Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

PC has Piracy Rate of 93-95%

135

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭folan


    If you call a plumber or locksmith or some other tradesman for a job, they do it and you don't pay, what's that called? If you are brought to court and made to pay, what are you guilty of? Fraud?
    thats where this "piracy is not theft because you dont lose anything physical" (made up quote but reflects some comments made around this in here) just falls down. its wrong, plane and simple.

    another dreadful comment i read once was that its not theft because, when you steal a toaster, the toaster is gone, but software isnt. But to make that a more physical example, whats actually happening is someone has invented the toaster and is trying to sell it to make a living and a profit for themselves, and you are copying the design and giving it out for free.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    Azza wrote: »
    The pirates don't need incentives to pirates game. They will do in droves with or without DRM.

    No doubt there, but it's often just less hassle to use a pirated Ubisoft game...so even paying customers could & do find themselves pondering whether to use a cracked version or not.

    Silent Hunter 5 was a farce with its 'always on' server authentication even for offline play. Often if the net was down or even the server itself, I couldn't play the game I purchased. Lets just say I found other ways to play it, despite having a retail disc sitting in my pc drive. Who's to say a chunk of that percentage didn't do the same thing, racking up the statistics?

    So no, I don't believe the numbers are that high in spite of the DRM, the DRM has had an influence on the numbers of you ask me


  • Moderators Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭Azza


    Its possible you are right but Ubi are claiming otherwise.

    I don't agree with always online DRM, and have avoiding buying games with that DRM system unless the system has been removed (which is common afgter a few months) or the game is been sold extremely cheaply.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    Azza wrote: »
    Its possible you are right but Ubi are claiming otherwise.

    I'm sure they are, but I can only speak from my own personal experience.
    I don't agree with always online DRM, and have avoiding buying games with that DRM system unless the system has been removed (which is common afgter a few months) or the game is been sold extremely cheaply.

    Agreed too, the notion of it even bothers me.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,992 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    Reekwind wrote: »
    Unless of course you consider theft to be taking something from someone else and thus depriving them of its use. If someone downloads a game then the developer has lost not one cent from this action


    That is a very childish viewpoint.

    This fucking attitude needs to die in a fire.

    If you want something, pay for it.
    Otherwise back to the kids table with you and maybe next year you can come hang out with the adults.


    Yup.

    I don't play on the PC but I have downloaded TV shows, movies etc in the past so I can't claim innocence but at least I am not delusional about it.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,909 ✭✭✭SeantheMan


    folan wrote: »
    thats where this "piracy is not theft because you dont lose anything physical" (made up quote but reflects some comments made around this in here) just falls down. its wrong, plane and simple.

    another dreadful comment i read once was that its not theft because, when you steal a toaster, the toaster is gone, but software isnt. But to make that a more physical example, whats actually happening is someone has invented the toaster and is trying to sell it to make a living and a profit for themselves, and you are copying the design and giving it out for free.

    Like the below ?
    Reekwind wrote: »

    If you steal car then the owner has no car. If you steal some Nikes then the shop is missing one pair of Nikes. If you pirate a game... well, nothing changes


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,026 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    4comic2-555.png


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,084 ✭✭✭✭Kirby


    Just like the term troll being bandied about by people when they disagree, the "strawman" label has become ridiculous itself....almost a parody of itself.

    Use analogies or metaphor's in a discussion on the internet? You are creating a strawman argument! :p It's ridiculous.

    On the subject of piracy itself, it's been discussed to death at this stage so I can't see the use in yet another thread debating it. Lets just try and stick to the original Ubisoft post if we can.

    While PC Piracy is no doubt rampant, personally I find the 95% statistic completely ridiculous and would love to know exactly how they came to these figures. I mean there really is no way to know that kind of information. They can't monitor the whole internet. Everything is just guesswork and extrapolation. Pure conjecture. And I don't believe in that.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,026 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    Kirby wrote: »
    Just like the term troll being bandied about by people when they disagree, the "strawman" label has become ridiculous itself....almost a parody of itself.

    Use analogies or metaphor's in a discussion on the internet? You are creating a strawman argument! :p It's ridiculous.

    The problem is constantly bringing the conversation back to what constitutes / defines 'theft' is tiring, and distorting the argument (which, you're completely right, has been done to death).

    Also, dinosaur comics are funny.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭ gizmo


    Kirby wrote: »
    On the subject of piracy itself, it's been discussed to death at this stage so I can't see the use in yet another thread debating it. Lets just try and stick to the original Ubisoft post if we can.

