Support NeoGAF

[New002]

Well, I'm not interested in a discussion on legality because the legality is fairly clear, depending on where you live. When your choices are "pay this guy $1000 for something he paid $50 for" and piracy and there is nothing else, I'm not gonna look down on the person who chooses to go the free way. That's my moral standpoint. Personally, I love to own the things, but that's not everyone.

I'm 100% in agreement with this.

 

[TheChewyWaffles]

Well when you buy a car, you buy the physical object, but with a game you buy a license to use it. Do you forfeit that license through theft, loss or damage? You're legally allowed to make back-ups for your own personal use, remember.

Hasn't the DMCA (in the states) made this questionable, legally? Not morally, mind you. To my knowledge, ripping MP3's is still illegal for instance, though the horse was let out of the barn door more than decade ago.

 

[Mael]

I think GOG has disproven this quite handily, actually. Beloved games that have been impossible to buy for many years show up on GOG and they sell. This is a regular occurrence.

I think this goes quite well with the recent Gamasutra article of people not appreciating older games or even not trying them at all.
For good or for bad, the industry is always pushing on new stuffs while discarding the old to the point where the old is even impossible to assess on its own merit.
I would still buy games for old systems if they were made available for a decent price.
Gog is awesome like that, that's even why Virtual Console was such a good idea to begin with.
The industry as a whole should better appreciate the past, consumers would certainly benefit.

 

[ChiefofCitadelSecurity]

I would say so.

I thought about it myself before. In the end I just buy the game used or whatever.

 

[KiraXD]

Well when you buy a car, you buy the physical object, but with a game you buy a license to use it. Do you forfeit that license through theft, loss or damage? You're legally allowed to make back-ups for your own personal use, remember.

Seriously, how can you compare that to software? not to mention insurance replacement programs, warranties, etc.


The argument with buying used that people are bringing up is that originally someone paid for that game new. That doesnt change based on you buying it used or not... if you dont buy it used someone STILL already paid for it, buying it used doesnt give the devs more money, nor does it deprive them of the original sale if you dont buy it.

If i own a game and my PS2 breaks should i not be allowed to emulate it on PC?
If i own a PS2 and my game breaks should i not be allowed to emulate it on PC?

I i buy a PC game and IT becomes unusable should i have to rebuy it to play it on my PC?

personally i dont see a problem with having backups of games you already own. im not gonna feel bad playing a game i already gave the devs money for once just to be able to continue playing it if it becomes unavailable.

 

[Zing]

I'd argue that emulating games unavailable at retail is actually better for the publishers. Why? Because people have finite money. Money not spent on eBay is money that can be spent on currently published games.

 

[Roto13]

I have no ethical problem with pirating games that you can't buy to support the developer of any more. People who are selling used copies of games on eBay aren't owed anything.

 

[L Thammy]

Pretty much this. You need to consider that even though the secondary market may not put money in the hands of the game makers, it still factors into other things that affect them.

e.g. Take Suikoden and the sequels. Off the market for a long time and legit copies are pretty much all second hand. The game is so popular that used copies sell at high prices and it is well documented that the game is sought after due to this fact. While it doesn't benefit the creators of the game directly, it tells Konami that the game has a fan base and popularity. This then leads to possible sequels as well as appreciation for the creators so that they can get more work.

Next the game is so popular of the secondary market, Sony gets them to put it in the store digitally for sale. One of the original developers of the game asks that fans buy it so the game company takes note and maybe makes a sequel.

I just checked out a ROM site right now. It has a brief "most downloaded" list as well as a "top rated" list for each platform. Torrent sites also show download numbers. I don't think you necessarily need the secondary market to get information about the demand for your older games.

