Has lucas gone mad?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Idiot356
I like the idea of CD-Keys, and registering your game so no one can take your key or copy.

I guess what Snoop Dog is saying is right, and of course it will strenghen the online community. But stealing games is still wrong, unless you are just so poor that you can't afford one game then maybe having a few pirated copies of games isn't wrong, but still.

But indeed, copy protection doesn't work because there are too many geeks willing to go around it, and where theres a will theres a way. So I think if you want a legit copy then CD-Keys (and regestering it) is the only way to keep people from playing it online. But even then people will figure it out, oh well. I buy my games because I feel that a developer such as Raven deserves the credit, and money they may earn from it. If they create a good enough game than I am willing to buy it.

---

I second that :D :D

I agree that trying to copy-protect CD's steers more customers away more so then it inspires people to buy there own. I absolutely refuse to buy a game I can't install on my PC, my secondary one in case someone wants to come over and play, and my brother's PC. I want to be able to buy one copy of a game and give it to my bro's for free and have us all be able to play online. They don't have money to be blowing on games and I don't think I should have to buy 3 copies.

Also, if I register my SFII CD-KEY, my brothers and I will still be able to play online together correct???? Right now we are able to so I don't want to screw that up.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Snoop Dogg



My point exactly. Nowadays they are wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars securing the game with technology that is already hacked so why waste the money and just let the hackers win? I mean they jack up prices because they have to pay so much more to protect there damn game that we know will be hacked regardless :(. I am sorry but I miss teh $30 games and dont like fronting $40 to $50 to make up for there losses trying to protect stuff. I can tell you not people who download a pirated game but actually uses it, they make less of a money loss then making the stupid protection does. So they just use piracy as an excuse and its pathetic cuz not all of us are rich asses.

---

That's just rediculous. Let's not have laws because people will and enjoy breaking them anyway. . .:rolleyes: Let's face it, if there were NO protection whatsoever, piracy would in fact increase to some degree. Software piracy is illegal and this is why money is invested to enforce the legal distribution of games and apps. Listen, if you spent countless hours programming a piece of software that you invested a good amount of your life to, you also would want to invest in software protection (which doesn't put much dent in profits) and show some dignity for you work.

-James

My favorite Game Selling Model (?) would have to Value's, creators of halflife. That is one game I actually felt good about buying because I was supporting a goood cause. You buy the base game (HL) for around $20-30, now you have the choice of going online and downloading Counter-strike, Day of Defeat, other mods, etc. for free, but if you don't have a fast internet connection (most people still use modems) then you can buy the Counter-Strike retail version and save yourself the days of downloading. I will buy Condition Zero when it comes out because not only do they make great titles, and Counter-strike is the god of videogame FPS's, but it's a business model that I really like and would love to see more companies use.

and we come back to the same argument:

are the developers really loosing money with people like me who wouldnt buy their product if i couldnt get it for free anyways?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by patssle
and we come back to the same argument:

are the developers really loosing money with people like me who wouldnt buy their product if i couldnt get it for free anyways?

---

Simply put... YES. They still have to support you. run servers so you can play the game, provide bandwidth so you can dl patches, make upgrades so it runs on your pirated copy of your os.

As a software developer, it sucks seeing your work stolen. if you want it free, build the damn thing yourself. There is no excuse for piracy. If you want good games, you should be prepared to pay the people that make them. Otherwise, they will stop making them and then where does that leave us? SOL.

"Simply put... YES. They still have to support you. run servers so you can play the game, provide bandwidth so you can dl patches, make upgrades so it runs on your pirated copy of your os."

and if you dont play multiplayer? and you use fileplanet or some place to download the patches?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by patssle
and if you dont play multiplayer? and you use fileplanet or some place to download the patches?

---

I'd have to say it's still cheating the game developers out of money. Usually my friends and I will each buy a different game and then make copies for our friends. This too is most likely wrong but for a bunch of poor college kid who want to play different games this is the only solution that we have right now, other than maybe going outside.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr Cherry

I'd have to say it's still cheating the game developers out of money. Usually my friends and I will each buy a different game and then make copies for our friends. This too is most likely wrong but for a bunch of poor college kid who want to play different games this is the only solution that we have right now, other than maybe going outside.

