(November 14, 2014 at 10:18 am)alpha male Wrote: They say they expected it to happen, so yes, they were using it as shareware, it just didn't work out as they expected.
Game of Thrones creators expected to get pirated online, does that mean they created the series as shareware?
Ofcourse not, idiot. If it was shareware they wouldn't have released two versions, one with DRM and one without.
Quote:I already gave you the account of my friend. Don't you believe it? I'm not making it up. Some people who can afford to pay for something will illegally take it for free if they think they can get away with it. I'm surprised that this concept is controversial in the slightest.
That doesn't mean piracy equals lost sales. There could be an equal number who end up buying the product after pirating resulting in "gained sales". Just because you've told me about one instance where it didn't happen, doesn't mean shit in the grand scheme of things, nor does it prove anything.
So again, prove it (pro-tip, you can't, it's conjecture).
(November 14, 2014 at 10:58 am)FifthElement Wrote: There is plenty of people who can actually afford to buy stuff, they just choose to get it for free just because they can.
I know few who earn $100000 per year and they are still doing it ...
People who are doing that are the ones who are defending it.
Does it make a difference though? The multimillion dollar corporations aren't losing anything, and even if they are, it's negligible. At the very least there's not enough evidence to be shown it has affected the successes of games that deserve to be successful.
Quote:"I'm all for science, but if contradicts what I believe in, I'll call it pseudoscience ..."
They have no proof
What's this supposed to be parodying? Yourself? You're the one ignoring all evidence contrary to your own opinion. You're the one who won't even give the articles or other points I've made any actual thought. At this point I don't actually care what responses you give unless you address my previous points, constantly going "piracy is stealing and bad mmmmkay" which is pretty much all anyone else here in this discussion has really given is getting kinda boring.
Quote:Why would companies (who can afford it) invest money in protection systems if online sharing is "harmless" ??? Just for the hell of it ?
Argument from ignorance much?
(November 14, 2014 at 11:32 am)alpha male Wrote: If those companies linked to really believe that no harm is done, they should put up their games for free download, and give a link for people to pay if they like it. That way people get a copy with the most recent updates, and without the risk of added viruses. And everyone who would have bought it will pay their 50 bucks just the same...right???
Now you really are being silly.
Obviously this would result in lost sales, because they wouldn't be making sales at all. They'd be relying on donations. Totally different scenario and a frankly, ridiculous comparison.
But it is funny you bring it up.
Ever heard of humble bundle? Yeah, maybe you should look into that.