 

[Jenenser]

Regardless of whether or not the reseller would use the funds to buy another game, you are devaluing their copy of the game (and anyone else looking to sell the game, too), so there are technically victims in the crime. How much you care about them is up to you.

interesting point. but do you really think a cartridge looses its value if theres an emulated version on the internet? because for many people that would pay prices above 100$ for an old game, the cartridge is the reason...
i don't think it devalues the cardridge that much, but at the same time i don't think someone should have an exorbitant gain on a used item he paid 60$ 20 years ago...

still a valid point because me thinkin things isn't knowin.

 

[Garou]

@Stumpokapow
That's all fine in that single line of thought, but how about these two factors:
- Time is not infinite for players, so playing illegally on an Emulator takes away from the time that might be used on officially sold games and thus their sales.
- Pent up demand for a title can play a factor in the decision of a company to re-license and subsequently re-release a title.

 

[Starwolf_UK]

One thing I can say is paying for stuff makes you appreciate it more. The trap with emulation is you fall into a "I paid nothing for this why should I put any time into learning it" and so you end up hopping through a complete romset doing a lot of nothing really.

But on the other hand feeling forced to pay for something and not having funds to further support is quite harmful (e.g. you spent money on a Uniharma Kawakaze SNES cart and can't buy Syanoara Uniharma Kawakaze on Vita because of that) but this does get blurry if it is like "I've not bought any Mario games on VC because I need money to buy NSMB" which really reeks of making an excuse to pay for one thing but not another (as both are on active platforms where the publisher is making money and there saying "I rather play the old SMB games and not care about NSMB" sends a message).

Lately I have been buying arcade compilations so that I own a legal copy of arcade games that weren't ported to consoles or available outside of these compilations. It makes me feel a lot better than just downloading and playing the games on MAME. Of course compilations only go so far and many
arcade games were never released for any platform, so for those games you really don't have much choice if you want to experience them.

When it comes to advice others I think the bolded is the most important thing really and basically what I wanted to say of do whatever makes you feel better.

Ethically, it's better because there's at least a chance that the person you paid for the used game turns around to funds a developer with that money. With piracy that's not a possibility.

This is a bit a false dichotomy don't you think? I mean you have the choice of not buying the used game and putting the money you would spend on it to funding a developer which would remove any doubt form a third party which may or may not do something you want with the money.

I generally agree with your point, but I zoomed in on this because it's not as simple as comparing raw numbers.

I recently bought SNES Sunset Riders for $75 (including shipping) from the guy who's had it in his possession since he bought it. He bought it when it came out in 1993 for $60. Accounting for inflation, he actually paid $98-ish in 2014 dollars. So he actually lost 23 2014 dollars in the transaction.

That's the way I think about it, which may actually be the completely wrong way of thinking about it.

Your point generally still stands, though.

The other way of looking at it is if you took $60 and managed to invest it such that you earned the rate of inflation (not easy in reality) the game also cost you less than it would buying it 22 years ago.

does the emulator rtequire BIOS files or other proprietary system software?

The emulator does not (you have the options to use some parts though). However, you are unlikely to do anything with your discs unless you can either get a certain model of DVD drive or a Nintendo Wii. There is always downloading disc images but it is something that is preferable to avoid (a Nintendo Wii is certainly more affordable than say a Retrode or Retron).

 

[Stumpokapow]

@Stumpokapow
That's all fine in that single line of thought, but how about these two factors:
- Time is not infinite for players, so playing illegally on an Emulator takes away from the time that might be used on officially sold games and thus their sales.

I look forward to your analysis of how professional cricket is negatively impacting the gaming industry to the point that watching it is unethical.

- Pent up demand for a title can play a factor in the decision of a company to re-license and subsequently re-release a title.

Piracy has always existed, so whatever evidence you think you are bringing up supports the assertion that pent-up demand is not impacted by abandonware-type piracy. Why did Nintendo re-release Super Mario Bros, it's perhaps the most widely pirated game of all time?

 

[Aeana]

@Stumpokapow
That's all fine in that single line of thought, but how about these two factors:
- Time is not infinite for players, so playing illegally on an Emulator takes away from the time that might be used on officially sold games and thus their sales.
- Pent up demand for a title can play a factor in the decision of a company to re-license and subsequently re-release a title.

