stop and carried on earning easy money. No-one really takes any notice of copyright warnings mainly because of all the writing. When you see it you instantly think 'bla bla...' and that's just the way of nature!
Playstation, in my mind actually earned more popularity because of this. Many audiences were aware of getting Playtstation's chipped and having copied games for a much cheaper price. A lot of commotion was often made just to get a copied game. Still, the whole idea of having a successful game company was to make a lot of profit, which they weren't receiving potentially. Obviously Playstation could not gather all their sold products back from the public and create a new 'un-chippable' one, it was totally impossible. So what they did was wait for a couple of years, say five years, and then created a newer and much smaller model, which was supposed to restrict the chipping process. Did it work, I don't think so! Many clever people, probably technicians, found ways to chip it making it posiible to play cheaper copied games again.
I didn't really see the point in releasing the same console with the same amount of power as its predecessor. The whole idea of having new consoles is to improve on the capabilities not just for looks. Ok, some PSone had a built-in screen and could run on batteries, but they still seem quite pricey, especially when you look at the logic.

So Playstation had a big plate on their hands, then look who came to join them...Sega! They entered the stage with great elegance with the release of the enhanced 128-bit Dreamcast, a huge success in their eyes. But what they didn't notice was the huge success for more hackers continuing making money from simply copying and selling a game.
It didn't take long until the Dreamcast was hacked, made possible to play copied games. It was no surprise that loads of people wanted copied games for the Dreamcast because it was cheaper - who in the right mind would want to buy something more expensive when you can get it somewhere else for a much lower price? No-one I'd imagine! This was the real factor that drew many crowds into buying copied games, the price. They wanted to play their favourite games for a lower price instead of going to gaming retailers and buying it for the 'recommended retail price'. Still, Dreamcast was quite successful, but not as successful as Playstation.

You would think now that Playstation would have made it impossible to chip their new PS2, but already people have found ways of chipping the PS2 once again making it possible to play copied games. When my brother bought his PS2 I had some idea that it was impossible to chip the PS2 due to all the commotion with the PS1 but I was totally surprised when I found out you could. It's times like these when you just wonder why haven't developers permanently restricted chipping? What's holding them back, they're sure to have the technology so what's stopping them? I don't know do you? Even the X-Box is beginning to get chipped, with Microsoft replacing the Motherboard inside yet they can still chip it afterwards. It's beginning to cause piracy problems aleready.



So what do you think about chipping? Are you for it or against it? Yes it may seem very tempting having the opportunity to purchase a game for cheaper, but it obviously isn't right. What it's doing to the industry is simply giving it a bad reputation, which isn't needed right now because we want gaming to improve. Look at it with this perspective. How would you like it if you created something, worked hard for it so you could earn well-deserved money then became very successful. Suddenly someone finds a way of imitating what you're doing and reducing your profit by the person selling copied versions of what you made. Very unacceptable wouldn't you agree? Well this is how many companies see it like today.

I'm sure many of you out there are FOR copying and not against it, but I don't blame you. It is very overwhelming, but we all have to emphasise with companies that work hard dat in day out creating better games/consoles and are gradually being foiled by illegal acts such as 'chipping'. Really it's up to you what kind of games you want but for some reason I prefer to get the real thing, and not have my console tampered with. By doing so you break the warranty on your console meaning if it breaks your f*****. Also if everyone gets pirate games, companies lose money, copanies stop making games, no more games to copy, everybody gets f*****.

If you've read this far then I hope this has given you a whole new perspective on the second biggest problem in the Gaming Industry (after, "Do gaming pollute the mind of a child?").
Thanks For Reading.

cjh wrote:
> Oh, and by the way, good post maddmun :o).

Thanks

When I was younger, back in the day the Playstation was just starting out, the thought that I could get a game for under a £5 was certainly appealing. I mean, as a kid (ok teen then) money is generally very tight, so you can't afford everything you would like to. So, when you have the chance to buy one game for £45 or 8 games for £50, lets be honest, which one are you going to go for????

It's not at all suprising that piracy has got to the stage that it has now, its so easy to do now. Even Sony are supplying people with the equipment to copy games. Obviously, I don't mean there is 'the official Sony Playstation Copy Pro' available for £65 down the shop, I mean the CD-R/W drives they make, the black recordable CD's they ship out, and the replacment Playstation cases they sell. Not only that, but with the likes of Blockbuster and other friends, the original verions of the games people want aren't hard to aquire.

What also made piracy more appealing was the way the big companies were looked apon. The way people saw it, a game that solf for £45 was £45 profit for the creator, and thats what they didn't like. "Why should they get £45 from me when I can get it for a fiver??" was the basic attitude from yongsters. Oh, and of course, it was 'cool' to copy games, not buy them. Now, however, I have grown up and know that £45 for a game isn't just pure profit for a the company.

