According to rumors, it will release on The Pirate Bay much earlier than 1 year, probably the publisher got an exception in the exclusivity deal with them. (I'm joking, somewhat, but this move...
According to rumors, it will release on The Pirate Bay much earlier than 1 year, probably the publisher got an exception in the exclusivity deal with them. (I'm joking, somewhat, but this move will probably feed into piracy of that game)
I love how people are advocating for piracy just because they don't want to spend a few minutes installing a new launcher. I mean I get it if they don't want to install Epic launcher as it is...
I love how people are advocating for piracy just because they don't want to spend a few minutes installing a new launcher. I mean I get it if they don't want to install Epic launcher as it is their choice which company/launcher they want to support, but they can also wait until the game comes out on their preferred launcher like a proper adult without resorting to piracy at a mere mention of the words "Epic".
Epic store sure has it's shortcomings and definitely has things it can improve on, but it isn't this big evil thing that the circlejerk suggests.
That's a bit of a strawman, IMO. I suspect the reaction has very little to do with people not wanting to install a new launcher for the vast majority of gamers, who likely have many digital sales...
That's a bit of a strawman, IMO. I suspect the reaction has very little to do with people not wanting to install a new launcher for the vast majority of gamers, who likely have many digital sales platforms/launchers installed already. E.g. I have Steam, GOG, Twitch Desktop, Origin, Discord, Oculus Store, Battle.net, UPlay as well as Hi-Rez and Daybreak games' launcher installed and have bought games from each. I can't speak for everyone, but the reason I refuse to support EPIC is because they are using anti-consumer tactics that I do not want to support for fear that if they are successful they will spread.
I get that, if someone chooses not to support Epic it's their right to do so, but instantly going to pirating just because the game is not releasing on their preferred storefront for a year is not...
I get that, if someone chooses not to support Epic it's their right to do so, but instantly going to pirating just because the game is not releasing on their preferred storefront for a year is not the answer. It's like stealing a book just because it's only available in bookstores and releasing on Amazon a year later.
And personally I never really gotten the argument about having too many platforms installed. I mean Windows already comes with a platform installed that can open and run games from any platform already without having to launch it first called desktop (or start menu if you prefer to keep things clean).
I agree. I haven't pirated a game in over a decade. Well... other than at LAN parties, because having everyone buy and install every old/obscure game we might want to play ahead of time is a bit...
but instantly going to pirating just because the game is not releasing on their preferred storefront for a year is not the answer
I agree. I haven't pirated a game in over a decade. Well... other than at LAN parties, because having everyone buy and install every old/obscure game we might want to play ahead of time is a bit much to ask and a pain to organize. But I never keep those games installed after the LAN.
Windows already comes with a platform installed that can open and run games from any platform already without having to launch it first called desktop (or start menu if you prefer to keep things clean).
That's a pretty ridiculous comparison IMO. The problem with store apps and launchers is that almost every one has a bunch of other BS they install alongside them, like always on background update services and anti-cheat services, that consume valuable RAM and bog down your computer unless you specifically uninstall/disable them (though they often reinstall and reenable themselves whenever the launcher updates). So there is some merit to the argument for not wanting to install too many of them.
Windows 10 makes it easy to disable unwanted startup processes from the task manager. Disabling them from there prevents the application from re-enabling it in the future.
Windows 10 makes it easy to disable unwanted startup processes from the task manager. Disabling them from there prevents the application from re-enabling it in the future.
Does that apply to services too? I don't think so, because I have definitely had Origin's web-helper and client services reset themselves to "automatic" on me plenty of times before, even after...
Does that apply to services too? I don't think so, because I have definitely had Origin's web-helper and client services reset themselves to "automatic" on me plenty of times before, even after disabling and setting them to "manual".
Yeah, I get where you are coming from. Personally I don't have a problem with Epic store I just don't like when someone calls for piracy because of it.
Yeah, I get where you are coming from. Personally I don't have a problem with Epic store I just don't like when someone calls for piracy because of it.
I don't think zaarn was "calling" for piracy, per se... they were merely joking about it and pointing out how shortsighted a move like making your game store exclusive is, as that often drives...
I don't think zaarn was "calling" for piracy, per se... they were merely joking about it and pointing out how shortsighted a move like making your game store exclusive is, as that often drives people to piracy. And they aren't wrong there. E.g. Not that they would ever do this, but if CDPR announced that Cyberpunk 2077 was going to be an EPIC Store exclusive, you can bet your ass I would be pirating it despite my misgivings about piracy. ;)
See, but this is what I don't get, I would maybe understand it if you had to buy 500$ hardware if you wanted to play it, but you only need to download another free launcher. I understand that...
See, but this is what I don't get, I would maybe understand it if you had to buy 500$ hardware if you wanted to play it, but you only need to download another free launcher. I understand that people can have different opinions about said launcher but just because a game is on there does not excuse piracy. I think if you really wanted to send a message to the devs straight up boycotting would be more effective than pirating it. I know this word is way overused but this just seem like entitlement.
And support a horrible anti-consumer, anti-competitive business model. Also, keep in mind that not every game that is EPIC exclusive plans on making themselves available on another platform after...
but you only need to download another free launcher.
And support a horrible anti-consumer, anti-competitive business model. Also, keep in mind that not every game that is EPIC exclusive plans on making themselves available on another platform after 1 year. Some, like Dauntless, appear to be planning on remaining EPIC exclusive for the foreseeable future.
if you really wanted to send a message to devs straight up boycotting would be more effective than pirating it
Developers and Publishers can't know if someone didn't buy their game and certainly can't know the reasoning for people doing so... but they do track piracy numbers and if those suddenly spike, that sends a pretty clear message to them.
And yes, I realize that wanting to play a game on my own terms is entitlement. But for some things that are highly desirable to me, I am willing to set aside my misgiving on piracy to consume them. That goes for some movies and TV shows as well. It's not fair to the content producers and I recognize that, but I am merely speaking truth and I suspect I am far from alone in having that attitude. People can rail against entitlement all they want but guilt isn't going to change human nature. Only offering people a reasonable and affordable way to access the content they want to consume, on the platform they wish to, will. As Gabe Newell himself said, "piracy is a service problem".
I'll make this as a response to @hungariantoast as well since I feel this response fits both comments. People will always find a reason to pirate games no matter what, and they will always do...
I'll make this as a response to @hungariantoast as well since I feel this response fits both comments.
People will always find a reason to pirate games no matter what, and they will always do mental gymnastics in order to justify it, like you said it is human nature. I'm not here to guilt trip anyone into not pirating it, but I have way more respect for someone who says "yeah, piracy is wrong but I'm still gonna do it anyway" than someone who pretends they are somehow forced into pirating or if they are somehow taking a stand by stealing. Like I said, if you really wanted to make developers aware of some issues there are other legit ways to do so.
The piracy debate has been solved for decades already. Convenience beats piracy. Lose the convenience, and piracy makes a comeback. All other factors and any morality is irrelevant to the...
Exemplary
The piracy debate has been solved for decades already.
Convenience beats piracy. Lose the convenience, and piracy makes a comeback. All other factors and any morality is irrelevant to the conversation, and so is the type of product or market.
Steam has convenience going for it. One launcher, most games that ever existed, and they even support linux (good luck getting that from other vendors). That's now what 'convenient' means in gaming. Create twenty more gaming stores with their own software and convenient is now gone - your windows gaming rig is now a bloatware/spyware-infested mess.
Same for streaming music, or movies and television. One service that has it all without ads wins on convenience. Splitting that up into dozens of services and it's less convenient, more expensive, and just as ad-ridden as cable.
Where that 'convenience' line lies is different for everyone, and it also has a lot to do with their budget - some people can afford to pay $10 a month to 30 different services. Most people will never do that. Kids will pirate everything just because they can, they are too broke to afford it, and it's fun. That they are breaking the law doesn't enter their minds, or if it does, it just adds to the thrill.
Piracy is easier now than it ever was. The law won't keep it at bay, or as we've seen over the last 40 years, even make a dent in it. Pirates see the law as a spineless joke and with the track record it's had stopping piracy of digital content it's easy to see why. Piracy is the proverbial nuclear option, and there's no defense of any kind that has ever been even the slightest bit effective stopping it. There are entire classes of legit businesses dedicated just to supporting piracy (VPNs, seedbox vendors, etc).
DRM and similar technologies would have had to be designed into the internet, and into the concept of a computer, from day one for artificial digital scarcity to ever work. We're lucky that didn't happen, because that technology has other, far more harmful uses if it becomes ubiquitous in computing.
If I had to pick a good example of anti-piracy measures, I'd point to Autocad. Their dongles and authorization process are anything but convenient, though. More like a gargantuan pain in the ass on a daily basis - but they haven't got any competition, really, so there's not much that can be done. You just have to suck it up and do the dance if you want to get your engineering on.