We have a lot of data points to show that demand is most likely not majorly impacted by being able to pirate a game. GOG's entire business model is built on this. Virtual Console has done fairly well for itself. Recently, Suikoden 2 came out on PSN and it was absolutely explosive.

 

[NESpowerhouse]

For me, I only emulate titles that I already own in some form, but want to play in better quality (specifically, GB, GBC, and GBA games). However, what if I bought a game collection new (in my case the Megaman X Collection) and can't play the games properly now due to my TV's difficulty with processing 240p signals through component cables. In that case, would it be alright to emulate the games as opposed to buying each game again individually?

 

[RM8]

Services like GOG and VC have the advantage that not everyone can deal with emulators, DOSBox, etc. - so they're hitting a demographic inherently larger than "free" emulation.

 

[m@cross]

I just checked out a ROM site right now. It has a brief "most downloaded" list as well as a "top rated" list for each platform. Torrent sites also show download numbers. I don't think you necessarily need the secondary market to get information about the demand for your older games.

Yes and no.

Willingness to download a game for free is not necessarily the same level of interest it takes to sell the game for $200 on ebay. In addition, which, a torrent/rom ranking, or absurd ebay prices that get talked about, is most likely to get noticed by management at game companies?

Also doesn't negate my second point. Some portion of the number of people who pirate the game will then have no incentive to buy the legit digital version when if it comes out, and directly damage sales numbers and affect willingness to develop new versions.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Services like GOG and VC have the advantage that not everyone can deal with emulators, DOSBox, etc. - so they're hitting a demographic inherently larger than "free" emulation.

This is great evidence that piracy is not going to impact re-releases; re-release purchasing isn't being driven by the availability of the content, they're being driven by the ease of the service. Which is a great thing.

 

[L Thammy]

Ethically, it's better because there's at least a chance that the person you paid for the used game turns around to funds a developer with that money. With piracy that's not a possibility.

I don't get this one. So if I, say, sell my copy of MechWarrior for the SNES. Am I going to donate that money to Activision? Or are we just saying that there's a possibility that I'm going to spend that money on Activision games? There's also a possibility that I don't care about Activision's games anymore and will use it on another company's games. There's an even larger possibility that I'm going to use it on fast food.

 

[Of All Trades]

I'm having a hard time coming to terms with the fact that two people, rather than zero, have made the case that playing old games rather than new ones is something anyone should give a flying fuck about. Boo hoo, Random House didn't get a sale of whatever book it publishes because I read a free copy of Huckleberry Finn. Woe to the literature industry having to compete with centuries old dead people who have no way to charge for their books! Woe!

 

[DrRussian]

Since I own most of the games I emulate it isn't that much of a problem, and buying an NES game on eBay won't support a developer so I don't feel bad about the games I do pirate.

 

[ScatheZombie]

Pretty much this. You need to consider that even though the secondary market may not put money in the hands of the game makers, it still factors into other things that affect them.

e.g. Take Suikoden and the sequels. Off the market for a long time and legit copies are pretty much all second hand. The game is so popular that used copies sell at high prices and it is well documented that the game is sought after due to this fact. While it doesn't benefit the creators of the game directly, it tells Konami that the game has a fan base and popularity. This then leads to possible sequels as well as appreciation for the creators so that they can get more work.

Next the game is so popular of the secondary market, Sony gets them to put it in the store digitally for sale. One of the original developers of the game asks that fans buy it so the game company takes note and maybe makes a sequel.

For every person who didn't use the secondary market to keep some hype on the game, they damaged its chances of getting noticed. For each person who pirated it through emulation, some of those removed themselves from possibly wanting to buy it digitally when it got re-released and damaged its chances for a sequel.

Bottom line is emulation is usually piracy, and piracy damages the industry that we'd all be better off supporting as it makes the things we love.