    While PC Piracy is no doubt rampant, personally I find the 95% statistic completely ridiculous and would love to know exactly how they came to these figures. I mean there really is no way to know that kind of information. They can't monitor the whole internet. Everything is just guesswork and extrapolation. Pure conjecture. And I don't believe in that.
    Given the kind of games they make, I'd wager it's quite simple.

    Take the number of games sold.
    Look at a variety of public torrent trackers out there and add up the seeders.
    Calculate piracy figures based on these.

    Doing it like that, it's pretty easy to see where they can get figures like that. Take Crysis 2 for instance, it was downloaded 3.92m times on the PC alone by the end of 2011 according to the Torrentfreak stats. However, within 4 months of release it had just broken 3m copies sold worldwide across all platforms. Doesn't make for particularly pretty reading so it's not particularly surprising when you see Crytek talking about moving in the F2P direction for future titles.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,909 ✭✭✭SeantheMan


    I actually dont understand the statement

    Does he mean to say that
    -Every PC user pirates 95% of their games ?
    -95% "have" pirated at one time or another ?

    A quick sample test could be easily taken here, and totally disprove the figure.
    I would imagine everyone here has pirated at least 1 game in their lives.
    But I doubt anyone here has a library that consists of more than 50% pirated games even.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,026 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    It is fairly easy to compare data on downloads vs sales.

    For example, compare VGChartz to torrent charts (public, excluding that fact there's likely to be more on private sites). Call of Duty MW3 PC sales are 1.47 million. Tracked torrents are 3.65 million. That's not 93-95%, but it is a hugely significant 70%. The Xbox figures for the same title are 14.39 million (bought) vs 830,000 (downloaded). Don't want to turn this into a console vs PC argument (the only thing more infuriating than piracy debates :p), but you can easily see why publishers are uncertain and critical of the PC market. And these aren't all titles with restrictive DRM - always a bit disappointed when I hear the World of Goo figures when 2D Boy went to so much effort to be as user friendly as reasonably possible (short of including instructions of how to upload and seed on P2P networks).

    Ubisoft may be using a bit of creative hyperbole, but it - if we're using figures easily available - isn't a huge exaggeration by any stretch.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,472 ✭✭✭✭Varik


    It is fairly easy to compare data on downloads vs sales.

    For example, compare VGChartz to torrent charts (public, excluding that fact there's likely to be more on private sites). Call of Duty MW3 PC sales are 1.47 million. Tracked torrents are 3.65 million. That's not 93-95%, but it is a hugely significant 70%. The Xbox figures for the same title are 14.39 million (bought) vs 830,000 (downloaded). Don't want to turn this into a console vs PC argument (the only thing more infuriating than piracy debates :p), but you can easily see why publishers are uncertain and critical of the PC market. And these aren't all titles with restrictive DRM - always a bit disappointed when I hear the World of Goo figures when 2D Boy went to so much effort to be as user friendly as reasonably possible (short of including instructions of how to upload and seed on P2P networks).

    Ubisoft may be using a bit of creative hyperbole, but it - if we're using figures easily available - isn't a huge exaggeration by any stretch.

    COD would not be a good game to compare Ubisoft's figures to, as most COD players are into the multiplayer more so than the single player which many of Ubisoft's games are more focused on.

    More developers are adding multiplayer to their games and it's not hard to think why, yes they prevent people trading games in early on but it also is something that the pirated copy can't do ( properly).


  • Moderators Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭Azza


    If DRM wasn't in some way effective in reducing piracy or was actually counter productive and increased piracy, surely Ubisoft and other companies would not use it. Developers/publishers are often accussed of using DRM because they are greedy so surely they would not use DRM if it increased piracy..


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭folan


    SeantheMan wrote: »
    Like the below ?

    exactly. nothing changes, except you have now aquired something that has cost a developer time and effort, which they were expecting to be reimbursed for. how many pirates would be happy working for free?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    Azza wrote: »
    If DRM wasn't in some way effective in reducing piracy or was actually counter productive and increased piracy, surely Ubisoft and other companies would not use it. Developers/publishers are often accussed of using DRM because they are greedy so surely they would not use DRM if it increased piracy..

    All DRM is in this instance, is tried & failed over the top security tactics. They remain in place for the legitimate user, but are very quickly dispensed with by crackers. By the time a certain method is cracked, Ubisoft will have already invested in it & used it.