Stay convenient, keep a reasonable price, and that's the best you can do fighting piracy. The market tendency right now is to fragment into hundreds of services that duplicate the cable and and console game markets as these old content behemoths try to create a corner for their content in this new marketplace. Most of them are in for a very rude awakening. They think streaming space is just a new cable space with each of them having their own 'channels'. Disney has the clout to make that work thanks to their near-monopoly on children's content. CBS? Not so much. A game 'network' launching on the strength of a handful of tiny exclusives, trying to take on Steam? Someone will have to explain to me how that isn't just a hilarious joke.
I have a hunch that's not going to fly long-term. People will subscribe for only a month or two, then cancel until something new they want to see appears. Make that process painful and they'll stop re-upping and simply pirate the content again. If these content providers are expecting everyone to pay them every month, they are looking for bankruptcy. They haven't got the 'bundles' that protected them in other marketplaces.
Where I personally draw the line is advertisements. Show me ads on a service I pay for and I'm not only out, I now consider you an enemy and feel not just guilt-free, but good pirating your content. Steam itself is about as far as I go - the ads there simply don't get in my way, and that's what I want, the ability to ignore them all unless I'm shopping. That's just me and my irrational hatred of insulting, time wasting, unproductive lies disguised as consumerism, though. Some people don't mind the ads.
Ask ten different people why they pirate and you'll get ten different answers. In the end, though, it always boils down to 'it's easy.' Frustrated consumers turn to piracy. Satisfied ones don't mind that extra $1/mo price increase every year so much.
Well expressed. I've had difficulty coming up with as solid anti-piracy measure, but I hadn't even noticed Autocad had a feature like that. What does it do? I think Gabe Newell expressed the...
Well expressed. I've had difficulty coming up with as solid anti-piracy measure, but I hadn't even noticed Autocad had a feature like that. What does it do?
I think Gabe Newell expressed the piracy problem best:
"We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem," he said. "If a pirate offers a product anywhere in the world, 24 x 7, purchasable from the convenience of your personal computer, and the legal provider says the product is region-locked, will come to your country 3 months after the US release, and can only be purchased at a brick and mortar store, then the pirate's service is more valuable."
The purpose of Steam is to provide as much value not only to the customer but also to other game publishers. "Our success comes from making sure that both customers and partners (e.g. Activision, Take 2, Ubisoft...) feel like they get a lot of value from those services, and that they can trust us not to take advantage of the relationship that we have with them."
That's exactly how Steam conquered the world. They turned Russia from pirate central into a monster cash cow that beats Europe in profits... just by not being dicks to their customers. People like...
That's exactly how Steam conquered the world. They turned Russia from pirate central into a monster cash cow that beats Europe in profits... just by not being dicks to their customers. People like to pretend this is a hard problem. The reality is it's an easy problem to solve. You just have to stop thinking 'piracy is theft' to get there. Piracy is theft-like in nature, but it's far more nuanced and complicated than simple stealing. You don't deprive anyone by making a copy, and yes, people would absolutely download a Porsche if that were possible without a second thought. Digital content isn't like physical content. The rules are different, at least until 3D printing comes into its own. Then we get to do this dance again in the real world, and that's going to make for interesting times. I think if we move from a mindset of 'copy' rights to a mindset of 'profit' rights we can dig our way out of this mess, but that'll take decades.
Edit: As for Autocad, it's kinda the 'Photoshop' of the computer-aided design market. Want to build a replacement for the golden gate bridge? You'll be using Autocad. They place part of the software itself inside a USB-attached dongle that must be present attached to the computer in order for the program to execute. Without it, whatever you're building in there just sort of... melts and loses its form (or at least, that was their easter egg 'haha' to the pirates in the early days). When you are a sysadmin supporting 200 desktops with this software installed, with each dongle locked to each unique digital copy of the program, you can see why it becomes a massive pain in the ass. They have some server-side USB keys now to take the pain out of that, but only because their customers basically rioted and demanded it. It's been a while since I worked in the CAD space, but back then they didn't have competition, period. Not sure if they do now or not.
Sadly we're half-way there already... See HTML5's built in DRM, and I wouldn't be surprised if at some point in the future cpu, gpu and monitor manufacturers consider including baked in hardware...
DRM and similar technologies would have had to be designed into the internet, and into the concept of a computer, from day one for artificial digital scarcity to ever work. We're lucky that didn't happen, because that technology has other, far more harmful uses if it becomes ubiquitous in computing.
Sadly we're half-way there already... See HTML5's built in DRM, and I wouldn't be surprised if at some point in the future cpu, gpu and monitor manufacturers consider including baked in hardware DRM to prevent screen and video output capturing of copyrighted materials, similar to what HD DVD & Blu-ray decided to do all those years ago.
It'll all fail, because there is no way to plug the analog hole. At some point, it leaves the system to travel through the air to get to your head. It can always be captured at that point, often...
It'll all fail, because there is no way to plug the analog hole. At some point, it leaves the system to travel through the air to get to your head. It can always be captured at that point, often losslessly, and the reuploaded and shared. Not just that, but the content using such annoying measures will end up being pirated much more heavily than content without it, so by using these technologies in an anti-consumer method, you simply guarantee your own failure.
Spotify uses DRM. I can also drag-and-drop playlists out of Spotify onto my desktop and have them magically appear as ogg-320 files in seconds thanks to some handy programs built to strip that DRM off of their service. Spotify has basically turned into Napster, we've come full circle despite the DRM protections. I'm sure Spotify knows about this, and also doesn't give a damn in the slightest. They probably added that tech just to smooth over their record deals with labels who, through pure tech ignorance, thought those protections would be effective.
I'm not worried. Once we have a brain computer interface that plugs the analog hole, then I'll start worrying... though less about who owns the media than about what garbage companies are trying to download into my wetware. :P
I agree that it's ultimately doomed to fail, but I think the attempt to lock everything down is sadly inevitable regardless. And like you I am not really worried either since workarounds to the...
I agree that it's ultimately doomed to fail, but I think the attempt to lock everything down is sadly inevitable regardless. And like you I am not really worried either since workarounds to the bullshit are inevitable as well, but it's just a giant PITA having to deal with this crap over and over again merely because nobody making the decisions seems to learn. ;)
Yeah. Live long enough and these cycles reach eye-rolling levels. So many people and businesses who never took the ten seconds to learn from history. When your business has as many layers,...
Yeah. Live long enough and these cycles reach eye-rolling levels. So many people and businesses who never took the ten seconds to learn from history. When your business has as many layers, middlemen, and backroom deals as the entertainment industry, change is slow, and hard, if it comes at all. People who have never used the internet are still making executive level decisions in these markets, and in government.
If it gets bad enough, a company will start up that focuses on fully open hardware, from BIOS to CPU Microcode, from motherboard to mobile phone - and they'll make a killing. There's been plenty of talk about this lately for reasons unrelated to this conversation. Markets are a fickle bitch, but they always give people what they want, eventually. Powers that be can meddle, confuse, and delay things, but they can't stop them in the long run. Sooner or later the market wins out and turns over the old paradigm.
Already starting to happen too, thankfully... :) OpenRISC, RISC-V, Necuno, Purism, etc. Whether they are successful and stick around is yet to be seen though.
If it gets bad enough, a company will start up that focuses on fully open hardware, from BIOS to CPU Microcode, from motherboard to mobile phone
Already starting to happen too, thankfully... :)
OpenRISC, RISC-V, Necuno, Purism, etc. Whether they are successful and stick around is yet to be seen though.
Accusing someone of performing mental gymnastics is a pretty dick thing to do. I can absolutely guarantee you I have spent significantly more on games (and movies/music) on dozens of different...
Accusing someone of performing mental gymnastics is a pretty dick thing to do. I can absolutely guarantee you I have spent significantly more on games (and movies/music) on dozens of different systems and platforms than anyone else you know. My steam account alone is valued at >$11k with almost 1k games on it. It is not just "mental gymnastics" that makes me refuse to support EPIC and "justify to myself" why I would pirate something over supporting them, and it genuinely is about having zero desire to support them essentially bribing 3rd party developers to release exclusively on their store... because if that model is successful it will spread. Am I entitled, perhaps a bit, yes... but I am not self-delusional.
But it is mental gymnastics though, you are trying to justify why you should steal something instead of doing a responsible thing and not getting the game until the devs release it on your...
But it is mental gymnastics though, you are trying to justify why you should steal something instead of doing a responsible thing and not getting the game until the devs release it on your preferred platform.
I never said I wouldn't wait the one year! I likely would and will do that for the games that are 1 year exclusives that I still want to play, like Hades. But also:
and not getting the game until the devs release it on your preferred platform.
I never said I wouldn't wait the one year! I likely would and will do that for the games that are 1 year exclusives that I still want to play, like Hades. But also:
Also, keep in mind that not every game that is EPIC exclusive plans on making themselves available on another platform after 1 year. Some, like Dauntless, appear to be planning on remaining EPIC exclusive for the foreseeable future.
Then let the devs know, spread awareness of this issue, there are ways to get in touch with devs nowadays to let them know they are missing customers. Also, the number of downloads on some torrent...