Just to clear something up from the developer end ... this is not how things work. The factors in determining whether or not an IP is revived for a sequel, ported to new hardware, or reprinted have basically nothing to do with the secondary market. When publishers greenlight remakes, remasters, ports, upscales, or digital versions of products older than, say, 10 years - the secondary market value is, at best, a marginal consideration because it is extremely niche. The number of people purchasing your game, by any means, after that amount of time is an effectively meaningless number. The publishers run market research against current trends, current consumers, and current competition. What's the price point compared to other current similar titles? What's the popularity of other current similar titles? Based on current consumer trends (in the primary market) what is our projected sales? We don't look at Ebay and see our older titles selling for +$80 as indicative of massive consumer demand, but as massive supply constraints. The number of games selling at that price point is extremely small and not indicative of actual market demand.

In fact, if anything, emulating the game and keeping public discussion about it active - either through Youtube videos, speedruns, Twitch streams, forums, etc. - does far more to compel publishers to bring back older IPs to new hardware (because that's areas that their market research will actually hit) than seeing the last 10 new copies in existence sell for $200 on Ebay.

 

[MechaX]

Well, I'm not interested in a discussion on legality because the legality is fairly clear, depending on where you live. When your choices are "pay this guy $1000 for something he paid $50 for" and piracy and there is nothing else, I'm not gonna look down on the person who chooses to go the free way. That's my moral standpoint. Personally, I love to own the things, but that's not everyone.

This is pretty much where I stand on it from a moral perspective (as mentioned by many people in the topic, the legal perspective differs, but is usually pretty clear cut and even may have case law on it).

Sure, you might be in a Suikoden II perspective where the re-release happened when the company decided to pull its head out of its ass years after the fact. But if the choices depended on either buying it from scalpers, buying the game in a language you probably don't understand, or emulation, I'm not going to hold it against anyone for taking the third option under the circumstances.

 

[openrob]

I agree that buying used is hardly a step up from emulation ethically.

What about pirating a game on a separate platforom. example, I own black flag for Wii U. My dog destroyed the disc, would it be morally wrong to pirating on PC?

p.s. dont worry i wont, i didnt get into the game lol

 

[Krejlooc]

Why don't you buy and then emulate?

*thumbs up*

 

[Aeana]

This is pretty much where I stand on it from a moral perspective (as mentioned by many people in the topic, the legal perspective differs, but is usually pretty clear cut and even may have case law on it).

Sure, you might be in a Suikoden II perspective where the re-release happened when the company decided to pull its head out of its ass years after the fact. But if the choices depended on either buying it from scalpers, buying the game in a language you probably don't understand, or emulation, I'm not going to hold it against anyone for taking the third option under the circumstances.

And people still bought Suikoden 2 in droves when it came out on PSN.

 

[IdreamofHIME]

Any chance Blood Omen Legacy of Kain will get a re-release?

It's on PSN, i bought it for my Vita but it's too dark.

 

[minkymuskyslyoldstoaty]

Well when you buy a car, you buy the physical object, but with a game you buy a license to use it. Do you forfeit that license through theft, loss or damage? You're legally allowed to make back-ups for your own personal use, remember.

This is why I hate the license argument. Publishers tell me I have a license when they want to stop me ripping disks I purchased legitimately (ie new, so they get their cut), but if there's an extra few quid to be wrung out of me, they shift the goalposts a mile. If I damage my disk and ask for a new one - after all, I have a license to use the media on it - they decide I don't have a license, and I have to buy another disk as if I had never purchased disk (and license) in the first place.

 

[beril]

We have a lot of data points to show that demand is most likely not majorly impacted by being able to pirate a game. GOG's entire business model is built on this. Virtual Console has done fairly well for itself. Recently, Suikoden 2 came out on PSN and it was absolutely explosive.

