Know clue why I'm surprised in any shape or form

Don't forget that DRM isn't just about online piracy. It's also about disk sharing between friends. When I got The Witcher 2, I didn't even need to put a serial number in. I could've just bought it, installed it, given it to my friend, and he wouldn't have to pay for it. DRM does prevent that and forces people to buy the game instead of borrowing from someone. With Steam or Origin, it's one serial number per account, and you can't have two people log into an account and play at the same time.

Everywhere. Gamestop, Steam, Amazon, even Origin is selling it. I think it was 60 or 50 dollars.

While I do agree with you that DRM helps with sales, that was a bad example. The Elder Scrolls has been around since DOS gaming, and Skyrim is the third game in the series to receive multiple game of the year awards. The Witcher series has been around since 2007 and doesn't have the type of advertising that ZeniMax does.

 

Which again, I find to be bullshit. When I buy a product, I expect to be able to lend it to someone who does not have one or cannot afford one. I also expect to be able to study the product and make another on my own to give to said friend. I do not appreciate the seller extorting more money out of me or charging me twice for the same product with no material gain on my part.

 

Did you know that Metal Gear Solid Peacewalker on PSP, a critically acclaimed main installment of an insanely popular IP, released when the PSP park was at its peak, sold less units than Metal Gear Acid, also on the PSP, despite the fact that Acid was tepidly received by the critics, was an obvious sub-par spin-off, and was released when the PSP park was at its lowest ? You can argue piracy morality all day long, in the end piracy does affect the sales. I know a few living breathing walking proofs of that, people who, as soon as piracy became an option, immediately ceased buying anything they could pirate, without a single exception.

Do you really think the marketing departments device things like DRM on a whim ? For the sake of arguing piracy ? They' ve got more reliable charts than we' ll ever have and are paid to do the math, it' s their job. They found a legal way to increase their revenues and they' ll stick to it as long as it remains efficient and legal, any other consideration falls behind. As I said before if people aren' t happy with X Y Z they' d better put their money where their mouth is, money is the only thing the marketing departments are paid to care about.

 

Do game developers need that many sales? Are you aiming for more profits, or is it reasonable to demand even more sales? Again I present the argument that if you let people pirate and you do burn out, those people will be forced to change their habits and become more reasonable or they will stop having games to pirate. You are not giving people enough credit.

If you are arguing that a lack of DRM affects sales, then I argue that letting people pass your product in the isle and not buy it also affects sales. At what point does extortion become acceptable?

 

It' s not necessarily the game developers per say who try to ensure the maximum profits, it' s the investors. Most of the time such things are completely out of the artists' hands. I wasn' t trying to argue that the search for maximum profit is what I would personally aim for, in fact I wouldn' t, but I can certainly understand that the people who invest millions tend to try and ensure a profit with any legal measure they can think of. Most surprisingly, they aren' t willing to take the risk to be forced to watch their investment "burn out" just to teach pirates a lesson. They are the ones who lack faith in humanity, or rather lack the will to bet on it, they are the ones you should be arguing with.

True. I' m one of the people who boycott such things. I wasn' t arguing that DRM doesn' t affect profits both positively and negatively, I' m arguing that if they keep doing it then it must mean that their charts proved the positives outweighs the negatives. It' s either that or they are completely stupid. I don' t understand why you keep bringing up extortion though, it' s illegal isn' t it ?

 

How frustrating. Once again it is the already rich and their greed that are to blame and not the overall populace.

No, in fact the very framework of law in almost every society today is the basis for wide-scale extortion. Forcing you to buy a product "or else" is called extortion, isn't it? Isn't that what taxes are?

Furthermore, doing something illegal like extorting thousands of dollars, and then offering to give it back for a small portion instead of paying before more than that portion for legal fees is also called extortion. In that case, they didn't want the full amount, but they did extort a percentage out of you. What would you call the piracy practices of the RIAA if not preying on those who cannot afford legal fees?

 

Oh hardly, there are video game companies going out of business left and right. The populace wants these games with huge budgets, therefore you cannot blame them for trying to get more money so that they don't go bankrupt.

 

But why would you try to compare the video game industry to extortion ? I would understand the parallel if video games were a first necessity product, but you can live just fine without them, right ?

 

The reasons why the populace wants them contradicts the idea that they would pirate them without DRM. If they want higher budget games, then they will pay willingly.

Do they want higher budget games or not? If so, then why is DRM needed?

Not quite. Particularly with intellectual property and protecting an idea using DRM, they are limiting what I can do with the data I have on my hard drive which I bought, and by extension how I use my hard drive as well as the hard copy of the game installer which I bought. They are extorting profits out of what I and others already own and furthermore they are extorting control over what we own. Please notice that breaking DRM is illegal. Or I was sure it was based on all of the arrests I have heard about. They are using that law to extort a profit from my using my property which I have already payed for. Extorting control is actually far more annoying than extorting profits alone.

 

Of course they do, why else do games with bigger budgets and better graphics sell a ton more than games with worse graphics? Even though the gameplay might be just as good, if not better? You put too much good will in the populace, they demand things and yet they do not want to pay for it. That's the world you live in.

 

Then they do not want it enough and do not deserve it. I do not put good will in the populace. I refuse to let them be stupid and harm everyone because of it. I would rather they all burn out and learn that they have to pay to have good games than be babied on the subject. DRM is a band-aid, it is a "how to solve" but does more harm than good for the end user. Instead, the average person must learn "why". By nature of trying to get good things for free and failing because of natural consequences if not through the learning of economics and trade.

 

Well, I get why you would be pissed if it was implemented after you bought the game. I know too little about the copyright mumbo jumbo to argue decently about it, but I certainly agree that those laws, from where I stand, do seem very flawed.

 

If DRM existed just to slow down pirates and did not hinder my enjoyment of the product, I would not mind it as much, but in cases like this they are limiting what I can do with what I payed them for, and if I try to break that DRM after buying it, I am breaking the law. I feel like that it is extortion in the same way that making a law telling me that I am not allowed to remove a child safety lock on a door I bought (which thereby costs me more money after I take it off) is extortion.