Then let the devs know, spread awareness of this issue, there are ways to get in touch with devs nowadays to let them know they are missing customers.
Also, the number of downloads on some torrent site does not equal to the number of lost customers.
Edit: Also like I said, if someone admits that piracy is wrong and they are going to do so anyway it's way better than someone who tries to somehow justify it why they need to pirate.
i'm sorry, but developers and their parent companies are not about to drop their anti-consumerist policies or get rid of DRM they've implemented or whatever else just because you ask nicely and...
Then let the devs know, spread awareness of this issue, there are ways to get in touch with devs nowadays to let them know they are missing customers.
i'm sorry, but developers and their parent companies are not about to drop their anti-consumerist policies or get rid of DRM they've implemented or whatever else just because you ask nicely and say you won't be buying their game. they're not likely to do it in response to piracy either, granted, but politely asking has literally no leverage of any kind (after all, the fuck do they care if you say you aren't buying their game? for all they know you never had intent to buy it at all) whereas at least piracy theoretically damages their bottom line and suggests to them you might have bought it in another circumstance.
But people will always do mental gymnastics to justify why they should pirate something no matter which launcher the game is available on. Piracy just forces devs to spend more resources on DRM.
But people will always do mental gymnastics to justify why they should pirate something no matter which launcher the game is available on. Piracy just forces devs to spend more resources on DRM.
yes, i'm aware that piracy numbers =/= lost customers. that's why i said theoretically it hurts the bottom line. maybe it doesn't in some cases. but honestly even ignoring that, the reality is...
But let's say a game has been pirated 100,000 times that does not mean that they lost 100,00 customers. That just makes them spend more on DRM.
yes, i'm aware that piracy numbers =/= lost customers. that's why i said theoretically it hurts the bottom line. maybe it doesn't in some cases. but honestly even ignoring that, the reality is that nobody at EA or activision or any other major game studio gives a shit about your polite pleas to stop fucking over consumers, because they don't answer to you and have no obligation to answer to you. you the consumer only matter if treating you nicely makes them more money--and if it doesn't, why should they bother to care about you? really, piracy--unethical as it might be--is basically the only clear, indisputable leverage consumers have by which they can change practices in the industry, because until it becomes non-profitable to use a certain practice, they have no reason to stop using it.
That just makes them spend more on DRM.
so what? for one thing DRM is almost ubiquitous to begin with, and it's all crackable with time--but more importantly, the ramping up of DRM is often a tool people exploit to advance the cause of making game studios rethink their approach, because if they make it too obnoxious enough people will start to tell them to fuck off, which is something that has happened before in the industry.
Exactly. One's wallet is still one's most powerful and effective voting tool. That's just the world we live in, and no matter how much it changes, or what laws are passed, as long as money and...
Exactly. One's wallet is still one's most powerful and effective voting tool. That's just the world we live in, and no matter how much it changes, or what laws are passed, as long as money and markets of any kind exist, that voting tool is going to be right there with them in some form.
Polite emails can be ignored. Having a 20% softer launch than you were anticipating along with the resulting stock tumble (and seeing your game at #1 on a piracy leaderboard) is not something that can be ignored. It's not something that can be solved by force or law enforcement, either - the company can't abdicate the responsibility. It's up to them, and they know it, and there's nothing they can do about it except become more convenient than the piracy is.
I like how HBO handles it. They brag about their pirated content in their marketing. I wonder once HBO Go went online how much the piracy dropped. I'd bet it was pretty significant. They also made a killing by realizing that hey, if you make shows with a lot of rewatch value (aka good television), and sell them on DVD/BluRay, you'll make far more money than advertising allows you to make.
Most people do want to support the things they love.
You keep acting like I don't already do that. Are we not here on this public forum (and places like reddit) expressing our dissatisfaction? And I have already posted on the SuperGiant forums about...
You keep acting like I don't already do that. Are we not here on this public forum (and places like reddit) expressing our dissatisfaction? And I have already posted on the SuperGiant forums about my disappointment that Hades is EPIC exclusive. What more can I really do?
Also, the number of downloads on some torrent site does not equal to the number of lost customers.
Not all of them, but a vast majority are. Piracy IS a service problem. If the games were available for a reasonable price on the terms those gamers were comfortable with, with enough added value over the pirate copies (be it convenience, no DRM or otherwise), the majority likely wouldn't be pirating. CD Projekt/GOG were founded on converting pirates in communist Poland doing exactly that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffngZOB1U2A
Nothing, you let the devs know about the issues that you have. And like I said, I'm not here to guilt trip anyone about piracy. if you want to pirate, pirate away. I just don't like when someone...
And I have already posted on the SuperGiant forums about my disappointment that Hades is EPIC exclusive. What more can I really do?
Nothing, you let the devs know about the issues that you have. And like I said, I'm not here to guilt trip anyone about piracy. if you want to pirate, pirate away. I just don't like when someone acts as if they are somehow forced into it or is doing so as some kind of protest and not because they just want to play the game and don't want to pay for it or wait until it is available.
Where have I acted like I am being forced into piracy? I feel like you're taking a bunch of baggage and assumptions you have made about other people who are just trying to justify their piracy and...
Where have I acted like I am being forced into piracy? I feel like you're taking a bunch of baggage and assumptions you have made about other people who are just trying to justify their piracy and are applying it to me.
It's true that in some rare cases I feel forced into piracy, when something isn't available to buy (e.g. I pirate a lot of fan-translated manga and fan-subbed Japanese/Korean tv shows because you can't even buy English versions of them even if you wanted to). But in most cases I fully admit piracy, even when I do it, is selfish entitlement. But I have also spent an insane amount of money on games, movies and music over the years and will likely continue to do so, and yet I still pirate occasionally... as have many, many other people, so it's very clearly not entirely about money. So I will say it again in hopes you finally acknowledge it this time; Piracy is a service problem. And I would honestly suggest you watch that youtube documentary on GOG I linked too... as it may change your opinion on pirates, their motivations and how best to go about convincing them to actually buy a product instead of pirating it.
p.s. another good video on the subject is the Cloth Map's video on Cuba's gaming scene, where most people have no choice but to pirate if they want to play any games: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEplzHraw3c
I haven't meant you specifically, sorry if I came across like I was accusing you. When I was talking about people thinking that they are forced into piracy I was mostly referring to a generic...
I haven't meant you specifically, sorry if I came across like I was accusing you. When I was talking about people thinking that they are forced into piracy I was mostly referring to a generic group/people in other threads on reddit for example rather than anyone in this thread specifically.
Edit: And I agree with you, if someone has no other option to acquire a product legally I feel it is kind of justifiable to pirate it since there are no other options. But when talking about games being exclusive to Epic store I feel that this example doesn't really work since there is an option to acquire said product.
Fair enough. Sorry I took it as you accusing me even if that's not what you meant. And despite the disagreement, I have enjoyed this discussion with you. So sorry if I came across as angry at you...
Fair enough. Sorry I took it as you accusing me even if that's not what you meant. And despite the disagreement, I have enjoyed this discussion with you. So sorry if I came across as angry at you or anything, I am not... I am just passionate about this subject is all (as I am sure you are too). :)
Yeah, even though we disagreed I really enjoyed the opportunity to have this discussion :) . I'm glad that here on Tildes such discussions are possible without one side getting downvoted and their...
Yeah, even though we disagreed I really enjoyed the opportunity to have this discussion :) . I'm glad that here on Tildes such discussions are possible without one side getting downvoted and their side of the argument hidden.
Not only are they bogging down your computer, anti cheat services are actual malware. They spy on your computer and are able to send whatever data they want back to someone elses server. For this...
like always on background update services and anti-cheat services, that consume valuable RAM and bog down your computer
Not only are they bogging down your computer, anti cheat services are actual malware. They spy on your computer and are able to send whatever data they want back to someone elses server. For this reason we should probably all be running games in a sandbox/vm
No it isn't because stealing a book reduces the available stock of the store. Pirating the game is exactly the same as not buying it. If you were never going to buy it originally then there was...
It's like stealing a book just because it's only available in bookstores
No it isn't because stealing a book reduces the available stock of the store. Pirating the game is exactly the same as not buying it. If you were never going to buy it originally then there was never anything lost by pirating it.
I don't mean people who have no intention of buying said game and would pirate it no matter what storefront it was on. With that analogy I was referring to someone who wants to buy a book but...
I don't mean people who have no intention of buying said game and would pirate it no matter what storefront it was on. With that analogy I was referring to someone who wants to buy a book but decides to steal it instead because it's only available in bookstores and not Amazon.
It's more complicated than that, really. I've previously spoken out in defense of Epic launcher a new store and launcher. But I've also expressed some serious reservations about how Epic is...
That was a while ago but I've had my opinion settle on the matter: I do not like it, I do not appreciate it, and I will rebel against it.
