Copy protection

[Nailfoot]

I wasn't so much complaining about the price itself, but the fact that games get distributed for free to the less-than-ethical. I understand that piracy may not have as much of an affect on prices as out right stealing the game of off the retail shelf.

Call it good old fashioned jelousy. And I am certainly NOT gonna pirate the game just to "get even".

[Grumbold]

I can remember when computer games were cheaper, but in those days I was getting Spectrum games on cassette tape......

Making a backup copy was so much easier back then

[Mogling]

Game prices are a direct reflection of the cost of making games these days. Im sure a quite a few million USD went into the cost of CivIV. Most games these days require a budgest like that to be even considered by retailers to carry, and even more needs to be spent on shelf space and advertizing. Plus these days fewer and fewer games are making money, so game publishers want to make as much as they can from the ones that do.

[LzPrst]

completely SICK of all this piracy

I agree, in this day and age computer game piracy should be eliminated. It makes games more costly and it puts the heightened price on those who are honest enough to buy the game.

However, I bought Civ3 when it came out, for the full 500 NOrwegianKroner, (ca 63€ ) I played the game a little and found it... lacking. Then Play the World Expansion came out and I thought, hey, maybe this is the fix (pun intended) I'm looking for, at least I'll get multiplayer. So I bought that too. for 300 NOK. Turns out it was part of the solution, but still lacking a little. Finally Conquests comes out demanding an additional 300 NOK, and I cant play multiplayer without it cause just about everyone has gone over to conquests expansion pack since it does in fact make the game a little better.

Am I supposed to pay more for the expansions that IMO makes the game what it should have been to start with than the game itself?
Piracy might be unethical but I consider the expansion pack leeching of customers equally unethical. Especially when they are to a large extent patches for what should have been working to start with.

I dont download games, I buy them or borrow them from friends. Whether the latter is legal or not I couldnt care less. Conquests I borrowed from a friend cause I refused to pay a cent more for Civ3. If the game was cheaper I would just buy it myself.
I just want to restate my previous words, current gaming prices are ridiculously high, and the continued inflated level of prices will NOT help combat piracy.
But just to take another example, Playstation games are as expensive and occasionally MORE expensive than PC games, and they are nearly immune to piracy. What is the gaming industry's/vendors excuse there?

Face it, its pure GREED and not piracy that keeps prices where they are. I just discovered play.com and I will from now on buy all my games from there. I suggest that you all do the same so we can force the market to be a little more consumer friendly.

[Nailfoot]

Originally posted by Mogling
Game prices are a direct reflection of the cost of making games these days. Im sure a quite a few million USD went into the cost of CivIV. Most games these days require a budgest like that to be even considered by retailers to carry, and even more needs to be spent on shelf space and advertizing. Plus these days fewer and fewer games are making money, so game publishers want to make as much as they can from the ones that do.

Well, yes of course. But, certainly, the game price is inflated a bit because the publishers know that not every single copy produced will be "paid for", and not every single individual playing the game has a legitimate copy. Anyway, I apologize for getting off on this tangeant. Suffice it to say that all of us here are loyal fans and CIVFANATICS and will not be pirateing the game under any circumstances!

[Brutus66]

I think that, of the challenges that computer gaming faces today, piracy is small potatoes. Probably the biggest is the inroads made by console games.
As much as I don't like consoles, I have to admit that they are cheaper than pc's and you don't have to do any fiddling to get games to run on them. There's no fear that the video card won't handle the graphics of the game you buy, no drivers to upgrade or downgrade to get something to run. They have captured the market share for casual gamers.
I have also noticed that magazines like Maxim do monthly reviews of games, but don't even bother to mention PC titles unless a featured console game happens to have a PC version available.
Consoles are the Mac of electronic gaming- so simple that even a monkey can run one.
Then again, maybe that comparison isn't appropriate because there's a lot of stuff out there you can play on a PS2.

[Elethiomel]

Game prices are certainly inflated. They're not a direct reflection on the cost of making games. There is tons of overhead, not the least of which is licensing, incorporating, and testing copy protection. Copy protection that can make your game not work even if you bought it legitimately. Copy protection that scans your computer for software it deems likely to be used to circumvent copy protection. Copy protection that is completely and utterly useless.

It doesn't matter how sophisticated your copy protection is - it's going to be circumvented within a day. And people who play a cracked version of the game won't have to contend with fickle SecuRom 7 which refuses to start the game if you have virtual CD drives on your system, or if you have a certain brand or model of CD or DVD writer.

What copy protection does is piss off and inconvenience legitimate customers. It doesn't do an iota to inconvenience or otherwise hinder software pirates. Hell, they probably enjoy an intellectual challenge, or why would they form these "cracker groups" that break copy protection and then release the game for free on the internet? There is certainly no profit in it.