There was a thread a little while ago, about the price of games being to high, and I made some big post about the reasons, which I'll cut down now.

- Paying the programmers.
- Paying for the hardware/software the programmers use.
- People to make the graphics, games after all, need great graphics.
- Pay for advertising the game
- Pay to distrubute the game.
- ... and a few others.

Which turns out to be a couple of pounds profit per game. Now, obviously that sounds like a lot if the likes of GTA: Vice City was an example, how many thousands of pounds profit is that??? Quite a lot, but it's well deservied in my view to the company for making entertainment for us all.

Anyway, I'm going on a bit here.

I, personally, think piracy is wrong, very wrong, as it could very well destroy the games industry as we know it if things don't get better. Although things seem fine to use now, be sure the games companies do not see it this way.

But, I do see why it is such a common thing now. We don't have endless amounts of money, and we do like our games, so it's just the way things are going.

I notice you say why don't Sony and the like just make a console that is 'un-chip-able'. If only it was that easy. Unfortunatly, where there us a will, there is a way. All a game really comes down to is a load of computer code on a CD ROM, and if you copy that code on to another CD, it's going to produce the same effect as the original (i.e. a playable game). As far as I'm aware, there are certain protection codes on the original CD's which go into the cosole to begin with, and authorise it is a genuine CD. All that a hacker has to do is find out this securuity, code, and lets face it, some people make a living out of cracking codes.

Personally though, I don't trust anyone within the companies to be 100% honest, and think there are the odd technision who knows all about the consoles and either sells his/her knoladge to someone else, or simply creates the chips which they know very will will work on the boards in the console. The idea of the money they could make from that must be enough to tempt even the most loyal of staff. Not that I'm pointing fingers or anything, I just think there could be a few big mouths within Sony, Microsoft, etc who are only looking out for number 1, themself.

.... I don't even know if that made much sence, to anyone, so to sum it up.

"Piracy is wrong in my view, but with the way it is so easy to get hold of or to do it yourself for the fraction of the price, I see why its so appealing."

Oh, and by the way, good post maddmun :o).

Pointless Babble wrote:

> Older games that are nigh on impossible to find, I'll download; it's
> that whole "abandonware" thing, nobody is really losing out
> as the titles aren't manufactured or sold anymore - they've had their
> income, and the companies aren't making a profit on them, but they
> aren't making a loss if you download the game either.

That's something i do also, solely for that reason


Anyway, my point was more about the copying of games using a CD-RW at home. Companies which constantly make great games are losing out. Places like Capfcom, Konami etc, just because people want it for cheaper.

I tend to be in two minds over it...

Console games I'll buy, I like to support the companies responsible for the games, and heck I'm not about to buy anything I don't like so it's credit where credit is due. If I chip a console, it's for two reasons:

1) To play imported games. Such as ones I otherwise wouldn't be able to get in the UK, or I wish to play at the time of US release, or I want to play fullscreen at 60Hz etc. etc.

2) To use homegrown software such as emulators, music players, games and stuff like that.

Games for the PC platform made by reputable people, which also happen to be decently playable, I'll buy. Same reasons as above.

Older games that are nigh on impossible to find, I'll download; it's that whole "abandonware" thing, nobody is really losing out as the titles aren't manufactured or sold anymore - they've had their income, and the companies aren't making a profit on them, but they aren't making a loss if you download the game either.

Games that may be enjoyable, but were made by a company I loathe for their sly, underhanded tactics and temper tantrums when they don't get their own way; I will download. I won't fund a company I don't particularly like. People that fall into this category are Electronic Arts, Interplay etc. because of my experiences of their behaviour in the past. For example, EA's insistance on buying decent rights, and turning them to crap; like the Ultima series. Or the way if a particular online games company is outshining them, they'll buy them out, and shut their service down to prevent any profit loss from the Ultima Online series.

That's essentially my stand point on the whole piracy issue.

Trying to raise your word count i see....

