POLL: Cracked games or Paid games?

[KingYaba]

I have purchased Reign of Chaos twice and The Frozen Throne three times. Two CDs were eaten by a computer (shattered completely in the optical drive) and one was scratched on the label side. I did not make backups at the time but the game is cheap enough and the extra CD keys don't hurt, either.

 

[Signal-11]

I have purchased Reign of Chaos twice and The Frozen Throne three times. Two CDs were eaten by a computer (shattered completely in the optical drive) and one was scratched on the label side. I did not make backups at the time but the game is cheap enough and the extra CD keys don't hurt, either.

I'm the point where I don't buy media anymore because of this. I must have bought Half Life at least five or six times and Dawn of War and it's expansions several times. I haven't done this since the advent of Steam.

My Steam library is pretty expansive and I can play any game I've ever bought through Steam on any computer of my choosing. If I don't feel like downloading gigs of content, I can just copy the cache files between computers and I'm good to go. By doing this, Steam has completely obviated my need to associate in any way with PC pirates. I used to, for no other reason than grabbing the NoCD crack for a game I already bought.

OTOH, this new limited activation scheme is going to push me and guys like me back to grabbing cracked executables from the pirates again. These things are such a PITA that unless I really, REALLY want to play a game that has an activation scheme, I won't buy it.

 

[xparaparafreakx]

Cracked games or Paid games?

How about Cracked Paid Games?

You must thing, wtf am I talking about?

I cracked the cd check on most if not all games I paid.

So I am going to put a vote for both.

 

[softypolimer]

Cracked games or Paid games?

How about Cracked Paid Games?

You must thing, wtf am I talking about?

I cracked the cd check on most if not all games I paid.

So I am going to put a vote for both.

TRUE! too much pain to carry the CD every where u go because sometime u "just" felt like playing game suddenly (when u happened to visit your friends after work, in the office) u have a laptop but you dint bring the cd since u didn't really planed to play game there at the first place.

I used to love to play my my ET:QW but hates to take care of my disc every where i went. There's no support for no cd check in mac version(I also hav pc version which is 50% cheaper than my mac version) and there's no sign for this to ever get a support form aspr too. I mean, why the disc so important since u have login to your online account. If the disc broken/damage due to traveling, I probably force to buy a new disc again. Strangely I cant find cracks for this game so I have to use an annoying bootcamp rebooting my mac every time I just wonna spend a few mins on ET:QW

recently, I'm thinking of buying battlefield 2142 for mac but I'm worry going to face another of cd checking problems.

I paid most of my game (only that I can find on retail or online store) and cracked most of them. We gotta admitted that some time those torrent site can be useful for some stuff that been lost or game that not avalable for some region or the game that dissapear from the store.

I also have my steam account and I love it. I wish thing mac game can work like steam or we can have steam for mac.

 

[andrew upstairs]

I pay for all of my software, games, music, movies and books. If it's not worth the money it's probably not worth the time either.

This.

+++ And why is it that suddenly out of nowhere cracked games/apps users are frowned upon? It's not like economically we are all doing so well

What do you mean, suddenly? Piracy has always been looked down upon by everyone but the pirates. If anything it's seems to be becoming more accepted, which is a shame.

 

[chrono1081]

Mine are all paid for. People who used cracked software have no idea of the enormous time it takes just to make a "simple" application.

Now, with that being said I have no pity for companies who riddle their programs so badly with DRM that even a legit paid for copy cannot be played. Just like my copy of Orange Box. Thanks to the steam ******** I can't even play in offline mode without first going to online mode. Not possible where I work/live since I cant plug a non-work machine into the network.

Orange Box is the only hacked game I have, but I also have the full paid for version that is rendered useless.

 

[MRU]

Thread title says POLL.....

Where's the POLL ?

 

[whooleytoo]

IMO, there are a few lies which usually surface in these debates:

1) "Our game/music/video was downloaded 1 million times illegally, so that's 1 million x sales price revenue lost". False. You have absolutely no idea how many of those people would have bought your product. Some people will download any junk, once it's free.

2) "I couldn't afford/wouldn't have bought that game/music/video anyway, so it's not harming anyone". False. If you couldn't pirate, you'd find a way to buy it legally. You wouldn't just sit there staring at an empty screen, listening to the sound of silence.

3) "Piracy is stealing". Well, no, it isn't. Not in any conventional sense, since you're not denying the game/music/video to anyone else. A more valid comparison might be going to a gig/event without paying for it, or perhaps using a bus/train without paying (and getting your friends to do likewise). And perhaps complaining when it doesn't work perfectly, even though you never paid for it in the first place.

Some companies will price their products irrationally and put unfeasible restrictions on how they can be used. And conversely, (as the iPhone market has shown) it doesn't matter how cheap stuff is, some people are still too tight to pay for anything.

