Indie game developer strikes back at pirates

[Deleted]

This is a little bit offtopic but I remember an older game like this one , It was mostly text based and free, also you could play it more than 30 years and you could see the charts and some other things. I cant find it anymore , anyone knows the name ? It was something like game making tycoon or game tycoon but I cant find it anywere. Thanks.
Edit : It might be game tycoon , but when I search it on google it gives me all tycoon games, from what I remember it was about 15-30 mb.

So no ones remember that one ?

[Nerraw]

This wouldn't be the same company that came up with

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Dev_Story

If not then it almost seems like a direct copy to me and deserves to be pirated

Yes, because making something for smartphones is the same as making something for the PC... Thanks to these guys, if this is the kind of game you enjoy, you no longer have to have a smartphone to do so.

By your logic, Age of Empires deserves to be pirated too because the whole medieval RTS was already done with Warcraft.

[Wildtree]

stop selling games for 60$ duh stupid gaming companies and no one would even pirate a crappy facebook tycoon game lol so mission failed game dev tycoon...

movies take way more money to make than games do,yet they only cost like 10$ brand new for dvd...game industry is a joke

Stop selling cars for 80.000+, others sell theirs for 10.000k.....
You make very little sense here. You cannot compare different products.
Why do movie DVDs cost 10 bucks? Because the main source of income is from the movie theaters. By the time a movie reaches the shelves in form of a DVD it's old, and out of the movie theaters. It's an up-sale, and not the main income source.
The same goes for music today... The CD's are fairly cheap, yet the real money made off a new album comes nowadays from the concerts.
Thanks to piracy the ticket prices are sky rocketing. Prime example, most recent Rolling Stones tour.... Official ticket prices up to $650 for one ticket.

[Deleted]

This thread is spectacularly negative. They made a game about game development and I only heard about this game because of their fake game version. Regardless of whatever point they were trying to make (which I think is a decent one, the people in the thread defending piracy make me sad), I see this as pretty clever marketing.

I have no idea why people are putting them down -- they haven't done anything wrong.

People aren't putting the company down...they are stating that piracy doesn't equal lost money.

I'l take myself as example, from the age of 15-20 I pirated EVERY SINGLE GAME. As soon as I had somewhat money I slowly started buying the games I enjoyed on steam...games that I'd never bothered to buy if I hadn't pirated before as I never buy old games without atleast being able to play the demo.

Granted, I used Rapidshare at the time. So I was paying to play unlimited demos for a small amount off money.

The biggest problem is companies still selling games for 60 euros. It makes me laugh as not only steam but various of other webstores sell the game LEGALLY for 50% off that amount. Oh look BF4...I might consider preordering that shit for 30 euros insted of 60 euros on the official site.

Yes, because making something for smartphones is the same as making something for the PC... Thanks to these guys, if this is the kind of game you enjoy, you no longer have to have a smartphone to do so.

By your logic, Age of Empires deserves to be pirated too because the whole medieval RTS was already done with Warcraft.

Porting says hello.

[Easo]

Cookies to the developers.

[Nerraw]

Gamemakers only got themselves to blame for piracy.

Always on DRM, Shitty ports from a aged console, not able to utilize a decent gaming rig at all. Shitty rushed games with hardly any content. Watered down cod games every year, same crap in "new" packages

History would seem to disagree with you: http://www.gamespot.com/news/the-wit...rojekt-6346876

CD Projekt Red is widely regarded as having some of the most "gamer-friendly" features, IE. no obnoxious DRM, good story, amazing graphics, free content updates post-launch with plenty of new stuff to do, lots of innovation and improvement with new titles. etc. And yet, almost a third of the people playing their top game half a year after launch did so on pirated copies. So no, the game developers are NOT the sole perpetrators. People's lack of morals play a pretty big part too.

---------- Post added 2013-05-01 at 12:40 PM ----------

Porting says hello.

And if the original developers refuse to do so?

