The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Just seen this over at PlanetXbox.com but it applies to software on ALL platforms, not just Xboz (obviously):
Piracy, no matter what the context, has always been a hot topic and this morning it seems piracy is on the rise. In a recent report from the Business Software Alliance (BSA), an organization that promotes a safe and legal online world, piracy has risen two years in a row. Once by 37 percent in 2000 and again by 40 percent in 2001 with piracy in North American piracy at 26 percent, a one percent increase over 2000. The report went on to state that that while piracy in North America is lower than any other region of the world it attributes to the third highest loss for the industry with $1.9 billion lost in 2001 and $2.9 billion in 2000.
Highest Piracy Rates For 2000/2001
Vietnam: 2000 = 97% - 2001 = 94%
China: 2000 = 94% - 2001 = 92%
Indonesia: 2000 = 89% - 2001 = 88%
Ukraine / Other CIS: 2000 = 89% 2001 = 87%
Russia: 2000 = 88% 2001 = 87%
Pakistan: 2000 = 83% 2001 = 83%
Lebanon: 2000 = 83% 2001 = 79%
Qatar: 2000 = 81% 2001 = 78%
Nicaragua: 2000 = 78% 2001 = 78%
Bolivia: 2000 = 81% 2001 = 77%
The report concluded with a bittersweet ending as it was said while piracy in 2001 was only $10.97 billion, as opposed to $11.75 billion in 2000, the reason has been partially attributed to the effects of worldwide economic slowdown and lower software prices. Furthermore, during 2001, North America, Asia/Pacific and Western Europe accounted for 85% of all revenue lost due to piracy.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Thats a bloody lot of money. No wonder software prices are so high if they have to recoup those kinds of figures.
Pirates suck. And not the ones with an eye patch and a parrot on their shoulder...
Piracy, no matter what the context, has always been a hot topic and this morning it seems piracy is on the rise. In a recent report from the Business Software Alliance (BSA), an organization that promotes a safe and legal online world, piracy has risen two years in a row. Once by 37 percent in 2000 and again by 40 percent in 2001 with piracy in North American piracy at 26 percent, a one percent increase over 2000. The report went on to state that that while piracy in North America is lower than any other region of the world it attributes to the third highest loss for the industry with $1.9 billion lost in 2001 and $2.9 billion in 2000.
Highest Piracy Rates For 2000/2001
Vietnam: 2000 = 97% - 2001 = 94%
China: 2000 = 94% - 2001 = 92%
Indonesia: 2000 = 89% - 2001 = 88%
Ukraine / Other CIS: 2000 = 89% 2001 = 87%
Russia: 2000 = 88% 2001 = 87%
Pakistan: 2000 = 83% 2001 = 83%
Lebanon: 2000 = 83% 2001 = 79%
Qatar: 2000 = 81% 2001 = 78%
Nicaragua: 2000 = 78% 2001 = 78%
Bolivia: 2000 = 81% 2001 = 77%
The report concluded with a bittersweet ending as it was said while piracy in 2001 was only $10.97 billion, as opposed to $11.75 billion in 2000, the reason has been partially attributed to the effects of worldwide economic slowdown and lower software prices. Furthermore, during 2001, North America, Asia/Pacific and Western Europe accounted for 85% of all revenue lost due to piracy.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Thats a bloody lot of money. No wonder software prices are so high if they have to recoup those kinds of figures.
Pirates suck. And not the ones with an eye patch and a parrot on their shoulder...
Page:
I don't pirate games. I used to own a few copied PlayStation games, as we all have (except the rare few or Nintys), but I never played them. Fair enough, copying games is bad, but my mates all agree that if there's a game that's good enough to buy, they'll buy it. People only copy games that they wouldn't buy normally. Well, all the 'casual' copiers. If you know what I mean.
Recently though, I've gotten into emulation quite a lot. There's nothing more satisfying than seeing a great game, such as Super Mario 64 or Pokemon Stadium running flat out at 60fps at a resolution of 1600 x 1200, with none of that overly blurry N64-typical anti-aliasing. Brilliant. Thing is, of the few N64 ROMs I have, I own all of the games anyway so that isn't illegal. Right?
Plus, I want something like Bleem for my PC. Bleem was great because it could play PlayStation games on your PC. At the time, my PC was technologically advanced and so could run the games with relative ease, and they looked tonnes better than on the PlayStation proper. At the moment, I'm looking for a similar thing for the PS2 - I wanna play my games on the PC. Not ROMs, but off the actual discs.
Anyway, I don't agree with piracy, but if its a choice between paying nothing and getting nothing or paying nothing and getting something, I know which I'd choose. And emulation is only wrong if you don't own the real thing. But luckily, I do. :)
Recently though, I've gotten into emulation quite a lot. There's nothing more satisfying than seeing a great game, such as Super Mario 64 or Pokemon Stadium running flat out at 60fps at a resolution of 1600 x 1200, with none of that overly blurry N64-typical anti-aliasing. Brilliant. Thing is, of the few N64 ROMs I have, I own all of the games anyway so that isn't illegal. Right?