What I find remarkable is how so many people I know whose income relies on software sales, pirate so much software themselves. Crazy.

 

[mslide]

I try to be honest when it comes to this subject, but I don't just blindly follow the law because it's the law. Here are my rules that I live by and I think they are quite reasonable:

1) If it's a product that can still 'easily' be legally acquired, I will pay for it. By this, I mean I can either go to Best Buy and buy it or I can go to Amazon and order it. In all honesty, I would rather have a new original box/media than a downloaded copy. If I'm forced to go to ebay and buy a used copy, I usually won't.

2) If I legally purchase something, I will always try to find a "CD crack" so I don't have to put the CD in the drive. I don't care what the law might or might not say about this. I purchased it, so I should be able to crack the heck out of it if I want to. Companies are fooling themselves if they think doing this is protecting anything. Any sort of DRM can and will be cracked.

3) If it's a product that one cannot easily purchase a new copy of, I have no moral issues with downloading it. An example of this would be games that came out when I was a kid (in the 80's) that I want to play again, or games that came out in the 90s that one cannot buy new but are not considered "Abandonware" because the developer claims you can still legally acquire a legit copy.

4) If I paid for a product once, then I have no problem with downloading an illegitimate copy if my original copy was destroyed for some reason, or I lost it. There's no way I'm going to try to find a legit way to buy "The Secret of Monkey Island" or almost any old Sierra adventure game because I know that I had once paid for them when they were new games.

Part of my job does involve software development and I do know how much time and effort goes into creating these games. I do think that just blindly downloading anything and everything is stealing, or at least just as bad as stealing. If you are downloading something because you can't afford it, well then get a (better) job so you can afford the toys you want. If you're a kid, well then wait until you are older and can afford it. There are tons of things I couldn't afford, but I wanted, when I was a kid and I didn't just go out and steal them to go it.

 

[Plutonius]

3) "Piracy is stealing". Well, no, it isn't. Not in any conventional sense, since you're not denying the game/music/video to anyone else. A more valid comparison might be going to a gig/event without paying for it, or perhaps using a bus/train without paying (and getting your friends to do likewise).

I would like to see how far your definition of stealing would fly in a court of law

All good examples of stealing. Unless it is given / sold to you by it's legitimate owner or a representative of the legitimate owner, it's stealing. Just because you are not denying the service / product to anyone else when you take something does not invalidate your actions as stealing.

You can discuss the moral implications of cracking software (is it right or wrong, under what conditions is it right, etc.) but don't call it anything else but stealing.

 

[0098386]

What's also good to remember is you don't own the game. When you buy a game you buy a license to run that copy and you own the medium it's on. Just like when you buy OSX or Windows (more so OSX), there's no serial code so you could install it on as many systems as you please. Using that logic you bought it once so why not install it on more computers?
Because you only bought a license for that game.

A family friend gave me his boxed copy of Doom when I was a kid, but I went out and bought it when it hit Steam (for the convenience). Same goes for Doom 3, HL2 and a few other games. I was a student for 5 years and self employed for 2... Yet even I can justify giving money (when its not much) to developers to say "hey this is a great product make more".

 

[MrBean]

What are the specs of your Mac?

17" Imac, 1.83 Ghz intel core duo, 2 gigs ram, radeon 1600.

Was using the game agent.

But COD4 still runs like a charm.

 

[Signal-11]

Mine are all paid for. People who used cracked software have no idea of the enormous time it takes just to make a "simple" application.

Now, with that being said I have no pity for companies who riddle their programs so badly with DRM that even a legit paid for copy cannot be played. Just like my copy of Orange Box. Thanks to the steam ******** I can't even play in offline mode without first going to online mode. Not possible where I work/live since I cant plug a non-work machine into the network.

Orange Box is the only hacked game I have, but I also have the full paid for version that is rendered useless.

You only need to go online ONCE with Steam after purchasing a game. Once you go offline, you can stay offline on that machine for weeks and months at a time without having to go online. Maybe you don't understand how Steam is supposed to work?

 

[Signal-11]

What's also good to remember is you don't own the game. When you buy a game you buy a license to run that copy and you own the medium it's on. Just like when you buy OSX or Windows (more so OSX), there's no serial code so you could install it on as many systems as you please. Using that logic you bought it once so why not install it on more computers?
Because you only bought a license for that game.

Aw, horse puckey. I used to buy that argument, but the more I think about it, the more software licensing as an ownership of the medium but not the content doesn't hold water and doesn't even have a consistent internal logic. This is becoming more and more obvious as we move to systems without physical media. If you want, we could sit here and do a couple dozen hypothetical scenarios with Alice and Bob to see just how absurd this notion can become.

Furthermore, the validity and enforceability of shrink wrap/click through EULAs doesn't necessarily hold up in court, depending on circumstances and jurisdiction.

