Ubisoft games - poster children for piracy?

[sbr]

But why do you need a reason to pull completely out of a market?  As I said above you can't exactly boycott games that aren't made.

[Barrister]

You don't have to listen to Jake to figure that out though - the industry is going to blow it out of proportion because they have a vested interest in doing so.

It is like asking an auto insurance salesman how much fraudulent auto claims impact the industry.

I have an honest question for you Berk.  I have been following this thread from the start, so I might have missed something but if I did it was unintentional.  I am not trying to trap you, or get you to restate something you already have; no bullshit.

What is the industry's vested interest in blowing the piracy problem out of proportion?  I mean if they don't want to make PC games anymore, for any reason, why do they need a scapegoat?  Why can't they just say "PC gamers are whiny bitches and consoles are easy to develop for and more profitable."

I don't see where they lose anything by just saying F You to PC gamers if that is their intention.  What, are PC only gamers going to boycott games that are not made for their system?  Console players won't care, they still get their game.  The very small group that owns/uses both aren't likely to just give up gaming completely, talk about cutting off your own nose to spite your face.

I just don't get the end game here for the PC devs in blaming something that isn't really a problem.

Because it makes it a lot easier and much more palatable to have a reason.  Telling PC Gamers that they can't be bothered to make reasonable ports is failing at basic PR.  They avoid that issue if they point to the dastardly pirates preventing them from being honest and fair to their PC fans.

Except the fact that major games are not being released for PC is hardly out of laziness.  Surely the big game companies have some fairly logical basis for not releasing certain AAA titles for PC.

[garbon]

You don't have to listen to Jake to figure that out though - the industry is going to blow it out of proportion because they have a vested interest in doing so.

It is like asking an auto insurance salesman how much fraudulent auto claims impact the industry.

I have an honest question for you Berk.  I have been following this thread from the start, so I might have missed something but if I did it was unintentional.  I am not trying to trap you, or get you to restate something you already have; no bullshit.

What is the industry's vested interest in blowing the piracy problem out of proportion?  I mean if they don't want to make PC games anymore, for any reason, why do they need a scapegoat?  Why can't they just say "PC gamers are whiny bitches and consoles are easy to develop for and more profitable."

I don't see where they lose anything by just saying F You to PC gamers if that is their intention.  What, are PC only gamers going to boycott games that are not made for their system?  Console players won't care, they still get their game.  The very small group that owns/uses both aren't likely to just give up gaming completely, talk about cutting off your own nose to spite your face.

I just don't get the end game here for the PC devs in blaming something that isn't really a problem.

Because it makes it a lot easier and much more palatable to have a reason.  Telling PC Gamers that they can't be bothered to make reasonable ports is failing at basic PR.  They avoid that issue if they point to the dastardly pirates preventing them from being honest and fair to their PC fans.

Except the fact that major games are not being released for PC is hardly out of laziness.  Surely the big game companies have some fairly logical basis for not releasing certain AAA titles for PC.

Laziness? I wasn't addressing laziness. I was addressing why it isn't a good idea to tell a base of consumers that you won't make a product because you simply don't feel like it. You know - the hypothetical that sbr raised.

[garbon]

But why do you need a reason to pull completely out of a market?  As I said above you can't exactly boycott games that aren't made.

Because the market is no longer profitable? It clearly a win to produce games that are made for consoles. You've the capability of consoles to handle as close to PC capabilities as most consumers want and said consumers have to worry nothing about hardware restrictions as the devs can optimize games to work across several consoles systems. Why wouldn't the ideal consumer base now be said platforms?

[Berkut]

You don't have to listen to Jake to figure that out though - the industry is going to blow it out of proportion because they have a vested interest in doing so.

It is like asking an auto insurance salesman how much fraudulent auto claims impact the industry.

Again, d'oh.  Every industry is going to blow its problems out of proportion.  That doesn't mean that we (as in society in general) should just ignore those problems.

I don't think I ever said we should.

I've repeatedly asked why people think this is the reason that PC gaming has declined, and the ONLY thing that has been given as data is that developers SAY that is the case.

I don't think it should be ignored, nor do I think it is ignored. I do think that there is little evidence that piracy is the reason that PCs no longer dominate the gaming market, and have stated why I dismiss the "evidence" provided. All it amounts to is "Game developers SAY that it is a huge problem and killing PC gaming". Hence my observation that the developers have a vested interest in over-stating the problem, and hence their word is not very good evidence.

[Barrister]

I don't think it should be ignored, nor do I think it is ignored. I do think that there is little evidence that piracy is the reason that PCs no longer dominate the gaming market, and have stated why I dismiss the "evidence" provided. All it amounts to is "Game developers SAY that it is a huge problem and killing PC gaming". Hence my observation that the developers have a vested interest in over-stating the problem, and hence their word is not very good evidence.

I dunno - given that game developers are the ones responsible for making games, I'd think they'd be about the biggest experts on why they do or do not make PC games anymore.  I mean, it's fair to say you should take what they say with a grain of salt, but to discount it entirely seems foolish.

[Berkut]

You don't have to listen to Jake to figure that out though - the industry is going to blow it out of proportion because they have a vested interest in doing so.

It is like asking an auto insurance salesman how much fraudulent auto claims impact the industry.

I have an honest question for you Berk.  I have been following this thread from the start, so I might have missed something but if I did it was unintentional.  I am not trying to trap you, or get you to restate something you already have; no bullshit.

What is the industry's vested interest in blowing the piracy problem out of proportion?  I mean if they don't want to make PC games anymore, for any reason, why do they need a scapegoat?  Why can't they just say "PC gamers are whiny bitches and consoles are easy to develop for and more profitable."

