- Joined
- April 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,459
There is.There is no we.
If you don't feel you're a part of audience exposed to different scam attempts, that doesn't mean such audience doesn't exist.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,459
There is.There is no we.
The report continues: 'This positive effect of illegal downloads and streams on the sales of games may be explained by the industry being successful in converting illegal users to paying users. Tactics used by the industry include, for example, offering gameplay with extra bonuses or extra levels if consumers pay.'"
So the industry is fighting piracy with micro-transactions and in game purchases and it is working?
So now we know who to blame for those .
So the industry is fighting piracy with micro-transactions and in game purchases and it is working?
So now we know who to blame for those……….
I guess that the way of thinking is this ? - That the hoinest people buy anyway and that those who want to pirate pirate anyway ?
There is a saying I have read somewhere before, "Laws keep honest people honest."
Also, piracy is super evil, but this is just good business:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthe...s-a-disgusting-sense-of-deja-vu/#4bd650ae71f5
Isn't this actually the other side of the coin ?
There is.
If you don't feel you're a part of audience exposed to different scam attempts, that doesn't mean such audience doesn't exist.
Actually the article says that piracy is not hurting, and is probably helping, the industry. Hence there is no financial reason for the industry to be "fighting piracy."
Quite obviously some members of the industry are just increasing profit margins and lining their own pockets every way they can, including "with micro-transactions and in game purchases."
__
I think GG is worried we will pirate her game. Although if any of us are still alive or gaming in 2060 when she releases it remains to be seen.
Yes, because the industry introduced micro-transactions and in game purchases to counter the piracy? Isn't that what it said? from the quote I posted it sounds like so.
Having a hard time following your 'logic'. Nothing in the OP article or the 300+ page EU Commission report ever mentioned microtransactions or in-game purchases, The para you quoted cited the positive effect of piracy on "sales of games". Obviously game sales are different than microtransactions and in-game purchases.
The quote said the positive effect on "sales of games" might be due to industry success "in converting illegal users to paying users". Since the Commission specifically cited "sales of games", it's apparent that they meant converting game users not paying for the game ("illegal users") to game owners ("paying users").
The quote continued, "Tactics used by the industry include, for example, offering gameplay with extra bonuses or extra levels if consumers pay." Again, in the actual context of the quote, "consumers [who] pay" was referencing "paying users" from the prior sentence, i.e., game purchasers. The Commission was saying that the industry rewarded game purchasers with bonuses or extra levels.
Your speculation that illegal users, who wouldn't spend money on the game in the first instance, subsequently spent money to became game owners so they could spend even more money on microtransactions and in-game purchases ('pay to pay more') requires a leap of logic that isn't supported by the EU Commission's report, or by logic itself. Microtransactions and in-game purchases can also be pirated, same as the game, with or without game ownership.
At any rate your 'pay to pay more' scheme certainly wasn't proposed by the EU Commission.
__
I don't know that much about pirates, but as far as I understand they don't bother to crack everything, like a pair of new pants or extra levels, as the amount of work required is not worth it for the pay-off it gives them. So those are added after the release sometimes for free ( TW3 except the add-on ) or sometimes ( more often ) for a cost Deus Ex Microtransaction edition. But it is specifically mentioned in the article that means such as these are taken to combat privacy by the companies and that they think it works. Whatever the game companies are right or not in their analysis we cannot know. Unless they start releasing full games on day one again instead, and sales would decrease. Then another such a study is initiated.
Deus Ex: Mankind Divided microtransactions were present at game release (but not in pre-release copies given to game reviewers). The DX items available via mt's and in-game purchases were also rapidly made available for free on the web via game "trainers", etc. DX:MD sales were miserable and the series abandoned by Square for the foreseeable future. The poor sales were blamed by many, on the mts and in-game purchases added to the game.
TW3 incentives OTOH are freely given to game owners, and are the type of rewards that are thought to have a positive effect on game sales. CDPR execs have noted that these incentives can also be pirated but nevertheless are thought to have a positive effect on goodwill between gamers and CDPR, thereby promoting game sales. CDPR's TW3 achieved massive game sales without game piracy protection.
At any rate the EU Commission report never mentioned mts or in-game purchases; makes sense taken at face value; and certainly doesn't itself propose or suggest your 'pay to pay and pay more' scheme.
__
I am confused how do you mean "offering gameplay with extra bonuses or extra levels if consumers pay.'", if it is not done by DLC or micro-transactions, how do you do this in that case?
You mean to say that if for example a new hairstyle for Geralt is added after the game is released for free, instead of included with the initial game, the people who pirated TW3 will buy it instead because of that?
Here's how Marcin Iwiński, co-founder of GOG and development studio CD Projekt Red, explained it:
We released [The Witcher 3] without any copy protection. So, on day one, you could download the game from GOG, and give it to a friend (enemy as well)…and still we sold near to 10 million units across all 3 platforms. But the piracy factor was irrelevant, because we cannot force people to buy things. We can only convince them to do it. We totally believe in the carrot, not in the stick…I’ve seen many times, comments [that say] ‘Hey, I couldn’t afford the game when it was full price, but these guys are so fair, and they were never against us. They were always trying to do good, add a lot of value, give free DLC, give free content, that I bought the game from them when it was mid-price.'
…We don’t like when people steal our product, but we are not going to chase them and put them in prison. But we’ll think hard what to make to convince them. And uh, convince them in a very positive way, so that they’ll buy the product next time, they’ll be happy with our game, and they’ll tell their friends not to pirate it.
And funnily enough, the more we proceed this way, the more we see them again on forums and Reddit and whatnot, we see that there is a guy saying ‘hey where can I download Witcher 3: Wild Hunt from?’ And then there is 10 people bashing them, ‘Oh you fucko, do not download the game. These guys are fair, they’re the only fair guys in the industry. You should go and buy it.’
And so, I’m not sure if this guy will buy it or find this link, but still, it’s a very positive attitude and it’s excellent word of mouth.
__
That is actually an excellent way of thinking. Perhaps if other companies acted in that way as well piracy would indeed be less.
Unfortunately, CDPR is almost alone in acting like that, and I don't think they only refer to them in the report.
Not terribly relevant to the topic but still interesting. Or maybe it is relevant? Online games are far harder to pirate than single player.In the games industry the greatest proportion of revenues is generated by physical console games but online games will overtake this segment in a matter of a few years if current trends continue.
Now that's really strange. One big thing this isn't saying is WHEN they pay. Pirating a $60 game then paying $10 for it years later would still count as a sale. But what the Hades is that last sentence!? Do they mean DLC? Are people actually buying the main game when DLC shows up because they would rather not get the pirated version of the DLC? Or perhaps its something with console/phone pirating??For games, the estimated effect of illegal online transactions on sales is positive – implying that illegal consumption leads to increased legal consumption. This positive effect of illegal downloads and streams on the sales of games may be explained by the industry being successful in converting illegal users to paying users. Tactics used by the industry include, for example, offering gameplay with extra bonuses or extra levels if consumers pay.