[Deleted]

stop selling games for 60$ duh stupid gaming companies and no one would even pirate a crappy facebook tycoon game lol so mission failed game dev tycoon...

movies take way more money to make than games do,yet they only cost like 10$ brand new for dvd...game industry is a joke

Ofc movie companies can take less as they have a much MUUUUCH larger crowd. With that said sure they could lower the price a little.

[lordjust]

Exactly, look an minecraft and the developers "notch" laid back view on piracy if you could not afford the game, certainly didn't harm the game infact I know 4 people who obtained a pirated version played it for 2 days then went and bought it as it was such a good game. It can work for the game not against it but only if the product is actually good and worth it in the consumers eyes.

This only works if the bought version offer something you want that the pirated version can't. Look at singleplayer games like the Witcher 2. It offers only singleplayer and nothing else. Why would someone who pirated the game buy it? They can already do everything in the game like everybody else.

That's the reason why publishers want to have a good multiplayer so that people will buy the game for the multiplayer. There are some creative way to deal with pirated copies like in Sacred (Diablo type game) where cheaters and pirated version would wear bunny ears in multiplayer.

I think to stop pirating publisher have to do trial-versions of the game so that people who want to try the game before they buy it don't have to pirate the game. A lot of games you can't rent because of DRM so it's either pirate the game or buy it without knowing if it's good or not. Another thing is what I mentioned before. Cut down copy-protection and DRM but instead offer something that people want or make a cool copy-protection like in The Whispered World where you had 3 dices (real ones) to check. The dices are cool and fit the gameworld and it wasn't as annoying like copy-protection in the old days like the code charts in Worms where you had to enter a code that was printed in glossy black on matt black paper.

[Deleted]

so many shitty indie games coming out recently. If I was an indie game developer I would be happy that someone plays my game and won't punish peopel for wanting to play my game.

No. Just no. NO you would not. Just no. noooooo. If you where a indie game developer you would not be happy "Just because people are playing it" People are risk much to develop games. And No you would not just be "happy" that people pirated you game and you did not make money

[Warloff]

Piracy was a much bigger problem for games back in the 90s when it was so easy to pirate computer games. Back then the DRM was most games had a point where you could only proceed if you had the official instruction manual to help solve a simple puzzle.

What's really killing game companies is the used games markets. It's completely legal, there is nothing they can do about it, and they make no money off every single used game sold. This is one of the reasons Steam makes so money. You can't sell the used games you bought there.

[Deleted]

I think their point is awesome, and the way they showed it is even better, just heard TB talk about it. This will also make them a lot of commercial.

Now, as for my stance on piracy since I saw people talking about it:
1. I will pirate a game if it has no demo. Why? Because I want to try it myself before I buy it. If it has a demo I'll play the demo.
2. If after 2 hours of play I'm still having fun there is a high chance I'll buy it. If not, I will play about until 3 hours and uninstall.
3. Exceptions when I bought a game and the cd was damaged or by some reason I can't play it anymore (not my fault, never been banned from a game, I mean game related issues) I will pirate it. I did pay for it in the end.
Another exception is also when i dislike a company very much, but think one game in a million from them is good. EA enters here. For now, they're the only ones.
The third exception is if the game is not available in my region. If I can't buy it, it's not my fault, and you can't say I live in some backwards country, so I will pirate the game. If at some time the game becomes available in my country too, I will probably get it post-play so to say.
The last exception is if it's an old game and the company that made it is dead. As such, many times, the game is not available anywhere... so I pirate it since nobody else sells it and it's not hurting the company anymore, as they're defunct.

I think that up to a point piracy can help games. However, when we get to percents like for this game, with 90% pirating... not anymore. People should support companies that trust them and make good games without DRM, with demos and don't try to scam them for 934275735773 euros/dollars/whatever currency. If they don't, the DRM and the big evil money-grabbing companies will win, because the others will sink.

[Deleted]

I think their point is awesome, and the way they showed it is even better, just heard TB talk about it. This will also make them a lot of commercial.