maddmun wrote:
> Everyone has their own views on copying games. Some agree with the
> process and others disagree. Personally, I think the majority agree to
> copying games due to two pretty simple and worthy facts - it's cheap
> and quite reliable!
> Everyone has their own views on copying games. Some agree with the
> process and others disagree. Personally, I think the majority agree to
> copying games due to two pretty simple and worthy facts - it's cheap
> and quite reliable!
>
> When gaming entertainment actually evolved into something worthy of
> playing, Nintendo in the late eighties, many were drawn into gaming.
> Years went by, technology transformed and a lot of brain boxes started
> to appear in the far horizon of the industry. Hackers! The ultimate
> evil!
> Basically, these were very clever people who manoeuvred with certain
> consoles making it possible to play copied games for the console. This
> era didn't arrive until consoles that read on discs arrived (not sure
> about the Mega CD though). You see when the industry really started
> cartridges were commonly used, which were virtually impossible to
> copy. This was a huge advantage for cartridges, but as well these
> advantages came many more disadvantages than discs.
>
> The 'chipping' dilemma really got a boost when Sony's Playstation was
> released. The Playstation gave hackers a huge money-making
> opportunity, which was simply to copy games and sell them to many
> willing gamers in the public. Copyright laws were firmly created
> restricting anyone from copying, but it still went ahead. When you
> load most consoles you can clearly see what's stated. Copying is
> illegal, but once again hackers refused to stop and carried on earning
> easy money. No-one really takes any notice of copyright warnings
> mainly because of all the writing. When you see it you instantly think
> 'bla bla...' and that's just the way of nature!
> Playstation, in my mind actually earned more popularity because of
> this. Many audiences were aware of getting Playtstation's chipped and
> having copied games for a much cheaper price. A lot of commotion was
> often made just to get a copied game. Still, the whole idea of having
> a successful game company was to make a lot of profit, which they
> weren't receiving potentially. Obviously Playstation could not gather
> all their sold products back from the public and create a new
> 'un-chippable' one, it was totally impossible. So what they did was
> wait for a couple of years, say five years, and then created a newer
> and much smaller model, which was supposed to restrict the chipping
> process. Did it work, I don't think so! Many clever people, probably
> technicians, found ways to chip it making it posiible to play cheaper
> copied games again.
> I didn't really see the point in releasing the same console with the
> same amount of power as its predecessor. The whole idea of having new
> consoles is to improve on the capabilities not just for looks. Ok,
> some PSone had a built-in screen and could run on batteries, but they
> still seem quite pricey, especially when you look at the logic.
>
> So Playstation had a big plate on their hands, then look who came to
> join them...Sega! They entered the stage with great elegance with the
> release of the enhanced 128-bit Dreamcast, a huge success in their
> eyes. But what they didn't notice was the huge success for more
> hackers continuing making money from simply copying and selling a
> game.
> It didn't take long until the Dreamcast was hacked, made possible to
> play copied games. It was no surprise that loads of people wanted
> copied games for the Dreamcast because it was cheaper - who in the
> right mind would want to buy something more expensive when you can get
> it somewhere else for a much lower price? No-one I'd imagine! This was
> the real factor that drew many crowds into buying copied games, the
> price. They wanted to play their favourite games for a lower price
> instead of going to gaming retailers and buying it for the
> 'recommended retail price'. Still, Dreamcast was quite successful, but
> not as successful as Playstation.
>
> You would think now that Playstation would have made it impossible to
> chip their new PS2, but already people have found ways of chipping the
> PS2 once again making it possible to play copied games. When my
> brother bought his PS2 I had some idea that it was impossible to chip
> the PS2 due to all the commotion with the PS1 but I was totally
> surprised when I found out you could. It's times like these when you
> just wonder why haven't developers permanently restricted chipping?
> What's holding them back, they're sure to have the technology so
> what's stopping them? I don't know do you? Even the X-Box is beginning
> to get chipped, with Microsoft replacing the Motherboard inside yet
> they can still chip it afterwards. It's beginning to cause piracy
> problems aleready.
>
>
>
> So what do you think about chipping? Are you for it or against it? Yes
> it may seem very tempting having the opportunity to purchase a game
> for cheaper, but it obviously isn't right. What it's doing to the
> industry is simply giving it a bad reputation, which isn't needed
> right now because we want gaming to improve. Look at it with this
> perspective. How would you like it if you created something, worked
> hard for it so you could earn well-deserved money then became very
> successful. Suddenly someone finds a way of imitating what you're
> doing and reducing your profit by the person selling copied versions
> of what you made. Very unacceptable wouldn't you agree? Well this is
> how many companies see it like today.
>
> I'm sure many of you out there are FOR copying and not against it, but
> I don't blame you. It is very overwhelming, but we all have to
> emphasise with companies that work hard dat in day out creating better
> games/consoles and are gradually being foiled by illegal acts such as
> 'chipping'. Really it's up to you what kind of games you want but for
> some reason I prefer to get the real thing, and not have my console
> tampered with. By doing so you break the warranty on your console
> meaning if it breaks your f*****. Also if everyone gets pirate games,
> companies lose money, copanies stop making games, no more games to
> copy, everybody gets f*****.
>
> If you've read this far then I hope this has given you a whole new
> perspective on the second biggest problem in the Gaming Industry
> (after, "Do gaming pollute the mind of a child?").
> Thanks For Reading.






yes

i agree

totally

don't know why I said that, but, what really bugs me is that some pirate games still come up with the Piracy warning. It gets under my skin

I'm blind so I'M not looking at you

What? Why is everyone looking at me? Stop it!

*runs*

oooh, that'll raise my word count