Something that helped my settle on that approach were the new details that have come out since then:
guaranteed sales, with financial repayment for underselling
paying money just for the exclusivity
their GDC press approach of aggressively proving themselves
the shocking lack of security with the EGS
The Phoenix Point thing was hugely revelatory. This group saw what Epic was offering and decided it was so good that they didn't even have to worry about selling their game anymore. They'd get an easy profit taking Epic's offer, giving up their promises to their Kickstarter backers, and feel they don't really have to worry about customer satisfaction anymore. Vlambeer also confirmed this, suggesting that one of the big downsides of Steam is that there's community engagement and management involved as a downside! They're rather not interact with their consumers at all!
I understand that gamers are quick to throw around dramatic claims, and feel they're being trampled when it rains on them, but this is a remarkable situation. We have developers actually suggesting that they'd like to cut customer satisfaction out of their success metrics and instead want the guaranteed profit that Epic is offering. Guaranteed sales with compensation for underselling is an insane offer, one that takes crazy amounts of finances to offer.
This is quite literally Epic buying out exclusivity at the cost of customer satisfaction at this point.
So... the piracy question. Well, if Epic are guaranteeing that a lost sale will be paid out to the devs anyway, then it strangely enough means piracy is less damaging than usual. Epic has basically acknowledged that any lost sale will be a net zero change for the developer—it would be as if the game was bought anyway. Okay, that's not 100% sound, there's a few leaps made there, but Epic's deal with these developers makes it more of an option than it usually would be, because they've cushioned (if not negated) the blow.
I don't think dismissing piracy as Unquestionably Bad is the right approach here, I think the data could tell an interesting story between:
sales expectations pre- and post- exclusivity
sales after exclusivity is over
sales volume between EGS and Steam after the exclusivity period, and its affect on income
piracy figures in the first year versus other AAA games (and their sales)
As for myself... I haven't really pirated any games for years and years and years. Not since I was too young to have an income to buy games at all. But in this case... I'm against throwing around ungodly amounts of money to buy power, and I am against storefront exclusivity (beyond first party) enough that I will consider piracy as an active form of rebellion and expression. I want to send the signal that I wanted to play their game but do not want to support their business practices.
And it'll be fine, because Epic will pay the dev for my lost sale anyway. I can't help but be amused that Epic would have saved themselves way more money simply by giving the user even a $5 discount directly on all purchases made through the EGS instead of committing all this money to guarantee exclusivity.
would you mind elaborating on what these "anti-consumer tactics" are? cuz I see the phrase thrown around a lot re: EPIC but don't really know what's meant by it generally. In a vacuum, I'd be glad...
would you mind elaborating on what these "anti-consumer tactics" are? cuz I see the phrase thrown around a lot re: EPIC but don't really know what's meant by it generally.
In a vacuum, I'd be glad to have someone challenging Steam's monopoly even if it's marginally more inconvenient on my end.
Sure. As objectively as I can state it; What everyone generally means when they say "anti-consumer tactics" in regards to this situation is that EPIC are intentionally trying to artificially...
Sure. As objectively as I can state it; What everyone generally means when they say "anti-consumer tactics" in regards to this situation is that EPIC are intentionally trying to artificially restrict consumer options by negotiating deals with 3rd party developers to have them only release their game on EPIC's sales platform. Many of these developers had also previously shown themselves intending to release their games elsewhere at the same time (e.g. on GOG and Steam), but after a deal with EPIC was reached they then retroactively removed the game listing or pushed the announced release date back on those alternate platforms.
Exclusives on PC aren't entirely unprecedented, as many game Publisher's subsidiary developed games have been exclusive to their Publisher's sales platform (e.g. EA's DICE releasing exclusively through EA's Origin), but what is totally new is that EPIC is not doing this with subsidiaries, they are specifically targeting independent 3rd party developers, convincing them into doing it. Many of these are thankfully only 1 year exclusivity contracts, because developers are not stupid and they know people will be pissed off they can't get the game on their platform of choice and are hoping the consumers will be willing to wait a year rather than pirate the game, but not all are temporary exclusives... some developers appear to have been convinced into make their games permanent EPIC exclusives now.
And my (and many other's) worry here, is that if this tactic succeeds you will begin to see a gaming landscape start to develop on PC very similar to what we already see on consoles where many games, even those developed by 3rd party developers, are permanently locked into one particular platform to the exclusion of all others, to the detriment of us, the consumers. That is not something I want to promote or have happen in the future, so I will not be buying anything from EPIC as a result.
p.s. Discord is also guilty of doing this now too, which is why I don't plan on buying anything from them either. The only saving grace there is that thankfully Discord have not been nearly as successful as EPIC at convincing many 3rd party developers that exclusivity on their sales platform is a good idea.
I'm not advocating for piracy, I'm pointing out it'll happen. Epic is making lots of bad decisions around their launcher, most other launchers can be easily ignored since few have actual...
I'm not advocating for piracy, I'm pointing out it'll happen. Epic is making lots of bad decisions around their launcher, most other launchers can be easily ignored since few have actual exclusives. The problem is that everytime a new store opens and puts out exclusives, you get what is currently happening on the TV streaming market.
There is too many stores, the customers get confused and angry, they just want to play the game they say on youtube. If piracy becomes easier than buying the product legit, people pirate, Gabe Newell expressed that during an interview and I think it's largely true.
People don't pirate a game because they want it for free, very few people do that and those who do usually don't have the means to pay for it (ie, kids, students, poor households). People pirate because piracy offers a 24/7 gamestore, no signups required, no DRM, no waiting for updates, no always online requirement and no invasive anti cheat software. For free. That's a damn good service for the price and any gamestore will have to make a better offer than that to beat piracy.
I don't mind installing a new launcher. What I don't like is Epic's way of going about forcing their way into the market, and the fact that they are 40% owned by Tencent. Rather than make a good...
I don't mind installing a new launcher. What I don't like is Epic's way of going about forcing their way into the market, and the fact that they are 40% owned by Tencent.
Rather than make a good platform that people want to use, they put out a shitty barebones product then bought exclusivity from a bunch of smaller developers to force people to use it. To make things worse, many of these games have already spent months using Steam to advertise their game, only to bait and switch, which is a total dick move towards Valve.
Hell, the Epic Games Store doesn't even have any kind of cloud save support. They haven't even met the bare minimum of what users expect from Yet Another Stupid Games Launcher before trying to shove it down our throats.
I think piracy might be an overreaction, I'll happily just buy this game from the Microsoft Store. The MS store might be slightly annoying, but it doesn't come with any of the ethical baggage attached to the EGS. I'm guessing this game will be Play Anywhere which is a nice bonus, since Obsidian is owned by Microsoft now.
Which are all totally valid reasons for not using Epic store, I'm all for competition and people's right to choose. Personally I don't have any problems with Epic store and will continue to use...
Which are all totally valid reasons for not using Epic store, I'm all for competition and people's right to choose. Personally I don't have any problems with Epic store and will continue to use it, but I do understand if someone wants/needs some more functionality. What I am against is people using that excuse to pirate games (like I've said in other replies so sorry for repeating myself).
And the worst thing is Obsidian probably didn't know it was happening until the last moment, since they were updating the steam store page until hours before the announcement.
And the worst thing is Obsidian probably didn't know it was happening until the last moment, since they were updating the steam store page until hours before the announcement.
Honestly, I kind of feel bad for the developers of these games who likely don't have any say in where their game ends up, but are nonetheless going to take flak because of last minute switching...
Honestly, I kind of feel bad for the developers of these games who likely don't have any say in where their game ends up, but are nonetheless going to take flak because of last minute switching shenanigans. I feel even worse for saying that I kind of hope many of these Epic Games exclusives flop in their first year, because I really don't want to see where anti-consumer practices like this lead.
Moving forward, I'd like to see Steam change its policy to contractually enforce non-exclusivity if a game wants to advertise on their platform before release. I was already looking forward to Metro, and now Outer Worlds before they went exclusive, and I'm tired of getting blue-balled.
I don't really support Epic's endeavors here, but I will say that compared to how things work on consoles, I do like that things go non-exclusive after a year. Ideally PC digital download...
I don't really support Epic's endeavors here, but I will say that compared to how things work on consoles, I do like that things go non-exclusive after a year. Ideally PC digital download exclusives wouldn't exist, because it's bad enough we have that platform-to-platform, but if they have to, I think I'm okay with temporary exclusivity.
Same thing happened with Satisfactory. I was going to be a day one customer for that. Now I'll just keep playing Factorio until Satisfactory shows up on Steam, or even better, on GOG
Same thing happened with Satisfactory. I was going to be a day one customer for that. Now I'll just keep playing Factorio until Satisfactory shows up on Steam, or even better, on GOG
I played the alpha because it was free. (Still able to run it with epic launcher uninstalled because no DRM.) In it's current state l much prefer Factorio, so it's a good idea to wait a year for...
I played the alpha because it was free. (Still able to run it with epic launcher uninstalled because no DRM.)
In it's current state l much prefer Factorio, so it's a good idea to wait a year for it to drop on Steam since l
hope it'll improve during that time.