Now, as for my stance on piracy since I saw people talking about it:
1. I will pirate a game if it has no demo. Why? Because I want to try it myself before I buy it. If it has a demo I'll play the demo.
2. If after 2 hours of play I'm still having fun there is a high chance I'll buy it. If not, I will play about until 3 hours and uninstall.
3. Exceptions when I bought a game and the cd was damaged or by some reason I can't play it anymore (not my fault, never been banned from a game, I mean game related issues) I will pirate it. I did pay for it in the end.
Another exception is also when i dislike a company very much, but think one game in a million from them is good. EA enters here. For now, they're the only ones.
The third exception is if the game is not available in my region. If I can't buy it, it's not my fault, and you can't say I live in some backwards country, so I will pirate the game. If at some time the game becomes available in my country too, I will probably get it post-play so to say.
The last exception is if it's an old game and the company that made it is dead. As such, many times, the game is not available anywhere... so I pirate it since nobody else sells it and it's not hurting the company anymore, as they're defunct.

I think that up to a point piracy can help games. However, when we get to percents like for this game, with 90% pirating... not anymore. People should support companies that trust them and make good games without DRM, with demos and don't try to scam them for 934275735773 euros/dollars/whatever currency. If they don't, the DRM and the big evil money-grabbing companies will win, because the others will sink.

While your code of practice is honourable- this is not how business is supposed to work. Customers don't pay for stuff according to a code of honour; they pay because a business offers goods or services at a worthwhile price. That you've been put in the situation where you have to make up your own rules of when and how to pay indicates a failure on the part of the companies you're paying.

Businesses need to change their models as such that 100% piracy isn't a problem, as such that piracy is antithetical to what they do (or amounts to little more than social media buzz). Piracy itself is merely the internet doing distribution better than the companies are themselves. The inescapable implication of the internet is that titles can't really have meaningful pricetags as if they were standalone goods, because they're not; not anymore. That doesn't mean money can't change hands, just that it has to happen somewhere else along the line, perhaps before (crowdfunding, advertising, subscription), or after (freemium, microtransactions), or both. With such a powerful and inexpensive distribution method as the internet, the object should be to get as many titles to whoever wants them as easily as possible. Money can come before or after that.

[Zogarth]

While your code of practice is honourable- this is not how business is supposed to work. Customers don't pay for stuff according to a code of honour; they pay because a business offers goods or services at a worthwhile price. That you've been put in the situation where you have to make up your own rules of when and how to pay indicates a failure on the part of the companies you're paying.

Businesses need to change their models as such that 100% piracy isn't a problem, as such that piracy is antithetical to what they do (or amounts to little more than social media buzz). Piracy itself is merely the internet doing distribution better than the companies are themselves. The inescapable implication of the internet is that titles can't really have meaningful pricetags as if they were standalone goods, because they're not; not anymore. That doesn't mean money can't change hands, just that it has to happen somewhere else along the line, perhaps before (crowdfunding, advertising, subscription), or after (freemium, microtransactions), or both. With such a powerful and inexpensive distribution method as the internet, the object should be to get as many titles to whoever wants them as easily as possible. Money can come before or after that.

Problem is that nobody knows if all your ideas will allow the company to actually come out with a profit. And to be honest, many game companies are struggling right now. Square Enix for example got a lot of problems, and THQ recently shot down. But my question is... why not just buy the games you enjoy? In this case we got a 8 dollar game, with no DRM, no micro transactions, and just an easy one time download, with good speed. How would you do that better?

[Deleted]

Problem is that nobody knows if all your ideas will allow the company to actually come out with a profit. And to be honest, many game companies are struggling right now.

Actually we know that emergent models work quite well. Most smart phone apps and casual games use freemium and microtransaction models- and that market has totally eclipsed traditional or 'hardcore' gaming in size and activity. It's not just limited to casual games, though. Several classic point and click RPGs had all their overheads thoroughly covered when they had their projects funded over 1000% of what they were asking- those are the exceptional cases, but video games (of many different genres, mainly by independent developers) have their development costs completely crowdfunded every week on Kickstarter and sites like it. League of Legends is an outstandingly successful free to play battle arena game, and an exemplary model of the proper deployment of that model.

