[Glenn Epic]

Originally Posted by guybrush_guy

i sometimes think that they should stop making games for the PC and do nothing but console games. pirating games is much harder and happens less frequently on consoles. this theory of mine wouldn't really work unfortunately.

I added another l to really Guybrush. I hereby dedicate myself to correcting your spelling mistakes. Oh, who am I kidding

[Mattsius]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

Okay let me reword my question for you, and anyone can give their opinion about this. Is it piracy, for ONE person to use the same software on multiple of his computers? Coz that same logic does not apply to DVD's nor to music CD's (I can go buy a music CD to listen to on my home stereo and car CD player). Opinions?

I don't think it's piracy and I totally agree with you. That is, if we're talking about private persons, not companies? Companies should IMO have a different copy of the software for every computer they own. If a huge company would use just one copy for thousands of computers there would be a problem.
I'm sure you meant private persons though, SD, but I still wanted to share this side of the story.

[stepurhan]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

Okay let me reword my question for you, and anyone can give their opinion about this. Is it piracy, for ONE person to use the same software on multiple of his computers? Coz that same logic does not apply to DVD's nor to music CD's (I can go buy a music CD to listen to on my home stereo and car CD player). Opinions?

Interesting thought but your comparison doesn't really work.

If you load an OS on multiple machines you're effectively creating new copies of that OS. It would then be possible to sell one of the machines, thus supplying someone else with an OS they haven't paid for. I can understand your reasoning but it would only work commercially if you swore never to sell any of the additional machines you loaded the OS on which would make one hell of an unwieldy licence agreement.

By contrast, if you sell someone your home stereo they don't automatically get a copy of every CD you've played on it. If you did sell the CD with your home stereo you'd no longer have use of that CD.

[Ninja Dodo]

I think it's a grey area.

What about ROMs for example? How are you going to get hold of say Super Mario Bros 3, short of waiting for someone to sell the game (SNES console included) on ebay. Here in England you can sometimes buy them second-hand in game shops, but even then, they're very difficult to find.

I think having these old games floating around on the internet is preferable to having them fade into obscurity and never be played again.

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by stepurhan

Interesting thought but your comparison doesn't really work.

If you load an OS on multiple machines you're effectively creating new copies of that OS. It would then be possible to sell one of the machines, thus supplying someone else with an OS they haven't paid for. I can understand your reasoning but it would only work commercially if you swore never to sell any of the additional machines you loaded the OS on which would make one hell of an unwieldy licence agreement.

By contrast, if you sell someone your home stereo they don't automatically get a copy of every CD you've played on it. If you did sell the CD with your home stereo you'd no longer have use of that CD.

Yeah but when you are selling that extra machine, you are selling the OS with it. You are supposed to give the whole thing, machine and Windows CD to the buyer. Also your hypothetical example should apply to every single piece of software on the machine. If you have Half Life installed, you will be giving them a free copy of the game.

[stepurhan]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

Yeah but when you are selling that extra machine, you are selling the OS with it. You are supposed to give the whole thing, machine and Windows CD to the buyer. Also your hypothetical example should apply to every single piece of software on the machine. If you have Half Life installed, you will be giving them a free copy of the game.

In your situation of loading multiple machines from the same OS discs how would you supply the buyer with the Windows CD? The only CD you'd have would be your initial copy.

Also I think it does apply to every piece of software on the machine. If you're loading Half Life on to more than one machine from the same set of discs then you have exactly the same situation if you sell a machine. If you're not selling someone the program discs as well then you should remove the program.

Taking a different approach to the original question, have you ever gone to a computer shop and said "I want a new computer but, since this will be a second computer for me, I don't want to pay for the monitor."? I should think you'd politely be escorted from the shop if you did. Just because the OS is software and not hardware doesn't make it any less a component you need to use the computer properly.

Originally Posted by Mattsius

I don't think it's piracy and I totally agree with you. That is, if we're talking about private persons, not companies? Companies should IMO have a different copy of the software for every computer they own. If a huge company would use just one copy for thousands of computers there would be a problem.

How would a software manufacturer tell the difference? You could have personal and corporate editions (leaving it up to the retailer) or you could allow each OS to be installed a certain number of times (say 5) In either case it would be simple for an unscrupulous company to get round this by loading the private edition on to smaller groups of computers. As long as they used "group" names rather than the company name it's unlikely registration would pick this up automatically. A hypothetical thousand-computer company would save $160,000 (assuming 5 loads each) by doing this. And what if a private individual starts up a business and uses previously personal computers? Do they have to alert the manufacturer and pay additional licences?