That's what I thought too. I didn't get around to playing it as much as I wanted to that weekend, and I guess I made some early game mistakes in trying to play it like Factorio, but it still...
That's what I thought too. I didn't get around to playing it as much as I wanted to that weekend, and I guess I made some early game mistakes in trying to play it like Factorio, but it still seemed fun. Satisfactory had some interesting ideas though
I had no idea that Satisfactory was going to be released on the Epic Launcher. Up until that point I was somewhat interested but when I saw that the launcher didn't support Linux I lost any and...
I had no idea that Satisfactory was going to be released on the Epic Launcher. Up until that point I was somewhat interested but when I saw that the launcher didn't support Linux I lost any and all interest in Satisfactory. I watched a few Let's Plays of the Yogscast and found it pretty dull.
I'm conflicted because I really do understand the importance of competition for us consumers, but we've also never had it so good as consumers. At the risk of sounding like a Valve shill, Epic...
Exemplary
I'm conflicted because I really do understand the importance of competition for us consumers, but we've also never had it so good as consumers. At the risk of sounding like a Valve shill, Epic trying to ride in on a white horse to save us is hilarious because we're not the ones negatively impacted by Steam. Yes, please save us from ridiculously cheap prices, routine sales, dead-simple mod management, universal in-game browser/chat/community, etc. (obviously Steam isn't perfect, but it's damn close, imo).
Maybe further competition would make that even better, but I do find it obnoxious to have all of these damn game platforms installed. Origin, GoG (although admittedly it's optional!), Steam, BattleNet, etc. Just like come on...do I really need yet another bloated piece of software sending 'anonymous' data about me to another corporation? Thank god for PiHole.
of course, the reason why this happened isn't entirely on valve. steam is in the position that it is because valve offered a service people wanted--but also because just about everybody who tried...
Near monopoly status on PC game distribution is a pretty good reason IMO. Game developers need to have more options.
of course, the reason why this happened isn't entirely on valve. steam is in the position that it is because valve offered a service people wanted--but also because just about everybody who tried to answer steam with their own launcher made a shittier, clunkier, less functional version of it that would only ever gain traction because you were required to run their major releases through it. (i literally only have origin for one game that requires it to launch, for example, and if it weren't for that i wouldn't even bother.) i suspect we'd have more diversity if literally anybody who tried this had stuck the landing in any way.
I mean, the Epic Store is no different (except it is, because it's way, way worse than any other launcher out there, from a technical standpoint). Except Epic has dat Fortnite money to buy out...
I mean, the Epic Store is no different (except it is, because it's way, way worse than any other launcher out there, from a technical standpoint). Except Epic has dat Fortnite money to buy out publishers. We'll see how long that will last, but I don't think Epic can keep up this amount of spending forever.
I think Epic knows Fortnite will die off just like any other flavor-of-the-month game and is desperately tying to position themselves to maintain this high level of cash flow they've recently...
I think Epic knows Fortnite will die off just like any other flavor-of-the-month game and is desperately tying to position themselves to maintain this high level of cash flow they've recently grown accustomed to. Epic will probably never have another hit on their hands as big as Fortnite, but people will still need a place to buy new games for the foreseeable future.
They are basically trying to follow Valve's footsteps. The only difference is, Valve saw Steam as an answer to a number of technical problems first and as a revenue-generating platform second.
oh they probably can't, but to be honest the practices they're using right now are probably the only way anybody's going to seriously challenge steam at this point (short of all the major...
oh they probably can't, but to be honest the practices they're using right now are probably the only way anybody's going to seriously challenge steam at this point (short of all the major publishers uniting and creating one singular launcher). even places like GOG which have established brands that can be leveraged haven't really been able to meaningfully compete with steam's hegemony of the market, because steam just has so many games to offer as a storefront nowadays.
There are lots of healthy alternatives to Steam including GOG, Humble, and the various publisher stores. Most of these provide something unique to justify their existence, and I buy plenty of...
There are lots of healthy alternatives to Steam including GOG, Humble, and the various publisher stores. Most of these provide something unique to justify their existence, and I buy plenty of games on them. If Valve ever started abusing their market share, there are plenty of existing places for the market place to move to.
Epic, despite it's tiny market share, is already behaving in a far more monopolistic anti-consumer manner than Valve ever has. Imagine how evil they will be if they actually succeed.
Does the Humble Store still offer a local copy for some titles? I don't think I've bought a game on Steam since 2015. The local copy that I get from GOG is just too much of an insurance policy for...
Does the Humble Store still offer a local copy for some titles?
I don't think I've bought a game on Steam since 2015. The local copy that I get from GOG is just too much of an insurance policy for someone like me who mostly plays single-player games - knowing that I can download offline installers as backup for most of my library is great. I know Humble used to have a similar policy at some point, but I also haven't bought a game from them in a while now.
Steam obtained an organic monopoly, though. Epic is, strangely, creating inorganic competition by enabling the sacrifice of customer relations and satisfaction through things like guaranteed...
Steam obtained an organic monopoly, though. Epic is, strangely, creating inorganic competition by enabling the sacrifice of customer relations and satisfaction through things like guaranteed profits.
This is a strange reversal to what usually happens around monopolies, where the big monopoly is exploiting customers for profit and needs to be broken down by competition.
According to rumors, it will release on The Pirate Bay much earlier than 1 year, probably the publisher got an exception in the exclusivity deal with them. (I'm joking, somewhat, but this move will probably feed into piracy of that game)
The thing is, Epic games are DRM free so zipping the games and spreading them that way seems to be a piece of cake.
I would guess so. Metro: Exodus was cracked almost instantly
I love how people are advocating for piracy just because they don't want to spend a few minutes installing a new launcher. I mean I get it if they don't want to install Epic launcher as it is their choice which company/launcher they want to support, but they can also wait until the game comes out on their preferred launcher like a proper adult without resorting to piracy at a mere mention of the words "Epic".
Epic store sure has it's shortcomings and definitely has things it can improve on, but it isn't this big evil thing that the circlejerk suggests.
That's a bit of a strawman, IMO. I suspect the reaction has very little to do with people not wanting to install a new launcher for the vast majority of gamers, who likely have many digital sales platforms/launchers installed already. E.g. I have Steam, GOG, Twitch Desktop, Origin, Discord, Oculus Store, Battle.net, UPlay as well as Hi-Rez and Daybreak games' launcher installed and have bought games from each. I can't speak for everyone, but the reason I refuse to support EPIC is because they are using anti-consumer tactics that I do not want to support for fear that if they are successful they will spread.
I get that, if someone chooses not to support Epic it's their right to do so, but instantly going to pirating just because the game is not releasing on their preferred storefront for a year is not the answer. It's like stealing a book just because it's only available in bookstores and releasing on Amazon a year later.
And personally I never really gotten the argument about having too many platforms installed. I mean Windows already comes with a platform installed that can open and run games from any platform already without having to launch it first called desktop (or start menu if you prefer to keep things clean).
I agree. I haven't pirated a game in over a decade. Well... other than at LAN parties, because having everyone buy and install every old/obscure game we might want to play ahead of time is a bit much to ask and a pain to organize. But I never keep those games installed after the LAN.
That's a pretty ridiculous comparison IMO. The problem with store apps and launchers is that almost every one has a bunch of other BS they install alongside them, like always on background update services and anti-cheat services, that consume valuable RAM and bog down your computer unless you specifically uninstall/disable them (though they often reinstall and reenable themselves whenever the launcher updates). So there is some merit to the argument for not wanting to install too many of them.
Windows 10 makes it easy to disable unwanted startup processes from the task manager. Disabling them from there prevents the application from re-enabling it in the future.
Does that apply to services too? I don't think so, because I have definitely had Origin's web-helper and client services reset themselves to "automatic" on me plenty of times before, even after disabling and setting them to "manual".
It doesn't apply to services, but they usually aren't a major culprit when it comes resource usage.
Yeah, I get where you are coming from. Personally I don't have a problem with Epic store I just don't like when someone calls for piracy because of it.
I don't think zaarn was "calling" for piracy, per se... they were merely joking about it and pointing out how shortsighted a move like making your game store exclusive is, as that often drives people to piracy. And they aren't wrong there. E.g. Not that they would ever do this, but if CDPR announced that Cyberpunk 2077 was going to be an EPIC Store exclusive, you can bet your ass I would be pirating it despite my misgivings about piracy. ;)
See, but this is what I don't get, I would maybe understand it if you had to buy 500$ hardware if you wanted to play it, but you only need to download another free launcher. I understand that people can have different opinions about said launcher but just because a game is on there does not excuse piracy. I think if you really wanted to send a message to the devs straight up boycotting would be more effective than pirating it. I know this word is way overused but this just seem like entitlement.
And support a horrible anti-consumer, anti-competitive business model. Also, keep in mind that not every game that is EPIC exclusive plans on making themselves available on another platform after 1 year. Some, like Dauntless, appear to be planning on remaining EPIC exclusive for the foreseeable future.