Plus, I want something like Bleem for my PC. Bleem was great because it could play PlayStation games on your PC. At the time, my PC was technologically advanced and so could run the games with relative ease, and they looked tonnes better than on the PlayStation proper. At the moment, I'm looking for a similar thing for the PS2 - I wanna play my games on the PC. Not ROMs, but off the actual discs.
Anyway, I don't agree with piracy, but if its a choice between paying nothing and getting nothing or paying nothing and getting something, I know which I'd choose. And emulation is only wrong if you don't own the real thing. But luckily, I do. :)
Kernal, I agree completely- I do the same!
But I was talking about games, like the original post. Good points though
But I was talking about games, like the original post. Good points though
===SONICRAV---> wrote:
> unknown kernel wrote:
> " But what if Photoshop isn't available from their friendly local
> pirate? Do they nip down to PC World to get the retail version?
> Doubtful."
>
> Despite having completely disagreed with YH's argument, piracy figures
> do add up. In Edge a while back why calculated the money lost to
> piracy was many, many billions of pounds, taking into account that
> ONLY 1 out of 3 pirated games would be bought otherwise. Even if it's
> only 1 in 10, it's still a massive figure.
>
> Sonic
I don't doubt that the industry loses money but these figures still give the impression of having been plucked out of thin air. I just think that using a pirated piece of software and deciding to buy a retail version are different kinds of decisions.
In terms of expensive applications people use pirated versions almost as demo discs: so instead of /just/ buying photoshop, it makes sense to also pick up Corel Draw, Maya, Poser...whatever graphics app you think you might need. Not all of these are going to get used long-term - but it's a better system than using crippled trial versions. In the end many people will probably decide that they aren't going to use any of these products and use that precious hard drive space for Medal of Honour. But any PC user worth his salt is interested in exploring what his machine can do: so the process will be repeated with DTP or audio editing.
I've done this myself, and over the years have installed and uninstalled thousands of pounds worth of software. Realistically I was never going to purchase any of these apps because (a) I don't have that kind of money, and (b) I was treating my PC like a toy, seeing what it could do, exploring it, but not, on the whole, using it for mission critical stuff. And I'm prepared to pay for the things I use: Word is the only program that ever came close to my word-processing needs, so I bought it; and Dreamweaver has recently become an essential for me, so I've bought that too. This kind of screws the figures up: whatever ratio you put on the bought/pirated figures is arbitrary and in the end pretty meaningless.
> unknown kernel wrote:
> " But what if Photoshop isn't available from their friendly local
> pirate? Do they nip down to PC World to get the retail version?
> Doubtful."
>
> Despite having completely disagreed with YH's argument, piracy figures
> do add up. In Edge a while back why calculated the money lost to
> piracy was many, many billions of pounds, taking into account that
> ONLY 1 out of 3 pirated games would be bought otherwise. Even if it's
> only 1 in 10, it's still a massive figure.
>
> Sonic
I don't doubt that the industry loses money but these figures still give the impression of having been plucked out of thin air. I just think that using a pirated piece of software and deciding to buy a retail version are different kinds of decisions.
In terms of expensive applications people use pirated versions almost as demo discs: so instead of /just/ buying photoshop, it makes sense to also pick up Corel Draw, Maya, Poser...whatever graphics app you think you might need. Not all of these are going to get used long-term - but it's a better system than using crippled trial versions. In the end many people will probably decide that they aren't going to use any of these products and use that precious hard drive space for Medal of Honour. But any PC user worth his salt is interested in exploring what his machine can do: so the process will be repeated with DTP or audio editing.
I've done this myself, and over the years have installed and uninstalled thousands of pounds worth of software. Realistically I was never going to purchase any of these apps because (a) I don't have that kind of money, and (b) I was treating my PC like a toy, seeing what it could do, exploring it, but not, on the whole, using it for mission critical stuff. And I'm prepared to pay for the things I use: Word is the only program that ever came close to my word-processing needs, so I bought it; and Dreamweaver has recently become an essential for me, so I've bought that too. This kind of screws the figures up: whatever ratio you put on the bought/pirated figures is arbitrary and in the end pretty meaningless.
Sonic, the report came from the BSA (Business Software Alliance).
Read the whole thing here:
http://www.bsa.org/usa/press/ newsreleases//2002-06-10.1129.phtml
Read the whole thing here:
http://www.bsa.org/usa/press/ newsreleases//2002-06-10.1129.phtml
well i dont see a problem with it, the compays make billions anyway. i dont see whats wrong with a few copies being made. anyway i copy em but never sell them, cos that is wrong, ve ery bad, dont do it.
Damn, I was expecting a post about pirates with a black patch on one eye, a wooden leg, a parrot on the shoulder (aptly named 'Polly') and a treasure map leading to Blue Beards hidden treasure.
Well, I spose there was a mention of them, but it wasn't really enough now was it...
Well, I spose there was a mention of them, but it wasn't really enough now was it...
