Unless “piracy” is your alternative to buying a brand new copy at launch, I don’t wanna hear it.
If GameStop can make bank re-selling used games without giving back a cent to the developer, how is doing the same for free, without taking up competitive retail space any worse?
So was the install I made a copy of and gave to a friend. Either way the publisher makes the same amount.
Sure there might be a limited number of used copies, but when you’re talking about a mass manufactured product with limited demand like a random used game, then yeah, might as well be unlimited. How many used copies of GTA V or Skyrim out there do you think there are? Answer: far more than there are people looking to buy them, and each one of those copies can be sold an infinite amount of times.
The only games that are so rare that this matters are either so expensive or so hard to come by that everyone is okay with pirating them anyways because there’s no reasonable way to obtain them, and they’re all usually out of print any who.
So long as everyone who wants to play a game can purchase it used, its functionally no different than piracy. Except someone who did no work makes money off of it.
If a game can’t be easily legally obtained, if at all, its a pretty common belief that piracy is justified in the name of preservation.
The only exceptions to this are new releases which haven’t reached critical mass, and smaller releases which will never reach any sort of mass following.
The former is especially important when you realize that two months post-launch of a new piece of media, the company has made back the artist saleries, and everything after that is just bonus for the useless vultures upstairs.
You didn’t pay up to enjoy the product. They lost revenue. But yes, it didn’t “broke” the corporation.
This assumes I was going to buy it in the first place
You would if piracy wasn’t an option. Maybe not all of it, but some of it.
They lost HYPOTHETICAL revenue. Assuming that everyone who pirates a product would otherwise buy it is a textbook appeal to probability fallacy
Unless “piracy” is your alternative to buying a brand new copy at launch, I don’t wanna hear it.
If GameStop can make bank re-selling used games without giving back a cent to the developer, how is doing the same for free, without taking up competitive retail space any worse?
Because the copy sold by GameStop was already paid for to the publisher.
So was the install I made a copy of and gave to a friend. Either way the publisher makes the same amount.
Sure there might be a limited number of used copies, but when you’re talking about a mass manufactured product with limited demand like a random used game, then yeah, might as well be unlimited. How many used copies of GTA V or Skyrim out there do you think there are? Answer: far more than there are people looking to buy them, and each one of those copies can be sold an infinite amount of times.
The only games that are so rare that this matters are either so expensive or so hard to come by that everyone is okay with pirating them anyways because there’s no reasonable way to obtain them, and they’re all usually out of print any who.
Look, I’m all for piracy and against copyright, but you can simply admit you like free stuff without finding twisted explanations to justify it.
So long as everyone who wants to play a game can purchase it used, its functionally no different than piracy. Except someone who did no work makes money off of it.
If a game can’t be easily legally obtained, if at all, its a pretty common belief that piracy is justified in the name of preservation.
The only exceptions to this are new releases which haven’t reached critical mass, and smaller releases which will never reach any sort of mass following.
The former is especially important when you realize that two months post-launch of a new piece of media, the company has made back the artist saleries, and everything after that is just bonus for the useless vultures upstairs.