I don't see where they lose anything by just saying F You to PC gamers if that is their intention.  What, are PC only gamers going to boycott games that are not made for their system?  Console players won't care, they still get their game.  The very small group that owns/uses both aren't likely to just give up gaming completely, talk about cutting off your own nose to spite your face.

I just don't get the end game here for the PC devs in blaming something that isn't really a problem.

Because it makes it a lot easier and much more palatable to have a reason.  Telling PC Gamers that they can't be bothered to make reasonable ports is failing at basic PR.  They avoid that issue if they point to the dastardly pirates preventing them from being honest and fair to their PC fans.

Except the fact that major games are not being released for PC is hardly out of laziness.  Surely the big game companies have some fairly logical basis for not releasing certain AAA titles for PC.

Of course they do - there is more money to be made on the console side - a LOT more money.

Which isn't to say that there isn't any money to be made with the PC, it is just not as much, so we see what we have now - the AAA releases are mostly on the console, and where it makes a good investment, you see them ported to the PC. For games where the PC just makes more sense from a technical standpoint, the PC is still doing fine.

[Berkut]

I don't think it should be ignored, nor do I think it is ignored. I do think that there is little evidence that piracy is the reason that PCs no longer dominate the gaming market, and have stated why I dismiss the "evidence" provided. All it amounts to is "Game developers SAY that it is a huge problem and killing PC gaming". Hence my observation that the developers have a vested interest in over-stating the problem, and hence their word is not very good evidence.

I dunno - given that game developers are the ones responsible for making games, I'd think they'd be about the biggest experts on why they do or do not make PC games anymore.  I mean, it's fair to say you should take what they say with a grain of salt, but to discount it entirely seems foolish.

Which is why you should not discount it entirely - if someone does, I will be sure to tell them right along with you how foolish they are.

But to pretend that a huge market shift that is well understood and even predicted before it happened (the dominance of the console as a game system) is driven by piracy, when the data shows that piracy has been largely constant throught?

Buying that line would be even more foolish. It simply makes no sense. The Crysis example alone kills the general claim.

[Barrister]

Any time someone claims that a particular piece of evidence "kills" the opposing viewpoint I start to discount what that person says.

Sorry Berkut.

[Berkut]

Any time someone claims that a particular piece of evidence "kills" the opposing viewpoint I start to discount what that person says.

Sorry Berkut.

That is silly.

Someone made a claim. I pointed out that a particular example refutes the general claim. This is a perfectly normal way of responding to an argument. It's like some guy on the stand saying "I could not have killed that man Mr. Prosecutor, I would never lay a hand on anyone!" and you proceed to point out that he has a conviction on record for assaulting someone. It is an example that kills the general claim - if the claim were true, the example could not be true.

The claim here made is that piracy is what has killed the PC market. The specific example given for this was Crysis. But on examination, it turns out that the example is of a game that is in the top-25 most sold and most profitable PC games of all time even though it was the most pirated game of the year the same year it sold more copies than any other game. I contend that that example, far from proving that piracy is killing PC gaming, as the Crysis developer claimed at that time, proves that even with massive piracy, good games still make plenty of money, just like they always have.

So some other explanation for the relative decline in PC gaming compared to consoles must be found. It just so happens that there is in fact a rather well know, well understood, and pretty simple explanation.

I am simply at a loss at this point why this is so seemingly hard to understand. We know why consoles are taking over the gaming market. It is very simple - because that is what most people who spend money on games play games on. Period. It isn't because all those people with their XBOXs and PS3s and Wiis all wish they could be playing non-existent games on the PC, but nobody will make them.

[Berkut]

Honestly though, I am really tired of arguing about this, believe it or not.

Especially since it doesn't matter one bit - even if the devs are right, and it is all the fault of the evil pirates, the end result will be the same as if I am right, and piracy is a strictly tangential variable.

[Jacob]

Honestly though, I am really tired of arguing about this, believe it or not.

Especially since it doesn't matter one bit - even if the devs are right, and it is all the fault of the evil pirates, the end result will be the same as if I am right, and piracy is a strictly tangential variable.

Yeah. I didn't tell you what I know because I'm trying to sway you. What the posters of languish might think about piracy means exactly fuck all. This is all a matter of general trends and while we can try to understand them, understanding doesn't shift what's actually happening.

I just figured you might be interested in hearing an inside perspective.

[Razgovory]

Honestly though, I am really tired of arguing about this, believe it or not.

Especially since it doesn't matter one bit - even if the devs are right, and it is all the fault of the evil pirates, the end result will be the same as if I am right, and piracy is a strictly tangential variable.

I should hope so, you've said the same thing over and over again long after it stopped being relevant. Your data (or Datum point really) is that one game sold well.  Ergo Piracy isn't a major factor.

[dps]

But to pretend that a huge market shift that is well understood and even predicted before it happened (the dominance of the console as a game system) is driven by piracy, when the data shows that piracy has been largely constant throught?

Surely you're not claiming that piracy has remained largely constant for the last 25 years or so (which is roughly the timeframe in which large numbers of games for the PC have been widely available commercially)?  I have trouble believing that piracy was as bad in the late 80's when relatively few people had internet connections (and what they had was really slow dial-up) as it is now when most of us take the internet for granted (and have high-speed connections).

[Josquius]

You'd be surprised.
Downloading was of course virtually non-existing but direct copying was very common. With the old spectrum I got off my cousin I only have about 10-20 real games out of hundreds.
The market and the companies making the games were a lot smaller back then too, quite a different situation.,