GarciaHotspur
Member
I don't believe them
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
EU Commission research concludes there is no correlation between piracy and sales.
- Thread starter jmga
- Start date
paperspace
Member
⁣
I'll never get the whole "pirates would have never bought it anyway" deal.
I must be a weirdo or part of a rare species.
When I was younger I pirated everything I could get my grubby little hands on. Why? Because I didn't have a job and couldn't afford all the things I wanted. I modded every console, I used every exploit, I burned/downloaded/copied EVERYTHING. Games, movies, whatever.
Then I decided I wanted to play games on PS3 and was forced to cough up cash for games I wanted because there was no way to get them for free easily and reliably. I scrounged, saved, and found all sorts of ways to buy all my games for PS3, and amassed a pretty large collection. The legit methods of procurement were the only way I was gonna be able to play them and I WANTED TO PLAY THEM.
Then I got older and I had enough disposable income that I could just buy new releases without having to worry about the cost at all -- and piracy became a non-issue.
Believe it or not, sometimes people WILL buy something if there is no other way to get it. I don't understand the viewpoint of 'pirates will never buy anything' because at least in my case it certainly was not true.
I'm sure for every impoverished person who could never afford the real thing anyway, there is probably at least one person who totally could but is just trying to save some bucks (and I don't blame them). And if those people want to play something enough, they probably will buy it if there are no other alternatives...
EDIT: Forgot to mention -- yes there is bleed-over between pirates and people who will eventually want to buy it for real...but let's be serious. In terms of a game? Lots of people will pirate it, play it, and move on. Unless it's a multiplayer game of course. There's no good way to play those with a pirated copy unless you wanna be stuck with shitty LANs...so they are forced to buy it. And don't get me started on 'pirating a game because I don't like the company that makes it'. Man up and just admit you want to play it. If your ideals are so damn strong, you should be able to just avoid playing it altogether. Same thing with the 'OH IT'S LIKE HAVING A DEMO' crowd. I've seen every type of argument online over the years and it's mostly just people who don't want to feel bad about what they're doing. I was a eye-patch-wearing filthy pirate and I never thought I was somehow on the right side of some ideological battle. Seems silly to me. =)
I must be a weirdo or part of a rare species.
When I was younger I pirated everything I could get my grubby little hands on. Why? Because I didn't have a job and couldn't afford all the things I wanted. I modded every console, I used every exploit, I burned/downloaded/copied EVERYTHING. Games, movies, whatever.
Then I decided I wanted to play games on PS3 and was forced to cough up cash for games I wanted because there was no way to get them for free easily and reliably. I scrounged, saved, and found all sorts of ways to buy all my games for PS3, and amassed a pretty large collection. The legit methods of procurement were the only way I was gonna be able to play them and I WANTED TO PLAY THEM.
Then I got older and I had enough disposable income that I could just buy new releases without having to worry about the cost at all -- and piracy became a non-issue.
Believe it or not, sometimes people WILL buy something if there is no other way to get it. I don't understand the viewpoint of 'pirates will never buy anything' because at least in my case it certainly was not true.
I'm sure for every impoverished person who could never afford the real thing anyway, there is probably at least one person who totally could but is just trying to save some bucks (and I don't blame them). And if those people want to play something enough, they probably will buy it if there are no other alternatives...
EDIT: Forgot to mention -- yes there is bleed-over between pirates and people who will eventually want to buy it for real...but let's be serious. In terms of a game? Lots of people will pirate it, play it, and move on. Unless it's a multiplayer game of course. There's no good way to play those with a pirated copy unless you wanna be stuck with shitty LANs...so they are forced to buy it. And don't get me started on 'pirating a game because I don't like the company that makes it'. Man up and just admit you want to play it. If your ideals are so damn strong, you should be able to just avoid playing it altogether. Same thing with the 'OH IT'S LIKE HAVING A DEMO' crowd. I've seen every type of argument online over the years and it's mostly just people who don't want to feel bad about what they're doing. I was a eye-patch-wearing filthy pirate and I never thought I was somehow on the right side of some ideological battle. Seems silly to me. =)
I remember pirating games like nothing when I was a kid. What else could I do? No physical copies around for sale, no digital distribution, and we didn't have Amazon back then. Plus I didn't know English. I wouldn't, and couldn't buy those game even if there was no piracy. If devs want to increase sales, accessibility is the key.
That said, I do believe the more niche the game is, the greater piracy affects its sale. I doubt this survey covers many small games.
That said, I do believe the more niche the game is, the greater piracy affects its sale. I doubt this survey covers many small games.
Piracy is a red herring. Derailing threads is what red herrings do best.