Square Enix for example got a lot of problems, and THQ recently shot down.

Big publisher/developers who haven't been adapting to a changing industry. More like them will follow, yet more games are being made than ever, and more money is being made in the industry by more develpers than ever.

But my question is... why not just buy the games you enjoy? In this case we got a 8 dollar game, with no DRM, no micro transactions, and just an easy one time download, with good speed. How would you do that better?

Like I said, the money has to be moved elsewhere along the line. There are a lot of competeing models, and no single one is standing out as the clear victor. It could be that freemium games, microtransactions, advertsisng sponsorship, or crowfunding leap ahead of the pack in terms of profitability and user preference. Or perhaps something we've yet to see. My guess is that it will be a mix of them.

The industry is changing, the new models work, more are being pioneered. Big players from before the internet revolution want to keep doing business like they know how- to charge $60+ for pieces of plastic with games on them. They're willing to lobby for regressive legislation, and ruin lives with spurious futile suits; none of this changes the fact that this old model is doomed, however. It's as doomed as the bespoke autoindustry at the advent of mass production, as doomed and church dominated publishing at the advent of the printing press. The inescapable fact is that now that data no longer needs to be written to physical objects and shipped around the world, now that it can be infinitely copied and distributed worldwide near-instantaenously, the 'supply' of a unique piece of data has effectively become 'infinite'. So you can't sell it as a commodity anymore, it has to become a service, an experience.

[Promark]

Posting that picture of Theft vs. Piracy doesn't absolve anyone of wrong doing. People have been stealing from others in the same manner before the internet was even around. Copyright infringement, stealing designs, using watermarked/stock art without permission, etc. is very similar to piracy and they are all illegal too. Pretending that it doesn't impact anyone ever is an ignorant argument.

Have I ever done any of those things? Yep. Do I pretend that it is not harming anyone and perfectly okay? no.

[N-7]

P.S. the developer from the op complains he only sold some few hundred copies on day 1, maybe he just needs to realize his game fcking sucks.

The only way to buy this game was through their website which might resulted in the low sales. For most digital sales, Steam accounts to 50% of all sales.

[bohapjut]

You're in the minority though, releasing demos has been linked to reduced sales

[Deleted]

The industry is changing, the new models work, more are being pioneered. Big players from before the internet revolution want to keep doing business like they know how- to charge $60+ for pieces of plastic with games on them. They're willing to lobby for regressive legislation, and ruin lives with spurious futile suits; none of this changes the fact that this old model is doomed, however. It's as doomed as the bespoke autoindustry at the advent of mass production, as doomed and church dominated publishing at the advent of the printing press. The inescapable fact is that now that data no longer needs to be written to physical objects and shipped around the world, now that it can be infinitely copied and distributed worldwide near-instantaenously, the 'supply' of a unique piece of data has effectively become 'infinite'. So you can't sell it as a commodity anymore, it has to become a service, an experience.

I would not say that the way of doing bussines with charging $60+ for a game is dying, its just that the way of distributing them is changing, digital distribution is becoming bigger and bigger over the classic way of selling plastic containers with a DVD in retail stores.

You're in the minority though, releasing demos has been linked to reduced sales

If the game is crap yes since people will need to buy it to form an opinion, but that is also the reason some companies do not offer them anymore. Of course there is reviews but you can't make an exact personal opinion on those even if it has information being valuable.

[Deleted]

That's hilarious.

What's even more hilarious is morons asking for help.

[Xl House lX]

I have a difficult time understanding the logic used to defend stealing things. Call it piracy or whatever you want, it is illegal and it is wrong.

If I developed something, (a game, a movie, a stick figure) to be sold for profit, and thus it cost me money to create said thing, and someone got it for free, I lose out on my goal which is to make a profit. In turn, not only do I not gain profit, but I actually lose money because I spent money to create the item that was obtained for free illegally.

Theft, it sucks, its wrong, and it is illegal. That is all there is to it, anyone that supports it in any way shape or form needs to reassess the situation.