You can pirate most brand new games as well, at least on PC, and it's hard to measure how much that impacts sales.
But if we all collectively agree that it's "OK" to pirate an old game, that may impact demand for re-releases further.

 

[Card Boy]

I never understood why companies dont just rom dump all their previous games on digital platforms. Its basically free money left on the table.

 

[m@cross]

Just to clear something up from the developer end ... this is not how things work. The factors in determining whether or not an IP is revived for a sequel, ported to new hardware, or reprinted have basically nothing to do with the secondary market. When publishers greenlight remakes, remasters, ports, upscales, or digital versions of products older than, say, 10 years - the secondary market value is, at best, a marginal consideration because it is extremely niche. The number of people purchasing your game, by any means, after that amount of time is an effectively meaningless number. The publishers run market research against current trends, current consumers, and current competition. What's the price point compared to other current similar titles? What's the popularity of other current similar titles? Based on current consumer trends (in the primary market) what is our projected sales? We don't look at Ebay and see our older titles selling for +$80 as indicative of massive consumer demand, but as massive supply constraints. The number of games selling at that price point is extremely small and not indicative of actual market demand.

In fact, if anything, emulating the game and keeping public discussion about it active - either through Youtube videos, speedruns, Twitch streams, forums, etc. - does far more to compel publishers to bring back older IPs to new hardware (because that's areas that their market research will actually hit) than seeing the last 10 new copies in existence sell for $200 on Ebay.

Good to know, thanks for clarification.

I am curious though about one thing.

Take the Suikoden example again. One of the designers mentioned he hoped sales of the re-release would be high because it would be incentive for them to make a new game. If that is true, doesn't it still make it a valid argument that the consumer base is eroded by the free version users who no longer have incentive to pay for the re-release?

 

[Persona7]

It's on PSN, i bought it for my Vita but it's too dark.

Yeah, it's on PSN but the PC version is not available on GOG with the rest of the games in that series. Legal issues or something.

 

[Fbh]

Ethically I don't mind downloading an old game that much. Specially if it's one of those extra rare old games that are now sold for 100$+.
Downloading, I don't know, The Witcher 2 or 3 is something I don't approve of. But if you feel like trying Panzer Dragoon Saga and don't feel like spending $400 on a copy of the game (and another $60 on a used Saturn) I can understand if you want to download an emulate it


But yeah, buying it and then emulating it (to enchance graphics or simply because you don't own the system) would still be better than just downloading it. A few years ago I felt like replaying Final Fantasy IX and I just purchased it in disc format (it's easy to fin) but then just emulated it from an ISO

 

[beril]

I have no ethical problem with pirating games that you can't buy to support the developer of any more. People who are selling used copies of games on eBay aren't owed anything.

Where do you draw the line though? As soon as a physical game goes out of print? If it's not on the latest console generation? Two generations back?

Given the nature of the industry it'd require a lot of work for a developer to keep their entire catalogue available at all times, that doesn't mean you're entitled to play everything for free if you can't get it new.

 

[Grief.exe]

Note: this is assuming the title hasn't been re-released like Banjo Kazooie, PSN classics, and the Virtual Console.

Im talking about titles that will likely never be re-released. Games like Lost Vikings, Battletoads, Dragon Quest Monsters, etc.

I think they are basically the same thing. The actual creators aren't being reimbursed, you are only paying a scalper/collector/other person. Even the hardware you need to buy won't be reimbursing the creators.

Edit: title was meant to say buying a used game

I see what your saying. I wouldn't really fault people for just pirating older games where the creator isn't getting reimbursed anyways. I like to own all of the games I emulate as having a huge classic game collection is a priority for me, but I see why cost would be a huge barrier in many examples, not to mention arbitrary in many cases.

It's definitely a moral grey area.

 

[Tadpole]

Note: this is assuming the title hasn't been re-released like Banjo Kazooie, PSN classics, and the Virtual Console.