Here's what it comes down to. I pay for software, because I think it's only fair to the developer. On the flip side, if I've payed for that software, I should be able to do reasonable things with that software.

For example, Steam lets me keep multiple copies of multiple games on multiple computers. As long as I'm not actively running multiple copies simultaneously, no problem. That's fair and that's reasonable.

OTOH, things have come to the point where some publishers start treating me, the paying customer, as a criminal and enemy. That's ******** of the lowest order.

 

[Mr. lax]

Heated debate here i come!!

I'm personally a huge advocate of: "Its worth the money people will buy it"

BUT (this is a huge one): Since I am a mac gamer and i absolutely refuse to give any money to Microsoft in any way shape or form. I frequently download windows games that have been cracked to run on OSX. I have 43 to date.

PS3 on the other hand I'm extremely willing to pay for games and I spend about 60 a week on video games. I have 28 to date.

 

[ezekielrage_99]

Although I am really not a fan of piracy it does have its place, there are plenty of CD that I've listen to and probably wouldn't have bought if I bothered just getting a digital copy. On the other hand I have bought a few CDs I wouldn't have if I didn't get a copy.

I believe in the concept Radiohead had a few years ago with their CD, if it's worth people will buy it. People generally want to buy quality.

With games thankfully developers are getting on board with the fast'n'easy downloadable demos, this is a very good thing. There are many XBOX games I've played before deciding whether or not to buy, it saves on mistakes (thinking T2 for the SNES)...

It's not about piracy it's about developers engaging newer technology, giving the consumer what they want and selling quality rather than any old thing.

 

[Zortrium]

BECAUSE IT IS STEALING, GENIUS. ASK MOMMY & DADDY ABOUT TAKING THINGS WITHOUT PAYING FOR THEM. Buying the game later on does not magically "cure" your initial theft of the program.

It's not stealing, though -- theft is the taking of another's property, and while pirating a piece of software is certainly illegal, it doesn't actually deprive the owner of anything. It's a little like going to a clothing store and examining a shirt down to the fine stitching details, then using a machine to instantly create an exact copy of the shirt that you then walk off with. The store owners may initiate litigation against you, but it's not going to be for stealing.

Piracy arguably deprives the content owner of potential money, though how much is dependent on what percentage of pirates would otherwise buy the game if they couldn't download it. If a pirate ultimately does buy the software, though, the potential money is realized and the content holder has lost effectively nothing from the initial download.

BUT (this is a huge one): Since I am a mac gamer and i absolutely refuse to give any money to Microsoft in any way shape or form. I frequently download windows games that have been cracked to run on OSX.

I don't understand this -- if Microsoft makes nothing but crap then you shouldn't want to buy or use anything that they make. I'm as much of a Mac gamer as anyone and strongly dislike Windows, yet I went and shelled out something like $100 to Microsoft for a copy of Vista. Why? Because I think buying a copy of Windows is worth $100 so that I can play whatever Windows games I want. The fact that I dislike Microsoft is immaterial -- they offer a piece of software that allows me access to other pieces of software I'm actually interested in (which sounds like the whole point of an operating system in the first place), so I gave them my money. As soon as a legal alternative comes alone (e.g., a Mac port), I'll always opt for that, but many times that never happens.

 

[SwiftLives]

It's not stealing, though -- theft is the taking of another's property, and while pirating a piece of software is certainly illegal, it doesn't actually deprive the owner of anything.

No...stealing is taking something that doesn't belong to you without permission or compensation. It's a fairly black and white thing. If you download a game or a song illegally, you are stealing it. It does in fact deprive the owner of income. Rationalize it all you want.

It's a little like going to a clothing store and examining a shirt down to the fine stitching details, then using a machine to instantly create an exact copy of the shirt that you then walk off with. The store owners may initiate litigation against you, but it's not going to be for stealing.

The better analogy here would be examining the code of the game and going home and recoding it from memory for personal use. Which you're certainly welcome to do. Just don't try to resell the game.

Piracy arguably deprives the content owner of potential money, though how much is dependent on what percentage of pirates would otherwise buy the game if they couldn't download it. If a pirate ultimately does buy the software, though, the potential money is realized and the content holder has lost effectively nothing from the initial download.

No. It's like going to a clothing store and taking the shirt without paying for it. Then whining that you weren't actually ever planning on purchasing it, therefore you weren't depriving anyone of any revenue.

It doesn't matter if it's a physical object, or some sort of intellectual property. If you acquire a product that is offered for sale without permission or compensation, you are stealing it.

 

[0098386]

BUT (this is a huge one): Since I am a mac gamer and i absolutely refuse to give any money to Microsoft in any way shape or form. I frequently download windows games that have been cracked to run on OSX. I have 43 to date.

What a raving fanboy. You don't make any sense whatsoever.