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by stepurhan

Taking a different approach to the original question, have you ever gone to a computer shop and said "I want a new computer but, since this will be a second computer for me, I don't want to pay for the monitor."? I should think you'd politely be escorted from the shop if you did. Just because the OS is software and not hardware doesn't make it any less a component you need to use the computer properly.

HELL YEAH! Haven't you bought a computer in the last few years? I bought my last DELL 2 and a half years ago and I explicitly ordered it without a monitor coz I already have a monitor. Actually that is how the problem arose. I recently bought a computer online where I literally said "I want the motherboard CPU and case and that's it. I have all the other parts". So I'm using the same monitor with 2 machines (by the use of a KVM switch). The only piece of software I had to buy again was windows. Again, just coz a software downloads to a computer does not mean that you are supposed to buy multiple licences for multiple computers. Remember, this is personal use, not a corporate copy like Mattsius was suggesting. And take games for example. If I buy a PS2 game and I have 2 Playstation 2 consoles, I can play it on both. But if I buy the PC version and I have 2 computers, I have to buy two copies? Doesn't make sense to me.

[Mattsius]

Originally Posted by stepurhan

How would a software manufacturer tell the difference? You could have personal and corporate editions (leaving it up to the retailer) or you could allow each OS to be installed a certain number of times (say 5) In either case it would be simple for an unscrupulous company to get round this by loading the private edition on to smaller groups of computers. As long as they used "group" names rather than the company name it's unlikely registration would pick this up automatically. A hypothetical thousand-computer company would save $160,000 (assuming 5 loads each) by doing this. And what if a private individual starts up a business and uses previously personal computers? Do they have to alert the manufacturer and pay additional licences?

Actually there are personal and corporate editions of the newer Windows versions. I think they're called Home and Professional Edition, or something. Don't know what the actual difference is though.

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by Mattsius

Actually there are personal and corporate editions of the newer Windows versions. I think they're called Home and Professional Edition, or something. Don't know what the actual difference is though.

actually there are three versions. Home, Professional and Corporate. Professional has a few more features than the Home one. Corporate is for companies.

[JBRAA]

A really bad game
(not fun/enjoyable, or badly madly made)
costs 50 bucks.

A really good game
(will play for more than a month, probably and hopefully years)
costs 50 bucks.

How many bad games is there in the PC/xbox/Ps2 market?
How many good games is there in the PC/xbox/Ps2 market?

I think there is about 1 good game in 20. But hey, after listing and watching big gameshop sites, I think the numbers change. I think there is 1 in 50, that is a good game.

That is a reason I dont pay for *all* of my games.

If all games which got made were really good games, then I would buy more and be a happier gamer. However, I would still download games since I cannot buy everything, and not want to buy for games I just want to test if I like the genre, or even test a game to see what it is like.

So, what do I mean.

I mean, that 1 of 50, or 2 of 100, or 2% of *all* games are good.
That means that 98% are not as good as you want.

Then you could ask: Why are 98% of all games not good?
Because they dont *have* to be. Consumers, will buy, and often just *HOPE!!!* that the game will be good, after reading on the back of the case/box.

And that sux.

So, download and try, and buy if it is good.

And if you buy 5 games, or 10 games a year, I think you dont have the right download 10 games, but it doesnt matter since you wouldnt have bought 10 more.

So, if you give money into the gameindustry I think it is good.
But many, of not almost all of the gameindustry cheat the consumers. There are *so* many half-made, or half-thought-through, games being released that it is not fair to the consumer.

If the consumer *knew!!!* before buying a game, that he or she likes it very much, I think there is about zero reason to not buy it.

If you only download games, and not buy any, you are hurting the business as a whole. However, if you buy a game just to try it out, to see what the heck your friends are talking about, when refering to a game, then I dont think it matters, since you are just trying it out, and it doesnt matter if you download a demo version of the game or the whole game at that point.

I have downloaded LOADS of demos of games. The game industry didnt loose anything from that.

The people who refer to software download as theft are just not very bright/intelligent, or have friends or connections to Anti-software-piracy organisations who are very questionable.

Economical crimes are in the mind of the state, in most counstries, much much more worse than murder or childmolestation or what else. The mind of the state gives a impression: If you **** the state, we will **** you down to the bones and crush you till leftovers.

I havent read anything any of the other posts, so you guys have to be gentle and forgive me. I'm just writing away my thought. I'll come back later and read more =)

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by JBRAA

A really bad game
(not fun/enjoyable, or badly madly made)
costs 50 bucks.

