The re-download is a nice bonus. When I made a new computer last year, and tried to put Oblivion on it, the disc, which originally worked fine with my old PC, only showed two files. I then tried to read the disc on the old PC - same bad result.

For the heck of it, I put it in today, and the disc can't be read at all anymore. So with time the darn thing simply self-imploded (I've tried it on a few PCs - it's the disc, not my PC). If you want my honest opinion, I wouldn't be surprised if whatever copy protection they used is playing serious havoc with the drives. Either that or it was poorly manufactured and it's de-laminating itself with time.

Either way, it stinks, and I bet I'd have a tough time getting a free replacement.

-HM

Back to the topic at hand.

This is the first game in a LONG time that I have actually bought for two reasons.

a) it didn't suck, but actually was worth the money put into it, not a bang it off flashy title dissappointment.
the developers stand behind it.

sure you could play it on cracked private servers but then you are limited to a few peeps, the way the multi works is just fabulous. I simply had to have it.

my thoughts.

I pirated this game, to try it out because there was no DEMO. I dont buy games anymore without playing a DEMO. I think it should be compulsory for companies to post a DEMO before before or at the time they release their game. If they are not confident in their product, they should sell it.

I have bought the game since then, its great.

When we have a one-world government we will retrace the history of old game pirates and sentence them to punishment. Basically, you will be punished in the future for the crimes you commit today. This is MAGOG's plan.

We will hunt game pirates down like dogs, like when Pompey the Great cleaned out the Mediterranean.

Let me star off by saying I am NOT rationalizing piracy (though probably many will still think so)


This is my primary problem with people arguing against piracy. While there are many well made points why piracy is wrong [which I agree with], this is not one of them IMO. Software piracy is NOT the same as stealing the game off the shelf, or stealing the car you can't afford. Its like another poster somewhere on these forums said, its more like having a magic copy machine that can replicate any car, and then me using that machine to copy my neighbor's car with his (not the manufacturer's) permission. You can never convince me that the two are on the same moral level of wrongness because one results in the loss of property which someone has already PAID for, posses, uses, an the other is a perceived lost future sale (yes I agree it is very harmful) resulting from a current owner letting someone 'magically copy' what he has (even though he doesn't have the legal right to permit it). Saying they are the same does not help the anti-piracy cause IMO. What we need to realize that software (information) is a completely different ballgame and we need to come up with different ways to deal with it.

In short, software is looked at so differently because it is different.

@Coelocanth - Not to get into a debate that has been done to death many times over but I believe the answer to your question is a simple one - on the surface at least.

The main reason why lots of people use software despite not having money to pay for it comes down to the belief that copyright infringement is not really theft. Using the software does not deprive the creators of the product and thus the revenue stream they may get from it.

Moreover given how many buggy and ill developed titles have been published over the years with countless customers burnt (read as helpless victims) by said developers (read as immoral companies) and massive price increases (read as greedy companies) along with declining support services offered for products (read as margin enhancement for executive bonuses) for the average user (read as sucker) it is very easy to see why people want to try titles before they buy (read as trying to protect themselves) and try the real product - not a gimped or scripted product (read as spin & hype). After all one gets to test drive the actual car they are interested in purchasing and it comes with a pretty good warranty.

Additionally if the automobile, pharmaceutical or food industries were held to the same quality & support standards as the software industry there would likely be riots in the streets in many places or lots class action law suits.

With that said in this day and age it is better for one to really steal the physical products or a car or other material goods, since the criminal code has far less penalties. Which clearly shows whose side the law is really on and its not the peoples.

Then of course there is the whole "licensing" concept backed by nearly all the software companies. Simply put, when you "purchase" the software and you dont really "own" it and cant legitimately transfer it to others then how can you "steal" it when you dont pay for it?

yea i agree and i think i mentioned before. I dled Sins of off bittorrent.
Knew that i would only have fun with it if i played online.
Went to the store bought the game, and then put in the cd key, and got the patch.

Wow. didn't even have to reinstall the game.
That's what i call a painless transaction.


So, in conclusion:
Sins Seduced me ^^

If this 'magic copy machine' could also clone our dev team and our salaries it sounds like a fair deal!  

This was exactly my point. You can't treat software the same way. I DIDN'T say it doesn't harm anyone, read my post completely please. I said it's NOT the same as stealing. It's still wrong, and we need to redefine this new kind of 'wrong', somehow(sadly I have no ideas as to how...) . calling it flatout stealing just makes people ignore the other valid arguments behind anti-piracy(the most substantial of which is that you can't use the 'magic copy machine' on the devs ) .

The only reason I can see that anyone would ignore the other valid arguments is if they want to rationalize away the fact that pirating a game is stealing. There's no reason to treat software any differently than any other product. If you obtain and use it without paying for the privilege to do so, you're stealing it. I see no need to redefine this 'new kind of wrong'. It's these special definitions that end up muddying the waters. Call it what it is: stealing. And as for it not harming anyone, I didn't comment on that if that was directed at me.

Annatar, you seem to get half of my point. The other half is I'm trying to convince people that semantics DO matter in order to raise awareness and convince the common folk that its wrong. Istead of reiterate again and again, I will simply ask that you research the history of how courts treated emotional/psychological harassment vs. physical, and the changes that came about in looking at the emo/psy crimes as a result of courts giving them a seperate sub-catagory. Use that as an analogy for virtual vs physical

@Coel

My point is people do rationalize that piracy is not stealing (with good reason), but then they go ahead and use that as the end-all for it being WRONG. now if you concede the point that its not stealing, and go on to define it as a different wrong, the majority of rationalizers will concede the point that its wrong and stop. atleast thats my guess about the matter.


P.S.

hehe finally, the forums are helping me refine/reconsider my own arguments instead of turing into flame wars. Thank you guys for civilized discussions even when we don't agree...

I have my doubts about that, but anything is possible.



I enjoy discussions like this. It's kind of boring to discuss things when everyone agrees with you. But as long as it's flame free, it's usually interesting.