So you won't buy Microsoft products (insane?), so that means you can't buy Windows which is why you download cracked Win games to run on OSX. But do you realise that Microsoft (likely) doesn't make them games? And that you are only depriving the developers and publishers of their income - not Microsoft? So by not giving Microsoft their £60 for XP or Vista, you've skipped out on not giving people who made those games £1290 (assuming each of them 43 games were £30).
Bloody nora we have a live one.

 

[Plutonius]

It doesn't matter if it's a physical object, or some sort of intellectual property. If you acquire a product that is offered for sale without permission or compensation, you are stealing it.

+1

 

[Zortrium]

No...stealing is taking something that doesn't belong to you without permission or compensation. It's a fairly black and white thing. If you download a game or a song illegally, you are stealing it. It does in fact deprive the owner of income. Rationalize it all you want.

But the thing is that you're not taking anything -- you're copying it. The content owner hasn't lost any physical goods from you making a copy. Furthermore, it may, but may not, deprive the owner of income. If thieves who would otherwise rob a jewelry store and steal millions are prevented from doing so, they probably won't walk in and put down a million bucks to buy stuff. It's obviously not always like that, but it certainly can be -- pirates simply may not have the money to pay full retail price (see Asia).

I'm not trying to justify piracy, and if you read my previous post you'd see that I'm no fan of pirates myself, but it's still somewhat misleading to label it theft. I think that the vast majority of piracy is wrong, but I also think that the issue is less clear cut than you make it out to be.

The better analogy here would be examining the code of the game and going home and recoding it from memory for personal use. Which you're certainly welcome to do. Just don't try to resell the game.

This doesn't seem to be any different from saying that it's okay to pirate for personal use. What's 'recoding it from memory'? Is it making a character-for-character copy? That's just inefficient piracy. Is it remembering the basic structure of the program and then making a similar but not exact copy of the program? That's still copyright infringement. I can't think of a way to interpret this analogy without it still being illegal.

No. It's like going to a clothing store and taking the shirt without paying for it. Then whining that you weren't actually ever planning on purchasing it, therefore you weren't depriving anyone of any revenue.

If you take the shirt, the store loses both the money spent on purchasing the shirt from the supplier and the ability to sell the shirt to someone else. If you download a piece of software, the publisher loses neither. The only thing lost is some vaguely-specified quantity of hypothetical income.

It doesn't matter if it's a physical object, or some sort of intellectual property. If you acquire a product that is offered for sale without permission or compensation, you are stealing it.

Piracy is infringement, not theft. Still wrong and still illegal, but not the same.

 

[aznguyen316]

both, multiplayer games always paid, single player only games, cracked.. simple as though, unless it's a Valve game - then I buy. other than that, I buy my consoles games =)

 

[Zortrium]

both, multiplayer games always paid, single player only games, cracked.. simple as though, unless it's a Valve game - then I buy. other than that, I buy my consoles games =)

This kind of attitude is highly detrimental to those of us who enjoy story-centric (and consequently single-player centric games) and would like them to be able to stand up against the latest MMO cash cow or whatever. If you pirate single player games because you don't think they're good, then why play them? It makes even less sense in light of your assertion that you'd buy single player Valve games. Why is that? If it's because you think Valve games are good (as I assume it is), then why should another developer of a good and possibly even better single player game be less deserving? It's mindless fanboyism at its worst.

 

[Truffy]

And why is it that suddenly out of nowhere cracked games/apps users are frowned upon? It's not like economically we are all doing so well

Great argument! Now why don't you go out and steal a car? After all, it's not like we're all doing so well economically!

 

[aznguyen316]

This kind of attitude is highly detrimental to those of us who enjoy story-centric (and consequently single-player centric games) and would like them to be able to stand up against the latest MMO cash cow or whatever. If you pirate single player games because you don't think they're good, then why play them? It makes even less sense in light of your assertion that you'd buy single player Valve games. Why is that? If it's because you think Valve games are good (as I assume it is), then why should another developer of a good and possibly even better single player game be less deserving? It's mindless fanboyism at its worst.

how is it fanboyism? I never said I think single player games are bad. The reason I buy multiplayer games is b/c well to be able to get online.. I support Valve because I WANT TO. Not because any other developer of a better single player game is to be less deserving. For example, I love Bethesda softworks, never thought they're less deserving, and actually bought Oblivion and Fallout 3 for my console - nevertheless I bought them used so ultimately the developer is not getting the cash (only from the original sale, still not from me) - Gamestop or whoever else -- Craigslist posters benefit. Not trying to defend the fact that yes, I do pirate some SP PC games b/c it's easy, but I never said anything about SP games being bad.

Don't try to say I'm knocking the developers of any type of game, because I'm not, but whether it be piracy or buying used - one is illegal, the other is legal, the developer is being supported/unsupported in the same way however you want to look at it.