• Worx@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    In case anyone actually wants to know a couple of reasons

    A) It’s not fair that some people pay and some don’t. (Of course it’s also not fair that some can afford $70 on a video game and some struggle to buy food)

    B) If everyone would pay then we’d all only have to pay $50 each, lowering the price for those that are paying $70 at the moment. (Whether developers would lower prices or just make more money is another question)

    • AstralPath@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Naïveté. Its not devs that set the price. Publishers do not have your best interests in mind. They will always choose to make more money. They don’t give a fuck about literally anything else.

      The prices will never be lower. Purchasing no longer grants ownership. This is why piracy is justified in a lot of cases.

      Support devs that respect the community. Steal from those that don’t. Or even better, don’t play games whose publishers treat the community like shit.

    • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      They’ll literally never lower prices. Look at what prices for everything are right now. Their excuse was that covid was driving up prices, now that covid is over they realized they could charge more so here we are.

    • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Thanks for trying to bring an alternative perspective to the table.

      Neither argument is very compelling. A) is like “if I can’t have nice things, no one can”, and think about those arguments against loan forgiveness or healthcare. B) is wishful thinking game companies will charge what people are willing to pay no matter how many copies are sold. And unlike physical goods, the cost per digital license doesn’t really much if more copies are sold so expected sales volume doesn’t affect costs much in that sense. Piracy itself also doesn’t incur any cost (other than mythical lost sales), while Denuvo and other anti circumvention technology does.

  • otp@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    “I paid $70 on console and they got it on PC for free!”

    Hold off buying games for a while and you’ll be able to get them ALL for free on your new gaming PC!

    (How many games would they have to not buy? 15? 20?)

    • Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      15 games for $70 are enough to save $1000, which is definitely enough for a good gaming PC. After buying a PS5 and the cheapest PS Plus subscription, paid yearly (cause that’s the cheapest option per month) for a little more than 8 years, you’re also at $1000. With the most expensive PS Plus option it would only take a little more than 4 years.

  • DragonOracleIX@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I wonder if they would still hold that opinion if they were locked out of a game they paid $70 for, while the ones that got it for “free” can play it without any restrictions. Piracy is just as much a service issue as it is a money issue.

    • KomfortablesKissen@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      They already are throwing punches because they noticed people being less gullible than them. I’m guessing this would result in a “double down”, like “The developers wouldn’t have to kill this game if the pirates would have bought it.”

      • DragonOracleIX@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I wasn’t referring to games being shut down. I was referring to how denuvo stops you from playing the game if it has issues phoning home for whatever reason. My hatred for denuvo began when it locked me out of monster hunter for 24 hours the one time I wanted to come back to playing it.

  • HouseWolf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    ‘It’s not fair that we keep getting scammed and others don’t’

    So just don’t give them money next time?

    ‘LALALALA I can’t hear you, it’s your fault not mine LALALALA’

  • Trincapinones@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    The “it’s not fair we pay for these games for them to then be pirated” says it all, it’s not about the company becoming bankrupt because of piracy, it’s because they don’t want to feel bad once they have been scammed with a half made game that others have gotten for free. Because a half made game should be worthless

    • enkers@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      What a strange mentality. When I pay for things I want, I’m generally happy to support the creator. If others can’t, why would I be upset if they get the product for free? It means more people can also enjoy the thing I like.

      It’s such a crab bucket mentality, I couldn’t imagine living life being constantly bitter.

      • Nithanim@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I certainly don’t care if others get the game other ways (except unauthorized key stores). I am just happy that good games get their recognition and give people joy. I am in the fortunate situation that I am able to just buy all games I want. Heck, I even bought games for friends who were unsure or even dismissive “if it would be worth it”. I also buy/bought games that I never played or won’t play but watched streamers play it.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I can think of a couple ways this post makes sense. For example, if Denuvo paid this commenter to make this post.

      • dalekcaan@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Some people are really weird when it comes to things being “fair.” I forget the details but I remember a study where given the option of getting $100 and a stranger getting $200, a good chunk of people would rather neither of them get anything.

        • groet@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          There is a famous experiment , where a person gets 100$, and have to offer an arbitrary percentage of that to a stranger. If the stranger declines, both get nothing.

          From the strangers perspective, getting offered even 1$ is a win, but the vast majority rejected anything below 30%

  • JCPhoenix@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    That’s a bot, right? That can’t be real.

    I’ve met plenty of idiots. Some days, I’m probably one of them. But I don’t think I’ve ever come across someone who’s pro anti-piracy. Usually people are just neutral about it. Even the most law-abiding people I know, when I’ve told them I can download movies for free, are like “Oh, are you able to get this movie for me? Thanks!”

  • Coasting0942@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s not that hard to understand:

    Development of games requires resources. More resources trends with better games (coin flip). If every player pays, the game development gets the best possible quality. And artists get to keep their electricity bill paid for the week.

    Denuvo argues that their product guarantees the most resource extraction possible. This is debatable, and I personally lean on the side that it’s not as effective for revenue collection as advertised.

    Nobody got rich being honest.