Modding and Homebrew is not neccesarily illegal, but Software Piracy is.

[velcrozombie1]

@Atarifever

Fair enough. I do think you're right; its just that I feel very strongly that if
someone pays for a game, they should have access to the best possible
version of that game (granted, not all DRM is as crippling as some of the
Ubisoft stuff). That person could still write a letter to the company (I've
heard repeatedly that a physical letter is way more effective than an
email) telling them what they did and why. Even better would be a letter
explaining that they love the series and badly want to play the game, but
they refuse to financially support a DRM copy and are thus boycotting the
game on principle.

Having said all that, I use Steam despite it technically being a form of DRM.
I'm just giving possible scenarios and forms of action.

[weallmissedme1]

Edward, piracy hurts the people who develop software. Imagine you just spent months, if not years on a very popular piece of software, and people pirate the hell out of it. Your work just went to waste, you're not getting paid as much as you could have been, and you won't want to make any more software. Now, Open and Closed source OS's/Systems can cause a lot of confusion. So I'll simplify it greatly. I'm both a Windows and PinguyOS user. Windows 7 is completely closed off, if I make changes to the operating system and redistribute it, Micro$oft will sue the pants off me. PinguyOS is a Linux distribution, if I change it around, I'm allowed to redistribute it. Heck, PinguyOS is a heavily modified Ubuntu. Why can I do this? Because Linux is open. Most Linux software can be changed/distributed because of the fact it is Open Source, and there are few exceptions. That I don't mind, because if you get sent a piece of software that is open source, you're allowed. Closed Source software is different. Console games CAN NOT be open source. The disks are protected, so they don't want you changing, or "sharing" anything.

Basically, in a nutshell, developers don't want you stealing it, unless they make it open source, which isn't stealing.

[Edward1]

Atari, I used an example of someone behind two months on rent to show even a small amount of money can be an issue. Even someone like that shouldn't be spending $3 on a game, if they can bootleg it.  And there are many people like that. Several of them are in my family.

I put this from the perspective of a game maker, because I had to think about it. If I were a game maker, and someone pirated my game, who obviously needs to pay the bills instead, would I be offended?  No, I'd be happy they want to play my game, and encourage them to pay their bills instead.

I believe in utilitarian ethics, aka "what are the results of your actions."  If you are buying games on gog.com instead of paying the rent you are behind on what is the result? You get evicted, which costs society huge. I know you're saying don't buy games.  However, I don't believe in an afterlife. I think this is the only life you get. You might as well have as much enjoyment as possible, if its not harming anyone. There is no reason to put artificial moral limits on yourself, when the action you take doesn't harm anyone.  I know very few people agree with the philosophy, but I've always put "what harms someone" over "what is legal or illegal."  Keep in mind there are millions of legitimately disabled people who cannot work under any condition.  They tend to make about 700 bucks a month in SSI. Why should they even be buying games?  And they are permentally disabled, which means they will never work and always be in poverty.  Who is harmed when they pirate games?  Besides, their lives are already miserable enough.  There is no way anyone can convince me that people in these conditions who pirates games are harming the game developers.  And I don't see why they need to have the artificial moral limits on themselves when no real harm is involved.  And this is not an extreme outlier. There are millions of people in this situation.

Do I buy games?  I've bought hundreds of games in my lifetime.  I have a little bit more money than the people I described above, but not much, so i can buy games.  Have I pirated games in my life?  Absolutely.  Usually much older games with emulators, especially for rare imports, fan translations,  or arcade games with MAME.  DO I feel guilty?   No.  With the amount of games I have bought, I'm a huge net gain for the video game industry. If someone has a problem with that, then they have a problem.


  You may notice all my arguments are for people without money (emulators excluded).  Obviously anyone making 6 figures obviously has the money to buy games and should.  However, I changing argument here.  If someone is nearly destitute and pirates a game, especially if they are in no condition to work, what harm does pirating a game cause?

[ActRaiser1]

Pirates & Used Games are the bane of gaming :

-They are nothing more then petty thieves, however the choose to rationalize.
-They give game makers excuses and incentive to load games with consumer harmful DRM
-They have greatly contributed to the premature decline of several game consoles, including the Wii.
- They contribute to the regrettable decline of physical media
- They do not compensate game makers, thus hamstringing game development
- They contribute to the general decline of the game industry, leaving less studios, less games, and less variety.

Do not pirate & buy used games. You are ruining the industry. If you expect to be fairly treated by game companies, and have your rights fairly represented and lived up to, then YOU must do the SAME.

Fixed that.  The arguments seem to be the same.

For the record, I don't pirate or buy used games.  Does that make me holier than thou?  Or just a blowhard?  I want to give all my money to Nintendo, as really, they know best.  I mean other companies require their download games to offer trials on all download games.  Nintendo lets it up to the developer to decide.  One is more consumer friendly than the other; but, hey, Nintendo knows best.

Now that I'm done teasing.  Most of us have the actual cartridge on a shelf somewhere.  It makes no difference how I play it.  The whole Wii U back to Wii thing is a silly discussion.  When one owns a physical copy you can legally play it on whatever will support it.  Nintendo's EULA ignores that bit of detail.  They only remove it from the Wii in the hopes of gaining future possible revenue from someone else if you were to resell your Wii console.  Sour grapes and greedy, but, hey, it's a business and that's their job to make money.

[weallmissedme1]

WOA WOA WOA, sorry Segatorious, you were on a good track at first, but don't by used games!?!?! That's technically still paying for them and helping the economy. Yeah, now I can't say I agree with you.

[Atarifever1]

A couple things I guess.

David: I gave a lot of suggestions for free games.  There are more free games made every year than there are probably pay games each generation.  A very active gamer can play tons and tons of games, for free, legally, for the rest of time.  If your ethic is really "an' harm none, do as thou wilt," you should consider relative chances of hurting someone.  A free game hurts no one.  It is meant to be free, that is what the creator expects, and what they worked for.  Enough people deciding to pirate a game, for whatever reason, increases DRM that annoys paying customers, and a ton of piracy could even kill a studio or console, putting a large number of people out of work, and into the very poverty you are talking about.  If it's a 1% chance of hurting a bunch of people vs. a 0% chance, shouldn't you be encouraging people to go for the zero?  Both have the same outcome: playing games.  Again, there are a lot of free games.  A LOT.

As for the side-argument here about used games, piracy and used games are nowhere near the same thing, and it's easy enough to dismiss the notion they are.  If Nintendo sells 1 million copies of NSMB Wii U, they have at any one point, a maximum 1 million old copies vying for the same dollars as new copies.  If people download it illegally, they have infinity copies vying for the same dollars.  Not just that, but the used copies are used and still cost a bunch of dollars, so they are less appealing.  The infinity rip-off copies cost zero dollars.  So, you have 1 million of something at $40 to compete with vs. infinity of that thing that cost nothing.  You cannot beat infinity for free.  That is too good a deal.  

Not only  that, but what do most used game sales lead to?  More new game sales with the money the person earns.  So if you sell Super Mario Wii U to EBGames and then buy Pikmin 3 with some of the money, Nintendo gets $60 for the Mario game, then loses $45 when it sells again, but gets another $60 for Pikmin from you.  That leaves them up $75, and your collection up one game (if you want it again, you have to buy it again).  When you download those two games it leaves Nintendo up $0.00 and you up two games.  You get all the benefit, and they get nothing at all.    

Also, I forget who it was I saw an interview with who said publishers are well aware people hate DRM and that pirates will beat DRM and get the game widely distributed in, like, a week.  He said that week or so is what they aim for, as that's a week of huge sales if the game takes off.  Similarly, you have to assume a physical copy will take someone a week or a month to beat.  That means it's not on shelves to compete during the most important "make or break" period.  

Do not confuse used with stolen.  It's like saying there's no difference buying a TV from Goodwill and buying one from the trunk of some guy's car.  

[ActRaiser1]

Do not confuse used with stolen.  It's like saying there's no difference buying a TV from Goodwill and buying one from the trunk of some guy's car.  

Yes, but let's consider Nintendo in this, really, that's how this all got started.  In both cases, "Nintendo" lost out on a sale and revenue.  So, is it fair that someone gets to enjoy Mario 42, not once, but twice without giving Nintendo's tithe?  

<sarcasm>

[HardcoreSadism1]

This whole conversation makes me sad.

I can imagine Steer see's used games sales as a Pleb thing, perhaps he also thinks he's a wealthy person?