Developers and Publishers can't know if someone didn't buy their game and certainly can't know the reasoning for people doing so... but they do track piracy numbers and if those suddenly spike, that sends a pretty clear message to them.
And yes, I realize that wanting to play a game on my own terms is entitlement. But for some things that are highly desirable to me, I am willing to set aside my misgiving on piracy to consume them. That goes for some movies and TV shows as well. It's not fair to the content producers and I recognize that, but I am merely speaking truth and I suspect I am far from alone in having that attitude. People can rail against entitlement all they want but guilt isn't going to change human nature. Only offering people a reasonable and affordable way to access the content they want to consume, on the platform they wish to, will. As Gabe Newell himself said, "piracy is a service problem".
I'll make this as a response to @hungariantoast as well since I feel this response fits both comments.
People will always find a reason to pirate games no matter what, and they will always do mental gymnastics in order to justify it, like you said it is human nature. I'm not here to guilt trip anyone into not pirating it, but I have way more respect for someone who says "yeah, piracy is wrong but I'm still gonna do it anyway" than someone who pretends they are somehow forced into pirating or if they are somehow taking a stand by stealing. Like I said, if you really wanted to make developers aware of some issues there are other legit ways to do so.
The piracy debate has been solved for decades already.
Convenience beats piracy. Lose the convenience, and piracy makes a comeback. All other factors and any morality is irrelevant to the conversation, and so is the type of product or market.
Steam has convenience going for it. One launcher, most games that ever existed, and they even support linux (good luck getting that from other vendors). That's now what 'convenient' means in gaming. Create twenty more gaming stores with their own software and convenient is now gone - your windows gaming rig is now a bloatware/spyware-infested mess.
Same for streaming music, or movies and television. One service that has it all without ads wins on convenience. Splitting that up into dozens of services and it's less convenient, more expensive, and just as ad-ridden as cable.
Where that 'convenience' line lies is different for everyone, and it also has a lot to do with their budget - some people can afford to pay $10 a month to 30 different services. Most people will never do that. Kids will pirate everything just because they can, they are too broke to afford it, and it's fun. That they are breaking the law doesn't enter their minds, or if it does, it just adds to the thrill.
Piracy is easier now than it ever was. The law won't keep it at bay, or as we've seen over the last 40 years, even make a dent in it. Pirates see the law as a spineless joke and with the track record it's had stopping piracy of digital content it's easy to see why. Piracy is the proverbial nuclear option, and there's no defense of any kind that has ever been even the slightest bit effective stopping it. There are entire classes of legit businesses dedicated just to supporting piracy (VPNs, seedbox vendors, etc).
DRM and similar technologies would have had to be designed into the internet, and into the concept of a computer, from day one for artificial digital scarcity to ever work. We're lucky that didn't happen, because that technology has other, far more harmful uses if it becomes ubiquitous in computing.
If I had to pick a good example of anti-piracy measures, I'd point to Autocad. Their dongles and authorization process are anything but convenient, though. More like a gargantuan pain in the ass on a daily basis - but they haven't got any competition, really, so there's not much that can be done. You just have to suck it up and do the dance if you want to get your engineering on.
Stay convenient, keep a reasonable price, and that's the best you can do fighting piracy. The market tendency right now is to fragment into hundreds of services that duplicate the cable and and console game markets as these old content behemoths try to create a corner for their content in this new marketplace. Most of them are in for a very rude awakening. They think streaming space is just a new cable space with each of them having their own 'channels'. Disney has the clout to make that work thanks to their near-monopoly on children's content. CBS? Not so much. A game 'network' launching on the strength of a handful of tiny exclusives, trying to take on Steam? Someone will have to explain to me how that isn't just a hilarious joke.
I have a hunch that's not going to fly long-term. People will subscribe for only a month or two, then cancel until something new they want to see appears. Make that process painful and they'll stop re-upping and simply pirate the content again. If these content providers are expecting everyone to pay them every month, they are looking for bankruptcy. They haven't got the 'bundles' that protected them in other marketplaces.
Where I personally draw the line is advertisements. Show me ads on a service I pay for and I'm not only out, I now consider you an enemy and feel not just guilt-free, but good pirating your content. Steam itself is about as far as I go - the ads there simply don't get in my way, and that's what I want, the ability to ignore them all unless I'm shopping. That's just me and my irrational hatred of insulting, time wasting, unproductive lies disguised as consumerism, though. Some people don't mind the ads.
Ask ten different people why they pirate and you'll get ten different answers. In the end, though, it always boils down to 'it's easy.' Frustrated consumers turn to piracy. Satisfied ones don't mind that extra $1/mo price increase every year so much.
Well expressed. I've had difficulty coming up with as solid anti-piracy measure, but I hadn't even noticed Autocad had a feature like that. What does it do?
I think Gabe Newell expressed the piracy problem best:
That's exactly how Steam conquered the world. They turned Russia from pirate central into a monster cash cow that beats Europe in profits... just by not being dicks to their customers. People like to pretend this is a hard problem. The reality is it's an easy problem to solve. You just have to stop thinking 'piracy is theft' to get there. Piracy is theft-like in nature, but it's far more nuanced and complicated than simple stealing. You don't deprive anyone by making a copy, and yes, people would absolutely download a Porsche if that were possible without a second thought. Digital content isn't like physical content. The rules are different, at least until 3D printing comes into its own. Then we get to do this dance again in the real world, and that's going to make for interesting times. I think if we move from a mindset of 'copy' rights to a mindset of 'profit' rights we can dig our way out of this mess, but that'll take decades.
Edit: As for Autocad, it's kinda the 'Photoshop' of the computer-aided design market. Want to build a replacement for the golden gate bridge? You'll be using Autocad. They place part of the software itself inside a USB-attached dongle that must be present attached to the computer in order for the program to execute. Without it, whatever you're building in there just sort of... melts and loses its form (or at least, that was their easter egg 'haha' to the pirates in the early days). When you are a sysadmin supporting 200 desktops with this software installed, with each dongle locked to each unique digital copy of the program, you can see why it becomes a massive pain in the ass. They have some server-side USB keys now to take the pain out of that, but only because their customers basically rioted and demanded it. It's been a while since I worked in the CAD space, but back then they didn't have competition, period. Not sure if they do now or not.
Sadly we're half-way there already... See HTML5's built in DRM, and I wouldn't be surprised if at some point in the future cpu, gpu and monitor manufacturers consider including baked in hardware DRM to prevent screen and video output capturing of copyrighted materials, similar to what HD DVD & Blu-ray decided to do all those years ago.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0, never forget.
It'll all fail, because there is no way to plug the analog hole. At some point, it leaves the system to travel through the air to get to your head. It can always be captured at that point, often losslessly, and the reuploaded and shared. Not just that, but the content using such annoying measures will end up being pirated much more heavily than content without it, so by using these technologies in an anti-consumer method, you simply guarantee your own failure.
Spotify uses DRM. I can also drag-and-drop playlists out of Spotify onto my desktop and have them magically appear as ogg-320 files in seconds thanks to some handy programs built to strip that DRM off of their service. Spotify has basically turned into Napster, we've come full circle despite the DRM protections. I'm sure Spotify knows about this, and also doesn't give a damn in the slightest. They probably added that tech just to smooth over their record deals with labels who, through pure tech ignorance, thought those protections would be effective.
I'm not worried. Once we have a brain computer interface that plugs the analog hole, then I'll start worrying... though less about who owns the media than about what garbage companies are trying to download into my wetware. :P
I agree that it's ultimately doomed to fail, but I think the attempt to lock everything down is sadly inevitable regardless. And like you I am not really worried either since workarounds to the bullshit are inevitable as well, but it's just a giant PITA having to deal with this crap over and over again merely because nobody making the decisions seems to learn. ;)
Yeah. Live long enough and these cycles reach eye-rolling levels. So many people and businesses who never took the ten seconds to learn from history. When your business has as many layers, middlemen, and backroom deals as the entertainment industry, change is slow, and hard, if it comes at all. People who have never used the internet are still making executive level decisions in these markets, and in government.
If it gets bad enough, a company will start up that focuses on fully open hardware, from BIOS to CPU Microcode, from motherboard to mobile phone - and they'll make a killing. There's been plenty of talk about this lately for reasons unrelated to this conversation. Markets are a fickle bitch, but they always give people what they want, eventually. Powers that be can meddle, confuse, and delay things, but they can't stop them in the long run. Sooner or later the market wins out and turns over the old paradigm.
Already starting to happen too, thankfully... :)
OpenRISC, RISC-V, Necuno, Purism, etc. Whether they are successful and stick around is yet to be seen though.
Accusing someone of performing mental gymnastics is a pretty dick thing to do. I can absolutely guarantee you I have spent significantly more on games (and movies/music) on dozens of different systems and platforms than anyone else you know. My steam account alone is valued at >$11k with almost 1k games on it. It is not just "mental gymnastics" that makes me refuse to support EPIC and "justify to myself" why I would pirate something over supporting them, and it genuinely is about having zero desire to support them essentially bribing 3rd party developers to release exclusively on their store... because if that model is successful it will spread. Am I entitled, perhaps a bit, yes... but I am not self-delusional.