A really good game
(will play for more than a month, probably and hopefully years)
costs 50 bucks.

How many bad games is there in the PC/xbox/Ps2 market?
How many good games is there in the PC/xbox/Ps2 market?

I think there is about 1 good game in 20. But hey, after listing and watching big gameshop sites, I think the numbers change. I think there is 1 in 50, that is a good game.

That is a reason I dont pay for *all* of my games.

If all games which got made were really good games, then I would buy more and be a happier gamer. However, I would still download games since I cannot buy everything, and not want to buy for games I just want to test if I like the genre, or even test a game to see what it is like.

So, what do I mean.

I mean, that 1 of 50, or 2 of 100, or 2% of *all* games are good.
That means that 98% are not as good as you want.

Then you could ask: Why are 98% of all games not good?
Because they dont *have* to be. Consumers, will buy, and often just *HOPE!!!* that the game will be good, after reading on the back of the case/box.

And that sux.

So, download and try, and buy if it is good.

And if you buy 5 games, or 10 games a year, I think you dont have the right download 10 games, but it doesnt matter since you wouldnt have bought 10 more.

So, if you give money into the gameindustry I think it is good.
But many, of not almost all of the gameindustry cheat the consumers. There are *so* many half-made, or half-thought-through, games being released that it is not fair to the consumer.

If the consumer *knew!!!* before buying a game, that he or she likes it very much, I think there is about zero reason to not buy it.

If you only download games, and not buy any, you are hurting the business as a whole. However, if you buy a game just to try it out, to see what the heck your friends are talking about, when refering to a game, then I dont think it matters, since you are just trying it out, and it doesnt matter if you download a demo version of the game or the whole game at that point.

I have downloaded LOADS of demos of games. The game industry didnt loose anything from that.

The people who refer to software download as theft are just not very bright/intelligent, or have friends or connections to Anti-software-piracy organisations who are very questionable.

Economical crimes are in the mind of the state, in most counstries, much much more worse than murder or childmolestation or what else. The mind of the state gives a impression: If you **** the state, we will **** you down to the bones and crush you till leftovers.

I havent read anything any of the other posts, so you guys have to be gentle and forgive me. I'm just writing away my thought. I'll come back later and read more =)

I'm sorry but I really don't agree with you. Although it is true that there are maybe 1 in 20 good games out there, it is still piracy to download a game you haven't payed for. It's like going into a shop and saying hey these pair of pants suck, there is only one pair in 20 that are good, but hey I will try it anyway.

But I have plenty of solutions for your bad game problem.
1- Read reviews. They are free and usually pretty accurate. Don't take one source to formulate an opinion take many. I usually check IGN and Gamespot, and go to Borders or B&N and read the gaming magazines there and it's free and fully legal.

2- Ask people here. I am yet to play one game that people have given thumbs up here, that sucked. I had a message asking everyone what their fav PS2 games were when I first bought my console. And to my content, every game I have tried from their suggestions has kicked ass.

3- Rent. You don't have to buy every game. Forget about Blockbuster they are a bunch of thieves. Go to Something like Gplay.com and Gamefly.com. You can rent two games at any time for as low as 19.95 a month and keep them as much as you want. If you like it buy it. If you don't keep it forever and keep playing it or return it the same day. Also find one that is closer geographically to you. Gplay.com is in the bay area, so it takes them one day to ship the games to me.

Piracy is bad, it hurts the gaming industry that we all so love. Just think about it, next time you download something

[gillyruless]

Originally Posted by JBRAA

A really bad game
(not fun/enjoyable, or badly madly made)
costs 50 bucks.

A really good game
(will play for more than a month, probably and hopefully years)
costs 50 bucks.

How many bad games is there in the PC/xbox/Ps2 market?
How many good games is there in the PC/xbox/Ps2 market?

I think there is about 1 good game in 20. But hey, after listing and watching big gameshop sites, I think the numbers change. I think there is 1 in 50, that is a good game.

That is a reason I dont pay for *all* of my games.

If all games which got made were really good games, then I would buy more and be a happier gamer. However, I would still download games since I cannot buy everything, and not want to buy for games I just want to test if I like the genre, or even test a game to see what it is like.

So, what do I mean.

I mean, that 1 of 50, or 2 of 100, or 2% of *all* games are good.
That means that 98% are not as good as you want.

Then you could ask: Why are 98% of all games not good?
Because they dont *have* to be. Consumers, will buy, and often just *HOPE!!!* that the game will be good, after reading on the back of the case/box.