MilkyJoe
Member
Yeah this was me pretty much with Napster, I didn't have a pot to piss in, but found all these awesome bands through it. Roll on a few years and I buy all those bands' cds, t-shirt, concert tickets etc. I'm pretty sure they would be glad I originally acquired their music without paying for it.
UnluckyKate
Member
Because when the legal offer become more convenient (easy, fast, fairly priced) that the pirate offer, you don't pirate anymore.
Steam proved this.
Netflix proved this.
Spotify proved this.
its especially true in gaming (for example getting game patches and free dlc, etc).
They checked it between 2013 and 2015, but decided to suppress the results -- probably because the lobbyists didn't like them.
They checked to see if any sales were lost because of piracy. They also checked to see if any sales were gained because of piracy. Both theories checked in as so insignificant that they might not really exist.
Then the EU buried the report, because piracy smells bad and it's useful for people to be mad at it. Hey look, over there, is that an elephant?!
No, we're just not being stupid. No correlation is not the same as a negative correlation. No correlation between piracy and sales is a very different thing from there being no correlation between piracy and loss of sales. Therefore, the thread title is misleading.
prag16
Banned
Ah, the typical confusion between piracy and stealing. Let me help you. Stealing removes the original. Piracy (while still wrong) does not. HUGE difference.
And when "trying to stop them" results in companies sinking a ton of resources into invasive DRM that hurts paying customers more than it does pirates... well, you do the math.
"For games, the estimated effect of illegal online transactions on sales is
positive implying that illegal consumption leads to increased legal
consumption. This positive effect of illegal downloads and streams on the
sales of games may be explained by the industry being successful in
converting illegal users to paying users. Tactics used by the industry include,
for example, offering gameplay with extra bonuses or extra levels if
consumers pay. "
positive implying that illegal consumption leads to increased legal
consumption. This positive effect of illegal downloads and streams on the
sales of games may be explained by the industry being successful in
converting illegal users to paying users. Tactics used by the industry include,
for example, offering gameplay with extra bonuses or extra levels if
consumers pay. "
prag16
Banned
Of course not EVERY SINGLE pirate would never have bought anything given no other option. I don't think anyone is saying that ABSOLUTELY NONE of them would.
Some would argue that you being able to get introduced to games via piracy when you were younger stoked that interest and helped you become a paying customer down the road. Others mentioned Adobe's products and that kind of dynamic definitely seems to be in play in that area, so probably is with gaming to, to an extent.
This is entirely speculation, and while some people like this undoubtedly exist, the study in the OP indicates that the effect is probably negligible.
Well, I mean, it IS like having a demo. When I was younger and money was much tighter I did this at times. There are definitely a handful of games I ultimately bought that I never would have without having pirated it first. And ones that I didn't ultimately buy I invariably uninstalled/deleted after less than 2 hours or so. Not that any of this puts me on the "right side of some ideological battle" but your assumptions and anecdotes are worth no more than anybody else's.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
The entire study is based on survey data...
That's a fatal flaw, imho.
Whilst their methodology goes into detail on how they structured the survey questions to try to collect the most accurate and truthful response, they're still inherently basing the entirety of this study on data collected from survey respondents.
The crux of the issue is that regardless of how you phrase the questions, many (or even all) respondents may not be telling you the truth concerning their behaviors with respect to legal and illegal content.
They also have the issue of identifying the various demographics of people who actually download illegal content. It doesn't seem like their methodology here is sound either.
A study not based on survey responses but actual hard online tracking data would be infinitely more reliable than this. However, such tracking either currently doesn't exist or isn't accessible to anyone other than internet ISPs (who wouldn't give it up without a court order).
That's a fatal flaw, imho.
Whilst their methodology goes into detail on how they structured the survey questions to try to collect the most accurate and truthful response, they're still inherently basing the entirety of this study on data collected from survey respondents.
The crux of the issue is that regardless of how you phrase the questions, many (or even all) respondents may not be telling you the truth concerning their behaviors with respect to legal and illegal content.
They also have the issue of identifying the various demographics of people who actually download illegal content. It doesn't seem like their methodology here is sound either.
A study not based on survey responses but actual hard online tracking data would be infinitely more reliable than this. However, such tracking either currently doesn't exist or isn't accessible to anyone other than internet ISPs (who wouldn't give it up without a court order).
Weltall Zero
Member
Except that the posts I quoted (including yours) were complaining that the title should say "loss of sales" rather than "sales". Once more, with feeling:
Whether the research actually failed to prove a connection, rather than disprove that one exists, and how misleading the thread title is in that regard, is a completely different matter. It's the "sales / loss of sales" distinction that I find silly.