But it is mental gymnastics though, you are trying to justify why you should steal something instead of doing a responsible thing and not getting the game until the devs release it on your preferred platform.
I never said I wouldn't wait the one year! I likely would and will do that for the games that are 1 year exclusives that I still want to play, like Hades. But also:
Then let the devs know, spread awareness of this issue, there are ways to get in touch with devs nowadays to let them know they are missing customers.
Also, the number of downloads on some torrent site does not equal to the number of lost customers.
Edit: Also like I said, if someone admits that piracy is wrong and they are going to do so anyway it's way better than someone who tries to somehow justify it why they need to pirate.
i'm sorry, but developers and their parent companies are not about to drop their anti-consumerist policies or get rid of DRM they've implemented or whatever else just because you ask nicely and say you won't be buying their game. they're not likely to do it in response to piracy either, granted, but politely asking has literally no leverage of any kind (after all, the fuck do they care if you say you aren't buying their game? for all they know you never had intent to buy it at all) whereas at least piracy theoretically damages their bottom line and suggests to them you might have bought it in another circumstance.
But people will always do mental gymnastics to justify why they should pirate something no matter which launcher the game is available on. Piracy just forces devs to spend more resources on DRM.
But let's say a game has been pirated 100,000 times that does not mean that they lost 100,000 customers. That just makes them spend more on DRM.
yes, i'm aware that piracy numbers =/= lost customers. that's why i said theoretically it hurts the bottom line. maybe it doesn't in some cases. but honestly even ignoring that, the reality is that nobody at EA or activision or any other major game studio gives a shit about your polite pleas to stop fucking over consumers, because they don't answer to you and have no obligation to answer to you. you the consumer only matter if treating you nicely makes them more money--and if it doesn't, why should they bother to care about you? really, piracy--unethical as it might be--is basically the only clear, indisputable leverage consumers have by which they can change practices in the industry, because until it becomes non-profitable to use a certain practice, they have no reason to stop using it.
so what? for one thing DRM is almost ubiquitous to begin with, and it's all crackable with time--but more importantly, the ramping up of DRM is often a tool people exploit to advance the cause of making game studios rethink their approach, because if they make it too obnoxious enough people will start to tell them to fuck off, which is something that has happened before in the industry.
Exactly. One's wallet is still one's most powerful and effective voting tool. That's just the world we live in, and no matter how much it changes, or what laws are passed, as long as money and markets of any kind exist, that voting tool is going to be right there with them in some form.
Polite emails can be ignored. Having a 20% softer launch than you were anticipating along with the resulting stock tumble (and seeing your game at #1 on a piracy leaderboard) is not something that can be ignored. It's not something that can be solved by force or law enforcement, either - the company can't abdicate the responsibility. It's up to them, and they know it, and there's nothing they can do about it except become more convenient than the piracy is.
I like how HBO handles it. They brag about their pirated content in their marketing. I wonder once HBO Go went online how much the piracy dropped. I'd bet it was pretty significant. They also made a killing by realizing that hey, if you make shows with a lot of rewatch value (aka good television), and sell them on DVD/BluRay, you'll make far more money than advertising allows you to make.
Most people do want to support the things they love.
You keep acting like I don't already do that. Are we not here on this public forum (and places like reddit) expressing our dissatisfaction? And I have already posted on the SuperGiant forums about my disappointment that Hades is EPIC exclusive. What more can I really do?
Not all of them, but a vast majority are. Piracy IS a service problem. If the games were available for a reasonable price on the terms those gamers were comfortable with, with enough added value over the pirate copies (be it convenience, no DRM or otherwise), the majority likely wouldn't be pirating. CD Projekt/GOG were founded on converting pirates in communist Poland doing exactly that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffngZOB1U2A
Nothing, you let the devs know about the issues that you have. And like I said, I'm not here to guilt trip anyone about piracy. if you want to pirate, pirate away. I just don't like when someone acts as if they are somehow forced into it or is doing so as some kind of protest and not because they just want to play the game and don't want to pay for it or wait until it is available.
Where have I acted like I am being forced into piracy? I feel like you're taking a bunch of baggage and assumptions you have made about other people who are just trying to justify their piracy and are applying it to me.
It's true that in some rare cases I feel forced into piracy, when something isn't available to buy (e.g. I pirate a lot of fan-translated manga and fan-subbed Japanese/Korean tv shows because you can't even buy English versions of them even if you wanted to). But in most cases I fully admit piracy, even when I do it, is selfish entitlement. But I have also spent an insane amount of money on games, movies and music over the years and will likely continue to do so, and yet I still pirate occasionally... as have many, many other people, so it's very clearly not entirely about money. So I will say it again in hopes you finally acknowledge it this time; Piracy is a service problem. And I would honestly suggest you watch that youtube documentary on GOG I linked too... as it may change your opinion on pirates, their motivations and how best to go about convincing them to actually buy a product instead of pirating it.
p.s. another good video on the subject is the Cloth Map's video on Cuba's gaming scene, where most people have no choice but to pirate if they want to play any games:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEplzHraw3c
I haven't meant you specifically, sorry if I came across like I was accusing you. When I was talking about people thinking that they are forced into piracy I was mostly referring to a generic group/people in other threads on reddit for example rather than anyone in this thread specifically.
Edit: And I agree with you, if someone has no other option to acquire a product legally I feel it is kind of justifiable to pirate it since there are no other options. But when talking about games being exclusive to Epic store I feel that this example doesn't really work since there is an option to acquire said product.
Fair enough. Sorry I took it as you accusing me even if that's not what you meant. And despite the disagreement, I have enjoyed this discussion with you. So sorry if I came across as angry at you or anything, I am not... I am just passionate about this subject is all (as I am sure you are too). :)
Yeah, even though we disagreed I really enjoyed the opportunity to have this discussion :) . I'm glad that here on Tildes such discussions are possible without one side getting downvoted and their side of the argument hidden.
Not only are they bogging down your computer, anti cheat services are actual malware. They spy on your computer and are able to send whatever data they want back to someone elses server. For this reason we should probably all be running games in a sandbox/vm
No it isn't because stealing a book reduces the available stock of the store. Pirating the game is exactly the same as not buying it. If you were never going to buy it originally then there was never anything lost by pirating it.
I don't mean people who have no intention of buying said game and would pirate it no matter what storefront it was on. With that analogy I was referring to someone who wants to buy a book but decides to steal it instead because it's only available in bookstores and not Amazon.
It's more complicated than that, really. I've previously spoken out in defense of Epic launcher a new store and launcher. But I've also expressed some serious reservations about how Epic is creating exclusives.
That was a while ago but I've had my opinion settle on the matter: I do not like it, I do not appreciate it, and I will rebel against it.
Something that helped my settle on that approach were the new details that have come out since then:
The Phoenix Point thing was hugely revelatory. This group saw what Epic was offering and decided it was so good that they didn't even have to worry about selling their game anymore. They'd get an easy profit taking Epic's offer, giving up their promises to their Kickstarter backers, and feel they don't really have to worry about customer satisfaction anymore. Vlambeer also confirmed this, suggesting that one of the big downsides of Steam is that there's community engagement and management involved as a downside! They're rather not interact with their consumers at all!
I understand that gamers are quick to throw around dramatic claims, and feel they're being trampled when it rains on them, but this is a remarkable situation. We have developers actually suggesting that they'd like to cut customer satisfaction out of their success metrics and instead want the guaranteed profit that Epic is offering. Guaranteed sales with compensation for underselling is an insane offer, one that takes crazy amounts of finances to offer.
This is quite literally Epic buying out exclusivity at the cost of customer satisfaction at this point.
So... the piracy question. Well, if Epic are guaranteeing that a lost sale will be paid out to the devs anyway, then it strangely enough means piracy is less damaging than usual. Epic has basically acknowledged that any lost sale will be a net zero change for the developer—it would be as if the game was bought anyway. Okay, that's not 100% sound, there's a few leaps made there, but Epic's deal with these developers makes it more of an option than it usually would be, because they've cushioned (if not negated) the blow.
I don't think dismissing piracy as Unquestionably Bad is the right approach here, I think the data could tell an interesting story between:
As for myself... I haven't really pirated any games for years and years and years. Not since I was too young to have an income to buy games at all. But in this case... I'm against throwing around ungodly amounts of money to buy power, and I am against storefront exclusivity (beyond first party) enough that I will consider piracy as an active form of rebellion and expression. I want to send the signal that I wanted to play their game but do not want to support their business practices.
And it'll be fine, because Epic will pay the dev for my lost sale anyway. I can't help but be amused that Epic would have saved themselves way more money simply by giving the user even a $5 discount directly on all purchases made through the EGS instead of committing all this money to guarantee exclusivity.
would you mind elaborating on what these "anti-consumer tactics" are? cuz I see the phrase thrown around a lot re: EPIC but don't really know what's meant by it generally.