And that sux.

So, download and try, and buy if it is good.

And if you buy 5 games, or 10 games a year, I think you dont have the right download 10 games, but it doesnt matter since you wouldnt have bought 10 more.

So, if you give money into the gameindustry I think it is good.
But many, of not almost all of the gameindustry cheat the consumers. There are *so* many half-made, or half-thought-through, games being released that it is not fair to the consumer.

If the consumer *knew!!!* before buying a game, that he or she likes it very much, I think there is about zero reason to not buy it.

If you only download games, and not buy any, you are hurting the business as a whole. However, if you buy a game just to try it out, to see what the heck your friends are talking about, when refering to a game, then I dont think it matters, since you are just trying it out, and it doesnt matter if you download a demo version of the game or the whole game at that point.

I have downloaded LOADS of demos of games. The game industry didnt loose anything from that.

The people who refer to software download as theft are just not very bright/intelligent, or have friends or connections to Anti-software-piracy organisations who are very questionable.

Economical crimes are in the mind of the state, in most counstries, much much more worse than murder or childmolestation or what else. The mind of the state gives a impression: If you **** the state, we will **** you down to the bones and crush you till leftovers.

I havent read anything any of the other posts, so you guys have to be gentle and forgive me. I'm just writing away my thought. I'll come back later and read more =)

*sigh*

One thing that people who engage in piracy continue to forget is this:

downloading a game without paying for it is theft, plain and simple.

Claiming that there's nothing wrong with downloading a game because there are so many bad games just makes no sense. You don't take a bite out of every apple until you find a tasty one in the supermarket to avoid bad ones, do you? Or let's say that General Mills just introduced a new breakfast cereal but you hated the last two they introduced. Does that mean that you now have the right to go to your favorite supermarket and open up a box and try it?

Just because downloading a game is easy and you can do it anonymously doesn't make it any more valid or legal than stealing food at a supermarket. Until you provide economical compensation and obtain rights to a copy of them, games remain other people's property. If you take them without providing fair compensation, then you are breaking the law and you are engaging in theft plain and simple.

Another excuse that I hear a lot from people who engage in piracy is that it's ok to download a game because they wouldn't have bought the game anyway. To me, this also makes no sense. Is it Ok for you to go a steal a book from a local Barnes and noble because you wouldn't have bought it anyway? Is it Ok for you to go to a supermarket and steal a lobster because you wouldn't have bought it anyway? If you take someone else's property without obtaining proper permission to do so, then you are engaging in theft.

I think some people just have a laid back approach to software piracy because the activity involves taking of something that doesn't have a tangible form. IMHO, that's just not right.

[Erkki]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

It's like going into a shop and saying hey these pair of pants suck, there is only one pair in 20 that are good, but hey I will try it anyway.

Exactly. That's what I do when I'm buying pants. That's why they have those changing boxes you know...

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by Erkki

Exactly. That's what I do when I'm buying pants. That's why they have those changing boxes you know...

Good. That's a demo (see the features of the pants in a mirror and if you like it or not). But do you go take the pants, wear them till they wear out, and say oh this pants suck?

[Erkki]

You know, you could draw a hundred parallels like this and I could find faults with most of them. But it all depends on where your POV. I really hate these discussions, so this is my last post here.

If I'd steal the pants, the store would no longer have them and would lose money. If I'd steal the game, noone would even know it was "missing".

If I try the pants on and take a few steps, I can get a feel of them. But not all game demos are representative of the whole game. For exaple the Prince of Persia: Warrior Within demo leaves me in doubt if the game will actually suck or if they just chose bad segments for the demo. Some games even don't have demos.

But these arguments are actually completely irrelevant, because you can just as well buy the game and take it back to the store if you don't like it, instead of pirating to try it out. And indeed you have no "right" to try out a game before buying it. The industry in general just seems to find it profitable for all parties to release demos.

But I don't really care about any of these moral arguments against piracy and I'll continue both stealing and buying games. And nothing any of you can say here will make me feel either worse or better about it.

And just as a bonus, I'll pick on this statement too:
"Piracy is bad, it hurts the gaming industry that we all so love. Just think about it, next time you download something"

"Piracy is bad" that's about the most generic and subjective thing you can say about the subject.
"it hurts the gaming industry" yes, but not as much as the industry wants us to think. I haven't seen any proved numbers anywhere, ever.
"gaming industry that we all so love" I certainly don't love the industry, I love the games.

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by Erkki

If I'd steal the pants, the store would no longer have them and would lose money. If I'd steal the game, noone would even know it was "missing".