---

Oh, the irony of it all...

yet how much pro$it do they make?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by patssle
"Simply put... YES. They still have to support you. run servers so you can play the game, provide bandwidth so you can dl patches, make upgrades so it runs on your pirated copy of your os."

and if you dont play multiplayer? and you use fileplanet or some place to download the patches?

---

LOL, right, you've never played multiplayer on one of those games, heh. :rolleyes:

even if you do play multiplayer...dosnt mean it gets the list off their server. example: rouge spear is played on MSN zone.

but..HOW do they loose money if i wouldnt buy it anyways? the fact is...they dont loose money.

TANSTAAFL my friend. YOU are trying to get something for nothing. no matter what, someone somewhere has to pay. If you would never buy it, then you shouldnt play it. They loose money on you because you are using their product and not paying them for the use. That is a loss in cash right out of their pockets. What if everyone took your approach... say 500,000 people decided to play the game without paying. They would loose 500,000 units of profit. Its basic economics. You used the goods, but dudnt pay the fee.

"TANSTAAFL"

some new language im not familiar with?

we arnt discussing if its right or wrong to use illegal copies...we all know the answer to that...and its not worth discussing. what im asking you is: do they loose money even if you wouldnt buy it if you couldnt download it?

And I am saying YES. TANSTAAFL There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. it's a basic economics principle. You are trying to get something for free and I am telling you that that is impossible. By using the product, you agree to pay the people that built it. By not paying you are taking money from them. That is a real loss. Think of it like this. If you DID pay, would they have more money? Yes. So if you dont pay, they naturally have LESS money.

A company looses money when they make a product they can't sell. Directly they won't loose money from you if you weren't going to buy it anyways, but for every copy that they don't sell they loose money. Of course if they are using multiplayer servers then they have to pay for the extra bandwidth that you use up. I don't use any pirated games on the web. But then I'm using AOL right now at home so I don't play any games on the web. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by krack_it_up
And I am saying YES. TANSTAAFL There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. it's a basic economics principle. You are trying to get something for free and I am telling you that that is impossible. By using the product, you agree to pay the people that built it. By not paying you are taking money from them. That is a real loss. Think of it like this. If you DID pay, would they have more money? Yes. So if you dont pay, they naturally have LESS money.

---

i don't understand your logic. i believe passel's argument is that say if someone were to pirate a piece of software that he/she was not going to buy anyway, i see two possibilities:

a) the person pirates it, developer gets $0 dollar
b) the person does not pirate it, developer gets $0 dollar

where's the loss?

thank you...that sums it up perfectly

Quote:

---

Originally posted by krack_it_up
TANSTAAFL There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

---

A couple of things...

#1. Ain't is not a word.
#2. If it were, your sentence would be a double negative, therefore meaning There IS such a thing as a free lunch. :p
#3. If you Pirate games, the developers are losing POTENTIAL money, not actual money...

"the developers are losing POTENTIAL money"

but if you wouldnt ever buy it....then they would NEVER make money...so its not even potential.

You all need to take Econ 101.

Quote:

---

#1. Ain't is not a word.

---

Guess THIS is an imaginary entry then... :rolleyes:

No, it isnt potential money... it is real money. Potential money would be if you used the demo, didnt like it so didnt buy it. there they lost the potential of you buying the product.

You are using the actual product. You agreed when you installed the product that you had legally purchased it. They loose money just as plainly as if you had walked into the software store and stolen it off the shelf. You would become VERY aware of how much money they are loosing by your actions if they took you to cort and made you pay for the use. They legally could MAKE you pay for it because legally you OWE them for the use. You owe them. If they dont recieve what you owe... they are out of money they should have. That is a loss.

cant loose anything if it will never happen

*forget it these dicussions are pointless*

we arnt talking about that because the answer is obvious...

*deleted*