Im talking about titles that will likely never be re-released. Games like Lost Vikings, Battletoads, Dragon Quest Monsters, etc.

I think they are basically the same thing. The actual creators aren't being reimbursed, you are only paying a scalper/collector/other person. Even the hardware you need to buy won't be reimbursing the creators.

Edit: title was meant to say buying a used game

If it's reasonably old or obscure enough, then I say you're ok ethically.

 

[antibolo]

I never understood why companies dont just rom dump all their previous games on digital platforms. Its basically free money left on the table.

Because there's often a bit of legal legwork that needs to be done first. This is not a zero effort thing, despite how trivial it may seem.

 

[YianGaruga]

You can pirate most brand new games as well, at least on PC, and it's hard to measure how much that impacts sales.
But if we all collectively agree that it's "OK" to pirate an old game, that may impact demand for re-releases further.

In my experience, it is considered "OK" to pirate pretty much any game, new or old, if it's easy enough, for a huge part of the population. I live in Germany and you wouldn't imagine how many people at university though I was weird when I told them I actually buy my PC games. This is only an anecdote but it's what I have experienced many many times. Yet the PC market here is still big enough to fill shelves with games at retailers at least as big as the consoles.

People buy re-releases because they want to own them and play them legitimately again on their new systems. I don't think emulation is a factor. Would more people buy them if there was no emulation? Probably. Is that something worth thinking about? Absolutely not.

 

[ScatheZombie]

Good to know, thanks for clarification.

I am curious though about one thing.

Take the Suikoden example again. One of the designers mentioned he hoped sales of the re-release would be high because it would be incentive for them to make a new game. If that is true, doesn't it still make it a valid argument that the consumer base is eroded by the free version users who no longer have incentive to pay for the re-release?

Potentially, but that starts getting into the piracy fallacy - which is that every single person who pirated a game both would have bought the game and will never buy the game, when in reality most pirates would either never have purchased your title anyway (in which case, it's not a lost sale) or eventually purchase the product since piracy/emulation is, for these users, just a stop-gap measure until your product is at the right availability and at the right price point.

In terms of emulation specifically, the idea that the availability of ROMs and their usage negatively affect sales of re-releases has very little evidence behind it. There's probably (almost definitely) some very marginal sales loss from unconverted users but that's more than compensated for by entirely new users who both never played the previous version and have never emulated the game.

So, yes, but it's ultimately a very, very small number of users versus the benefit of those users (and others) spreading positive word-of-mouth about your product - a product that most consumers will not pirate or emulate, but purchase your re-release if it's available.

 

[Some Nobody]

This is where your problem is. No game is likely NEVER re-released. So say you pirate the Battletoads ROM and emulate it, play the crap out of it. Next month it gets a surprise release on the Nintendo Virtual Console or some Classic Rare Collection or something. You aren't going to buy that, because you just played the crap outta the game already, you are no longer in a Battletoads mood. So the company lost out on your money because you pirated the game.

LOL. Is this how companies try to calculate lost money from piracy?

 

[Timeaisis]

Not really. You are still technically stealing the game's license.

Buying and then emulating is ethical, because you own said copy of the game.

Also,

Given the nature of the industry it'd require a lot of work for a developer to keep their entire catalogue available at all times, that doesn't mean you're entitled to play everything for free if you can't get it new.

is a very valid point, I think. Just because something is hard to come by, doesn't suddenly make acquiring it illegitimately ethical.

 

[King Tubby]

Downloading a game that is out of print as opposed to purchasing a used copy is not going to hurt the developers or publisher involved in making the game. In some cases it may even turn you on to a developer or franchise you never would have known in the first place. I don't think it's a big deal ethically. It could even be better if you take the money you saved and used it to support that same dev on an endeavor where they would reap the profits.

 

[goldenpp72]

Barely since that is still the legal means of transfer of the license, this makes it unfortunate when some games are 100+ dollars. As a collector this isn't a big concern to me, however, I personally don't see an issue with emulating games that can't be reasonably obtained. The problem though is that say you emulate Earthbound and then a few years later the Wii U game releases and you think, no need to buy that I already beat it.