    No DRM to my knowledge, the field of pc game piracy, is actually effective {certainly for offline use anyway}. One might be released tomorrow that'll work for a time, but it'll be cracked before long. Certain people just like a challenge, & often have no interest in playing said game...the challenge of defeating a new DRM scheme is the fun itself


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭ gizmo


    Azza wrote: »
    If DRM wasn't in some way effective in reducing piracy or was actually counter productive and increased piracy, surely Ubisoft and other companies would not use it. Developers/publishers are often accussed of using DRM because they are greedy so surely they would not use DRM if it increased piracy..
    Yes and no. In the case of Ubisoft, they've actually built an infrastructure to support their DRM which would be far from cheap. They have said since then that they've noticed a drop in piracy figures but since they haven't released actual before and after figures of either these figures or their sales for the PC versions (to the best of my knowledge) it's hard to know if they're being entirely truthful.

    However, DRM can also be seen as a way to placate investors so, as with what happened in the case of Bioshock, if they can prevent the game being released in the two weeks after release, they'll see it as a victory.


  • Moderators Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭Azza


    Its true that the vast majortiy of DRM is cracked within in a short peroid of time (I think the exception was starforce which took a year or so). I don't think publisher ever said they expect to totally stop piracy with DRM but just reduce it. Even a small percentage conversion of pirates to legit costumers could see a signifcant increase inprofits.

    Say a game is pirated 1 million times, getting just 1% of the pirates to buy the game would an addtionally 10,000 copeies sold. Say at at average cost of19.99, that would be a additional 200,000 euro revenue.

    Of course say DRM does stop someone from pirating it a game, it doesn't mean they will then buy it. They may just skip it altogether. But PC piracy is so huge even a small conversion of pirates could be worth quite a bit of money to developers and publishers leaving on the breadline.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    Azza wrote: »
    Its true that the vast majortiy of DRM is cracked within in a short peroid of time (I think the exception was starforce which took a year or so). I don't think publisher ever said they expect to totally stop piracy with DRM but just reduce it. Even a small percentage conversion of pirates to legit costumers could see a signifcant increase inprofits.

    Say a game is pirated 1 million times, getting just 1% of the pirates to buy the game would an addtionally 10,000 copeies sold. Say at at average cost of19.99, that would be a additional 200,000 euro revenue.

    Of course say DRM does stop someone from pirating it a game, it doesn't mean they will then buy it. They may just skip it altogether. But PC piracy is so huge even a small conversion of pirates could be worth quite a bit of money to developers and publishers leaving on the breadline.

    I'd argue as to whether it has any effectivenss at all still. If someone downloads & installs a pirated game, going the final step & using a crack is every bit as easy as it always was. Lets not be under any illusions here, it's incredibly easy to do & if you have the know-how to install a game, using the crack will not be any more challenging.

    As Gizmo mentioned, it prob has more to do with investors etc than actually having any real world effect


  • Moderators Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭Azza


    True but if a DRM system can delay the ability to pirate a game before release and for a few days to possible a week or two weeks after its release is probably achieved whats expected of it.

    Zero day piracy is often claimed to be the most damaging form of piracy (piracy before release, or be released in one territory first and then cracked and available for piracy world wide).

    One of the common reasons people say they pirate games is because they couldn't get it legally as it wasn't released in there area and they didn't want to wait for the offical release date.

    So DRM thats effective in stopping or delaying that type of piracy when a game is released (the time when a game would sell the most) are possibly all a developer/publisher at this stage expects .


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    Azza wrote: »
    True but if a DRM system can delay the ability to pirate a game before release and for a few days to possible a week or two weeks after its release is probably achieved whats expected of it.

    Zero day piracy is often claimed to be the most damaging form of piracy (piracy before release, or be released in one territory first and then cracked and available for piracy world wide).

    One of the common reasons people say they pirate games is because they couldn't get it legally as it wasn't released in there area and they didn't want to wait for the offical release date.

    So DRM thats effective in stopping or delaying that type of piracy when a game is released (the time when a game would sell the most) are possibly all a developer/publisher at this stage expects .

    Very true, if anything it delays the inevitable rather than stopping it.


  • Moderators Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭Azza


    A delay could possibly result in a conversion to sale .


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    Azza wrote: »
    A delay could possibly result in a conversion to sale .

    The delays are nowhere near the effective, & if they are, the conversion rate wouldn't justify the DRM investment costs as the rate would be tiny.


  • Moderators Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭Azza


    How can you know that, unless you have actual figures to back that claim up its pure speculation.

    We don't know much a DRM system costs to implement. Most are developed by a third party, a system a publisher would simply hire out and not actually have to develop.

    We don't know how effective it is. But it seems highly unlikely a games publisher would use it if it didn't in the end make them money. These systems have been in place for years so there bound to have data on it. If wasn't in some way effective, they wouldn't use it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    Azza wrote: »
    How can you know that, unless you have actual figures to back that claim up its pure speculation.