YH,
importing would become far cheaper with the loss of regional lockouts. You see, the reason it costs a lots to import (well, actually it costs the same as buying it new here thanks to the poor canadian dollar:) is because only hardcore gamers import, meaning that only dedicated importers do importing, charging what they want.
If suddenly all US retailers could sell games to the WHOLE UK market, then many more would join, driving prices down.
As for stopping bad games from being developed, it will never happen... because the industry is more interested in profits than in quality control! They don't care what they supply, so long as we buy it! An example of why piracy exists to start with!
Oh, and what survey was this? Some surveys (like the one in Edge) take into account that 2/3 of pirated software wouldn't be bought if piracy didn't exist. Others (ELSPA) assume all pirated software would be bought new (stupid eh?!)
Sonic
importing would become far cheaper with the loss of regional lockouts. You see, the reason it costs a lots to import (well, actually it costs the same as buying it new here thanks to the poor canadian dollar:) is because only hardcore gamers import, meaning that only dedicated importers do importing, charging what they want.
If suddenly all US retailers could sell games to the WHOLE UK market, then many more would join, driving prices down.
As for stopping bad games from being developed, it will never happen... because the industry is more interested in profits than in quality control! They don't care what they supply, so long as we buy it! An example of why piracy exists to start with!
Oh, and what survey was this? Some surveys (like the one in Edge) take into account that 2/3 of pirated software wouldn't be bought if piracy didn't exist. Others (ELSPA) assume all pirated software would be bought new (stupid eh?!)
Sonic
Still significant enough to be a burden though.
In a um... 'report' I was doing (you'll see soon enough), I had to contact the ELSPA. All the piracy figures given are the retail value - one pirate game, to them, is worth £40. This means that the piracy issue isn't as expensive to the industry as you'd expect.
Just wanted to add that. :)
Just wanted to add that. :)
===SONICRAV---> wrote:
> 1) Remove all regional lock outs.
I agree with that completely.
> The following points are about reducing people's wish to pirate in the
> first place:
>
> 2) With the loss of regional lockouts, retialers in the UK will be
> directly competing with those in America. So prices will be forced to
> drop. It also means that Europe will get games quicker.
Ah but would we get games quicker? Also, how much cheaper would it actually be to buy a game from the US? By the time you've added postage etc on, it may be about the same price to walk to your local shop. Damn sight quicker too....
> 3) Develop games in all languages FROM THE START! Rather than waste
> months translating stuff, why not develop games will full language
> support right from the start. This means no more waiting for games,
> and we will have universal release dates. Not only that, but games
> development costs will be cheaper from the outset. (Taking into
> account the amount publishers take for translating games)
Never going to happen. Ever. It seems a good idea, but the fact is that some territories are more important to developers than others. Which is why a Jap version of a Jap developed game is released first.
Also, I don't think is would speed releases up much. You may not have to add 9 months on the end to translate the game, but it will be going on as the game is developed, so the development will be slower, so Japan would get the game later, which they don't want. See above.
> 4) STOP poor games from being developed from the start! Why do
> publishers allow really terrible games (esp those based on licences
> like the Simpsons) to get released? They should kill off such games as
> early as possible. This will increase the quality of what we see on
> the shelves and increase confidence in the industry.
Agreed, but there's one thing stopping this: Bandwagon.
You mention yourself a Simpsons game, and the fact is that a Simpsons game will sell, no matter how bad it is, as it has the licence. Also, if no bad games ever came out, we'd have nothing to compare the good games to...
> 1) Remove all regional lock outs.
I agree with that completely.
> The following points are about reducing people's wish to pirate in the
> first place:
>
> 2) With the loss of regional lockouts, retialers in the UK will be
> directly competing with those in America. So prices will be forced to
> drop. It also means that Europe will get games quicker.
Ah but would we get games quicker? Also, how much cheaper would it actually be to buy a game from the US? By the time you've added postage etc on, it may be about the same price to walk to your local shop. Damn sight quicker too....
> 3) Develop games in all languages FROM THE START! Rather than waste
> months translating stuff, why not develop games will full language
> support right from the start. This means no more waiting for games,
> and we will have universal release dates. Not only that, but games
> development costs will be cheaper from the outset. (Taking into
> account the amount publishers take for translating games)
Never going to happen. Ever. It seems a good idea, but the fact is that some territories are more important to developers than others. Which is why a Jap version of a Jap developed game is released first.
Also, I don't think is would speed releases up much. You may not have to add 9 months on the end to translate the game, but it will be going on as the game is developed, so the development will be slower, so Japan would get the game later, which they don't want. See above.
> 4) STOP poor games from being developed from the start! Why do
> publishers allow really terrible games (esp those based on licences
> like the Simpsons) to get released? They should kill off such games as
> early as possible. This will increase the quality of what we see on
> the shelves and increase confidence in the industry.
Agreed, but there's one thing stopping this: Bandwagon.
You mention yourself a Simpsons game, and the fact is that a Simpsons game will sell, no matter how bad it is, as it has the licence. Also, if no bad games ever came out, we'd have nothing to compare the good games to...
Page: