Poll of the Day > lol pirates (old gizmodo article)

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2017/09/the-eu-suppressed-a-300-page-study-that-found-piracy-doesnt-harm-sales
---

I'd love to see the methodology on that study, because it seems like something that would be literally impossible to prove or disprove in any objective or definitive sort of way.


---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I'd love to see the methodology on that study, because it seems like something that would be literally impossible to prove or disprove in any objective or definitive sort of way.

Well, petition the EU to unblock the study... or whatever shenanigans the article is claiming
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I'd love to see the methodology on that study, because it seems like something that would be literally impossible to prove or disprove in any objective or definitive sort of way.

Or it just finds something that everybody already knew.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I'd love to see the methodology on that study, because it seems like something that would be literally impossible to prove or disprove in any objective or definitive sort of way.

This so hard. And while most pirates likely wouldn't have bought the game anyway (unless it was offered at a super-steep discount) and the most prolific pirates often don't even get around to playing their pirated games, it's obviously going to impact some sales both directly and then because it shifts the paradigm, turning would-be consumers into just pirates.
---

Zeus posted...

This so hard. And while most pirates likely wouldn't have bought the game anyway (unless it was offered at a super-steep discount) and the most prolific pirates often don't even get around to playing their pirated games, it's obviously going to impact some sales both directly and then because it shifts the paradigm, turning would-be consumers into just pirates.

This is false. The only would be consumers who pirate something instead of buying are usually against DRM. Many pirates buy the games after things like Denuvo are removed. A person who never intended on buying a product is never a lost sale. A person isn't going to pirate just because somebody else pirated.
---

Revelation34 posted...

Zeus posted...

This so hard. And while most pirates likely wouldn't have bought the game anyway (unless it was offered at a super-steep discount) and the most prolific pirates often don't even get around to playing their pirated games, it's obviously going to impact some sales both directly and then because it shifts the paradigm, turning would-be consumers into just pirates.

This is false. The only would be consumers who pirate something instead of buying are usually against DRM. Many pirates buy the games after things like Denuvo are removed. A person who never intended on buying a product is never a lost sale. A person isn't going to pirate just because somebody else pirated.

That's the most ridiculous fucking thing I've heard all day. As a consumer turned pirate then later turned consumer, I can tell you that your claims are absolute hogwash. Conscientious pirating is largely bullshit (an absolute lie that pirates tell themselves to justify their actions) and, once you start pirating one thing, you often wonder why you're paying for something else. And the only reason I pay for content at all these days is when I can't readily find it free. If everything on NFI was available through pirates on YT, I would just cancel my NFI subscription and watch it free on YT. And if there was a YT equivalent for gaming, I would never buy another game again.

And how did I get into piracy back when I was really into it? Because I knew people who were pirating non-stop. Thanks to them, I wound skipping seeing things in theaters, buying games I would have otherwise purchased, etc. Obviously not everything I've pirated over the years I would have bought -- which I literally said in my previous post -- but even just with me content creators have lost out on a substantial amount of money thanks to piracy. Keep in mind that at least a few of them were absolutely non-consumers (ie, no lost sales), but by their actions they converted customers into pirates.
---

And I've heard some some video game developers that what they hate most about piracy is that they can't track their advertising spending
---

Zeus posted...

63KSpgcV6WdzGAb0N9

That's the most ridiculous fucking thing I've heard all day. As a consumer turned pirate then later turned consumer, I can tell you that your claims are absolute hogwash. Conscientious pirating is largely bullshit (an absolute lie that pirates tell themselves to justify their actions) and, once you start pirating one thing, you often wonder why you're paying for something else. And the only reason I pay for content at all these days is when I can't readily find it free. If everything on NFI was available through pirates on YT, I would just cancel my NFI subscription and watch it free on YT. And if there was a YT equivalent for gaming, I would never buy another game again.

And how did I get into piracy back when I was really into it? Because I knew people who were pirating non-stop. Thanks to them, I wound skipping seeing things in theaters, buying games I would have otherwise purchased, etc. Obviously not everything I've pirated over the years I would have bought -- which I literally said in my previous post -- but even just with me content creators have lost out on a substantial amount of money thanks to piracy. Keep in mind that at least a few of them were absolutely non-consumers (ie, no lost sales), but by their actions they converted customers into pirates.

Oh so you yourself means that every pirate is the exact same way. Only your claims are the ones that are bullshit. Steam is a good example of something that's more convenient than piracy since everything is right where you need it and also has cloud saves for most of the big games.
---

Bump
---