    I'd say its fairly safe to speculate that the costs/investment in pc game DRM outweighs any potential conversion earnings that such a scheme may earn. Companies are turning to FTP, doesn't that tell you anything?
    We don't know much a DRM system costs to implement. Most are developed by a third party, a system a publisher would simply hire out and not actually have to develop.

    Whatever development costs there are, they're passed on to whoever uses the system. These things arn't made for fun, they're an investment. Again, I'd say its very safe to speculate that whatever costs are involved in implementing a DRM scheme, the savings made by them do not pay dividends. How could they if the piracy rate is so high?
    We don't know how effective it is. But it seems highly unlikely a games publisher would use it if it didn't in the end make them money. These systems have been in place for years so there bound to have data on it. If wasn't in some way effective, they wouldn't use it.

    Don't underestimate the power of sh1te talk at board meetings. Protection makes investors happy, if it works or not.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,184 ✭✭✭marshbaboon


    Oh Ubisoft, you make me laugh so. I wouldn't even waste my bandwidth to download one of your titles.


  • Moderators Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭Azza


    EnterNow wrote:
    I'd say its fairly safe to speculate that the costs/investment in pc game DRM outweighs any potential conversion earnings that such a scheme may earn. Companies are turning to FTP, doesn't that tell you anything?

    Free to play has generally has lower development costs than full retail games. Thats one reason its becoming popular.
    Enternow wrote:
    Whatever development costs there are, they're passed on to whoever uses the system. These things arn't made for fun, they're an investment. Again, I'd say its very safe to speculate that whatever costs are involved in implementing a DRM scheme, the savings made by them do not pay dividends. How could they if the piracy rate is so high?

    Yes they are passed on to whoever uses the system. But thats going to be multipal companies, its not one single game developer or publisher incurring the cost nor is it going to be just game developers, publisher using it but other companies in the software market. Its going be alot less to license the system than to develop it.
    EnterNow wrote:
    Don't underestimate the power of sh1te talk at board meetings. Protection makes investors happy, if it works or not.

    Don't underestimate the power of the bottom line when it comes to board meetings. Money makes investors happy above all else.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    DRM is not effective, there is currently not a single pc game that couldn't be pirated/downloaded today & played free.

    DRM may be somewhat effective in delaying piracy, but these delays are usually measured in hours/weeks/days.

    Personally, its a waste of time that is a nuisance to legitimate gamers. It's rarely, if ever, a nuisance to people who pirate games.

    All facts. If DRM earns money for companies who use it, I don't see how it could possibly be more than what it costs to implement in the first place unless its ridiculously cheap


  • Moderators Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭Azza


    EnterNow wrote:
    DRM is not effective, there is currently not a single pc game that couldn't be pirated/downloaded today & played free.

    Diablo 3.
    EnterNow wrote:
    DRM may be somewhat effective in delaying piracy, but these delays are usually measured in hours/weeks/days.

    Splinter Cell Chaos Theory was uncracked for 424 days.
    Enter Now wrote:
    Personally, its a waste of time that is a nuisance to legitimate gamers. It's rarely, if ever, a nuisance to people who pirate games.

    All facts. If DRM earns money for companies who use it, I don't see where.

    There not all facts, they are your opinion. You don't know how companies measure the effectiveness of DRM. They could consider a delay of cracking of one of their games by a week a success. Yes games will still be cracked and its just a matter of time and then pirating will be easy for everyone else once thats done. But in those first few days after release a pirate may say "to hell with waiting I'm just going buy the game" if he/she can't pirate it due to the game being unplayable due to DRM. Piracy rates on PC are so high that just a small % of convertin pirates to buyers could mean a significant increase in revenue.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    Azza wrote: »
    Diablo 3.

    I found a crack that includes a sever emulator by searching just there :confused:
    Splinter Cell Chaos Theory was uncracked for 424 days.

    I said usually
    There not all facts, they are your opinion.

    Oh I'm more than happy to be proven wrong, but again is there a single case of DRM stopping piracy. And again, releases are usually cracked very very quickly. It's kinda more than just my opinion, the statistics are out there.
    But in those first few days after release a pirate may say "to hell with waiting I'm just going buy the game" if he/she can't pirate it due to the game being unplayable due to DRM. Piracy rates on PC are so high that just a small % of convertin pirates to buyers could mean a significant increase in revenue.

    I already agreed with that, I just don't think it happens that often. Not often enough to warrant the existence of DRM & the headaches it causes for legitimate gamers


Advertisement