It's a slippery slope that doesn't really have a good answer because when you buy my copy of earthbound on ebay, Nintendo makes nothing from that sale, but unless there is some promise to purchase in the event they release it officially again, which isn't gonna happen, then yeah I'd say, always make sure you have some legally owned license of that game before considering emulating.

 

[m@cross]

Potentially, but that starts getting into the piracy fallacy - which is that every single person who pirated a game both would have bought the game and will never buy the game, when in reality most pirates would either never have purchased your title anyway (in which case, it's not a lost sale) or eventually purchase the product since piracy/emulation is, for these users, just a stop-gap measure until your product is at the right availability and at the right price point.

In terms of emulation specifically, the idea that the availability of ROMs and their usage negatively affect sales of re-releases has very little evidence behind it. There's probably (almost definitely) some very marginal sales loss from unconverted users but that's more than compensated for by entirely new users who both never played the previous version and have never emulated the game.

So, yes, but it's ultimately a very, very small number of users versus the benefit of those users (and others) spreading positive word-of-mouth about your product - a product that most consumers will not pirate or emulate, but purchase your re-release if it's available.

Well made points. So the loss of re-release sales due to piracy might not out weigh the benefit of continued relevance gained through that piracy.

Of course this must assume that the piracy numbers are not a substantial portion of the total market. If piracy was rampant across all spectrum's of the market, I'd think the balance would fall.

 

[zeroroute]

If I own the game or have a snowball's chance in hades of acquiring it legally then I personally see no problem.

 

[InfiniteCombo]

If you still own that Wii you can just redownload them.

I don't own the original Wii, but even if I did, that's not the impression I got from the Nintendo Customer Service representative I was talking to. Maybe I misunderstood him. He made it sound like it was virtually impossible to re-download delisted games.

 

[Roto13]

Where do you draw the line though? As soon as a physical game goes out of print? If it's not on the latest console generation? Two generations back?

When there are no new copies left and it's not available (legitimately) digitally. When there's no way to pay the developers/publisher for the game.

 

[prag16]

Yeah, if new copies can no longer feasibly be bought, then I guess I don't really have a major problem with emulation. As TC said, either way jack squat is going to the creator.

But personally just about everything I've ever emulated I also physically own in some form.

 

[linkboy]

For me, it depends.

Take the PS1 for example, I've moved all of my PS1 games digitally. Either I play them on the Vita when they get a PSN release or I emulate them on my PC for the games I have where a PSN release probably isn't going to happen (see the Lunar games as a prime example).

I also have all of my GC games dumped on a memory card and I play them on my Wii U while all of the physical discs are packed away in a box back in the states while I'm in Korea (less stuff I had to take with me).

 

[isny]

Note: this is assuming the title hasn't been re-released like Banjo Kazooie, PSN classics, and the Virtual Console.

Im talking about titles that will likely never be re-released. Games like Lost Vikings, Battletoads, Dragon Quest Monsters, etc.

I think they are basically the same thing. The actual creators aren't being reimbursed, you are only paying a scalper/collector/other person. Even the hardware you need to buy won't be reimbursing the creators.

Edit: title was meant to say buying a used game

Lost Vikings is free if you sign up for a Battle.net account.

But yeah, if a game is out of print and not available at retail (and there's decent emulation for it) I'll definitely emulate it over paying $70 for a rare out of print title.

 

[Mael]

Where do you draw the line though? As soon as a physical game goes out of print? If it's not on the latest console generation? Two generations back?

Given the nature of the industry it'd require a lot of work for a developer to keep their entire catalogue available at all times, that doesn't mean you're entitled to play everything for free if you can't get it new.

Good point.
People were justifying pirating some high demand Wii games because they didn't buy it when the game was released and it went out of print.