Just coz no one knows it was missing does not mean it is not stealing. Taking something that is not rightfully yours is called stealing, whether what you take is tangible (an object) or intangible (a software).

Originally Posted by Erkki

If I try the pants on and take a few steps, I can get a feel of them. But not all game demos are representative of the whole game. For exaple the Prince of Persia: Warrior Within demo leaves me in doubt if the game will actually suck or if they just chose bad segments for the demo. Some games even don't have demos.

You can rent the game if you are so hesitant to pay 50 bucks on it.

Originally Posted by Erkki

And just as a bonus, I'll pick on this statement too:
"Piracy is bad, it hurts the gaming industry that we all so love. Just think about it, next time you download something"

"Piracy is bad" that's about the most generic and subjective thing you can say about the subject.
"it hurts the gaming industry" yes, but not as much as the industry wants us to think. I haven't seen any proved numbers anywhere, ever.
"gaming industry that we all so love" I certainly don't love the industry, I love the games.

Piracy is bad because companies spend 4 years pouring their heart out to produce a game for your pleasure. Do you find it right or moral, that you work on something for 4 years, and someone just grabs it for free? Maybe if you put yourself in their shoes, you will understand.
Whether you care about the gaming industry or not, they are the ones who create the games you love. Stealing hurts the development houses and publishers, and some of their figures are pretty shady.

[Erkki]

Did you read my post at all?

I'll make my point simple: "OMG! They pirated Game X! Let's start another piracy thread that will not differ in any significant way from every other piracy thread on any internet forum."

I wonder why have I been posting here anyway...

[stepurhan]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

HELL YEAH! Haven't you bought a computer in the last few years? I bought my last DELL 2 and a half years ago and I explicitly ordered it without a monitor coz I already have a monitor. Actually that is how the problem arose. I recently bought a computer online where I literally said "I want the motherboard CPU and case and that's it. I have all the other parts". So I'm using the same monitor with 2 machines (by the use of a KVM switch). The only piece of software I had to buy again was windows. Again, just coz a software downloads to a computer does not mean that you are supposed to buy multiple licences for multiple computers. Remember, this is personal use, not a corporate copy like Mattsius was suggesting. And take games for example. If I buy a PS2 game and I have 2 Playstation 2 consoles, I can play it on both. But if I buy the PC version and I have 2 computers, I have to buy two copies? Doesn't make sense to me.

That's not quite what I meant. You wouldn't expect the shop to give you a monitor for free so why ask for an OS for free? If you already had a spare copy of the OS (like you had a spare monitor) then that's a different matter entirely.

And as for the PS2 analogy. Yes, you can buy one copy of the game and play it on two separate consoles but you can't play it on BOTH CONSOLES AT THE SAME TIME. But if you install a game that doesn't need the CD to run on two computers then you can do just that. It's a rerun of your music CD analogy. The CD can be used in multiple players but it can only be used in one player at a time and the music doesn't stay in the player when you take the CD out.

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by stepurhan

That's not quite what I meant. You wouldn't expect the shop to give you a monitor for free so why ask for an OS for free?

Asking for an OS for free? I'm losing you here. I already payed for the same OS the first time. Plus your monitor analogy doesn't work, coz the bottom line, if I have a monitor, I can use it with 2 computers and not have to pay for another one. Why not the OS? It is my personal property and I am supposed to use it as many times as I want.

And just coz you don't insert the CD into the computer to make a program run does not make it any different. When you buy a music CD, you can transform the files into MP3 and you can potentially listen to them either on the MP3 player (downloaded content) or CD player (hard content) at the same time. Just coz something can potentially be saved onto a harddrive does not make it any different than another piece of software. With PS2s and XBOX'es don't you have hard drives? Can you install a whole game to the hard drive of an xbox and play it without the CD?

I think the bottom line is, Microsoft is abusing their monopoly of the OS to force people to buy multiple copies for their personal use, to make more profit. Plain and simple.

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by Erkki

Did you read my post at all?

I'll make my point simple: "OMG! They pirated Game X! Let's start another piracy thread that will not differ in any significant way from every other piracy thread on any internet forum."

I wonder why have I been posting here anyway...

I did not start this thread. I was just giving my opinion to JBRAA about his argument that "just coz a game is bad, I can download it and that's not piracy. It is not hurting anyone." It is piracy and it is illegal and it is hurting the game companies. They say so themselves. They are losing on potential customers. Dunno why you took offense in that and started attacking. Whether you yourself think it is moral or legal is a different issue, but that is why we have laws.