In a vacuum, I'd be glad to have someone challenging Steam's monopoly even if it's marginally more inconvenient on my end.
Sure. As objectively as I can state it; What everyone generally means when they say "anti-consumer tactics" in regards to this situation is that EPIC are intentionally trying to artificially restrict consumer options by negotiating deals with 3rd party developers to have them only release their game on EPIC's sales platform. Many of these developers had also previously shown themselves intending to release their games elsewhere at the same time (e.g. on GOG and Steam), but after a deal with EPIC was reached they then retroactively removed the game listing or pushed the announced release date back on those alternate platforms.
Exclusives on PC aren't entirely unprecedented, as many game Publisher's subsidiary developed games have been exclusive to their Publisher's sales platform (e.g. EA's DICE releasing exclusively through EA's Origin), but what is totally new is that EPIC is not doing this with subsidiaries, they are specifically targeting independent 3rd party developers, convincing them into doing it. Many of these are thankfully only 1 year exclusivity contracts, because developers are not stupid and they know people will be pissed off they can't get the game on their platform of choice and are hoping the consumers will be willing to wait a year rather than pirate the game, but not all are temporary exclusives... some developers appear to have been convinced into make their games permanent EPIC exclusives now.
And my (and many other's) worry here, is that if this tactic succeeds you will begin to see a gaming landscape start to develop on PC very similar to what we already see on consoles where many games, even those developed by 3rd party developers, are permanently locked into one particular platform to the exclusion of all others, to the detriment of us, the consumers. That is not something I want to promote or have happen in the future, so I will not be buying anything from EPIC as a result.
p.s. Discord is also guilty of doing this now too, which is why I don't plan on buying anything from them either. The only saving grace there is that thankfully Discord have not been nearly as successful as EPIC at convincing many 3rd party developers that exclusivity on their sales platform is a good idea.
Thank you for the explanation!
I'm not advocating for piracy, I'm pointing out it'll happen. Epic is making lots of bad decisions around their launcher, most other launchers can be easily ignored since few have actual exclusives. The problem is that everytime a new store opens and puts out exclusives, you get what is currently happening on the TV streaming market.
There is too many stores, the customers get confused and angry, they just want to play the game they say on youtube. If piracy becomes easier than buying the product legit, people pirate, Gabe Newell expressed that during an interview and I think it's largely true.
People don't pirate a game because they want it for free, very few people do that and those who do usually don't have the means to pay for it (ie, kids, students, poor households). People pirate because piracy offers a 24/7 gamestore, no signups required, no DRM, no waiting for updates, no always online requirement and no invasive anti cheat software. For free. That's a damn good service for the price and any gamestore will have to make a better offer than that to beat piracy.
I don't mind installing a new launcher. What I don't like is Epic's way of going about forcing their way into the market, and the fact that they are 40% owned by Tencent.
Rather than make a good platform that people want to use, they put out a shitty barebones product then bought exclusivity from a bunch of smaller developers to force people to use it. To make things worse, many of these games have already spent months using Steam to advertise their game, only to bait and switch, which is a total dick move towards Valve.
Hell, the Epic Games Store doesn't even have any kind of cloud save support. They haven't even met the bare minimum of what users expect from Yet Another Stupid Games Launcher before trying to shove it down our throats.
I think piracy might be an overreaction, I'll happily just buy this game from the Microsoft Store. The MS store might be slightly annoying, but it doesn't come with any of the ethical baggage attached to the EGS. I'm guessing this game will be Play Anywhere which is a nice bonus, since Obsidian is owned by Microsoft now.
Which are all totally valid reasons for not using Epic store, I'm all for competition and people's right to choose. Personally I don't have any problems with Epic store and will continue to use it, but I do understand if someone wants/needs some more functionality. What I am against is people using that excuse to pirate games (like I've said in other replies so sorry for repeating myself).
And the worst thing is Obsidian probably didn't know it was happening until the last moment, since they were updating the steam store page until hours before the announcement.
Honestly, I kind of feel bad for the developers of these games who likely don't have any say in where their game ends up, but are nonetheless going to take flak because of last minute switching shenanigans. I feel even worse for saying that I kind of hope many of these Epic Games exclusives flop in their first year, because I really don't want to see where anti-consumer practices like this lead.
Moving forward, I'd like to see Steam change its policy to contractually enforce non-exclusivity if a game wants to advertise on their platform before release. I was already looking forward to Metro, and now Outer Worlds before they went exclusive, and I'm tired of getting blue-balled.
I don't really support Epic's endeavors here, but I will say that compared to how things work on consoles, I do like that things go non-exclusive after a year. Ideally PC digital download exclusives wouldn't exist, because it's bad enough we have that platform-to-platform, but if they have to, I think I'm okay with temporary exclusivity.
Same thing happened with Satisfactory. I was going to be a day one customer for that. Now I'll just keep playing Factorio until Satisfactory shows up on Steam, or even better, on GOG
I played the alpha because it was free. (Still able to run it with epic launcher uninstalled because no DRM.)
In it's current state l much prefer Factorio, so it's a good idea to wait a year for it to drop on Steam since l
hope it'll improve during that time.
That's what I thought too. I didn't get around to playing it as much as I wanted to that weekend, and I guess I made some early game mistakes in trying to play it like Factorio, but it still seemed fun. Satisfactory had some interesting ideas though
I had no idea that Satisfactory was going to be released on the Epic Launcher. Up until that point I was somewhat interested but when I saw that the launcher didn't support Linux I lost any and all interest in Satisfactory. I watched a few Let's Plays of the Yogscast and found it pretty dull.
Played it durign their free-alpha weekend. It was pretty fun, but had some issues (which I think will be ironed out in the future)
Why exactly do you say that Steam has to be knocked down a few pegs?
Near monopoly status on PC game distribution is a pretty good reason IMO. Game developers need to have more options.
I'm conflicted because I really do understand the importance of competition for us consumers, but we've also never had it so good as consumers. At the risk of sounding like a Valve shill, Epic trying to ride in on a white horse to save us is hilarious because we're not the ones negatively impacted by Steam. Yes, please save us from ridiculously cheap prices, routine sales, dead-simple mod management, universal in-game browser/chat/community, etc. (obviously Steam isn't perfect, but it's damn close, imo).
Maybe further competition would make that even better, but I do find it obnoxious to have all of these damn game platforms installed. Origin, GoG (although admittedly it's optional!), Steam, BattleNet, etc. Just like come on...do I really need yet another bloated piece of software sending 'anonymous' data about me to another corporation? Thank god for PiHole.
of course, the reason why this happened isn't entirely on valve. steam is in the position that it is because valve offered a service people wanted--but also because just about everybody who tried to answer steam with their own launcher made a shittier, clunkier, less functional version of it that would only ever gain traction because you were required to run their major releases through it. (i literally only have origin for one game that requires it to launch, for example, and if it weren't for that i wouldn't even bother.) i suspect we'd have more diversity if literally anybody who tried this had stuck the landing in any way.
I mean, the Epic Store is no different (except it is, because it's way, way worse than any other launcher out there, from a technical standpoint). Except Epic has dat Fortnite money to buy out publishers. We'll see how long that will last, but I don't think Epic can keep up this amount of spending forever.
I think Epic knows Fortnite will die off just like any other flavor-of-the-month game and is desperately tying to position themselves to maintain this high level of cash flow they've recently grown accustomed to. Epic will probably never have another hit on their hands as big as Fortnite, but people will still need a place to buy new games for the foreseeable future.
They are basically trying to follow Valve's footsteps. The only difference is, Valve saw Steam as an answer to a number of technical problems first and as a revenue-generating platform second.
oh they probably can't, but to be honest the practices they're using right now are probably the only way anybody's going to seriously challenge steam at this point (short of all the major publishers uniting and creating one singular launcher). even places like GOG which have established brands that can be leveraged haven't really been able to meaningfully compete with steam's hegemony of the market, because steam just has so many games to offer as a storefront nowadays.
There are lots of healthy alternatives to Steam including GOG, Humble, and the various publisher stores. Most of these provide something unique to justify their existence, and I buy plenty of games on them. If Valve ever started abusing their market share, there are plenty of existing places for the market place to move to.
Epic, despite it's tiny market share, is already behaving in a far more monopolistic anti-consumer manner than Valve ever has. Imagine how evil they will be if they actually succeed.
Does the Humble Store still offer a local copy for some titles?
I don't think I've bought a game on Steam since 2015. The local copy that I get from GOG is just too much of an insurance policy for someone like me who mostly plays single-player games - knowing that I can download offline installers as backup for most of my library is great. I know Humble used to have a similar policy at some point, but I also haven't bought a game from them in a while now.
Steam obtained an organic monopoly, though. Epic is, strangely, creating inorganic competition by enabling the sacrifice of customer relations and satisfaction through things like guaranteed profits.
This is a strange reversal to what usually happens around monopolies, where the big monopoly is exploiting customers for profit and needs to be broken down by competition.