Community Feedback Poll - Game Piracy

Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote name='opportunity777']This is a site about saving money, right?

Well, early reviews of shit games keeps me from spending money on them. If a review is "fair" without a lot of BS such as, "I suck at this game, so the game sucks," then I believe there should be no problem. I don't think a person should shy away from criticizing or praising a game. The reviewer should provide rational reasons and clear explanations why he hates or likes a certain title.

[/quote]

That's what actual review sites like Gamespot or IGN are for, not CAG. Unless, that is the direction Cheapy is thinking of moving to. If so, that is his prerogative, but being first doesn't equate to being best especially if you have to do it at the expense of integrity.
 
[quote name='corrosivefrost']Professional reviewers aren't the average gamer.
Sometimes, professional reviewers get pressure from companies to put the scores within ranges *cough* Kane & Lynch *cough*.
Hearing what a few of your online buddies may think about the game, since they actually played it could be worth more than 1000 official reviews.
Does it matter how they got it? Not really. What matters is the impressions you get to hear about. Otherwise, pre-release reviews/impressions/everything will have to go.
Just get rid of the CAG-Cast while you're at it too. Cause they talk about stuff that isn't released. Did they get it from piracy? I don't know. Let's have cheapy and wombat post some receipts and photos of cases/discs![/QUOTE]

Good point on Kane and Lynch - I'd forgotten about that when I wrote that post. :oops:

You are right on how you'd interpret reviews from your friends. I think that comes down to how you use reviews - I've always used them to check for things in the game that are glaringly wrong, like broken controls or AI, because "fun" is relative person-to-person.

If we do go to the receipts and pictures verification method (which is a completely ridiculous idea), it would be fair to apply it to CheapyD and Wombat.

Like I said, the main thing I'm worried about is that allowing early impressions could potentially backfire on the site. You are right that if we're going to ban that we should get rid of early reviews for things like music, but Sony or Microsoft is a lot more likely to keep an eye on CAG than EMI or Universal because of the site's subject matter. I'd say we should focus on games and then apply whatever the result from that is to other media as applicable.

I've got to go to class now. It'll be interesting to see where the thread has gone when I'm back.
 
No, it should be a full retail game from the publisher with everything that comes in the retail version. Even if CAG's are doing it, the website should not promote it or mention it. It's okay to give impressions on Demo's or broken street dated products, with those they are sanctioned by the publisher and even if a street date is broken, you still paid for the retail price of the game. I believe that there should be zero tolerance on piracy, letting someone post a review or preview knowing a game is pirated on a website should not be allowed. How can one prove it though is the thin line to walk? Also, what the fuck is Cheapy thinking by polling the community to see if we should allow it? This is his website and he has sponsors like Gamestop that piracy directly affects.
 
[quote name='crystalklear64']I think about waiting months for every game. I am a cheapassgamer. Very very few games do I ever buy at release, and when I do, its only because of preorder/ridiculous value. The quality of the game has nothing to do with it.[/QUOTE]

In that case, is an early review really going to sway your opinion that much? Most of the "ridiculous value" (which I'm guessing meant marquee) titles don't need early reviews to justify your purchase, because you already have a good idea of what to expect from the game well ahead of time, from other sources (like legit early impressions, from websites or magazines).
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']That's what actual review sites like Gamespot or IGN are for, not CAG. Unless, that is the direction Cheapy is thinking of moving to. If so, that is his prerogative, but being first doesn't equate to being best especially if you have to do it at the expense of integrity.[/QUOTE]

And most Gamespot and IGN reviews are garbage. People here should be a lot more unbiased. I mean, who are you more likely to believe -- a friend who has similiar interests as you, someone you can ask questions, someone who has no real bias and is mainly interested in the game for the sake of enjoyment -OR- a "professional" reviewer who has managers to answer to, who plays games to review them, not to enjoy them, whose salary is paid for by the advertisers on his site/magazine/whatever... advertisers likely to be having their game reviewed... again, see the whole K&L fiasco.

Personally, I'd be more interested in the fact that I knew someone who played it because they wanted to and could get my questions answered.
 
[quote name='DJSteel']No pirated game would be fully functional, so IMO it's not a full game to review. You couldn't play online or you can't access some sort of functionality that exists in the full game..[/QUOTE]

Uh, for console piracy it's the exact same game that you buy at the store.
 
I voted yes, simply because as we all know, stores break release dates, and you shouldn't have to prove that the game wasn't obtained illegally. Also, if someone has a preorder for a game and then pirates it to play it early, I have literally no problem with that. I'm going to say right now I did that with Final Fantasy 12, and still picked it up on launch day, after enjoying it for a few weeks.
 
[quote name='Davestation']you still paid for the retail price of the game.[/QUOTE]

This has no place in your argument.
People here rarely pay full price for ANYTHING.
And you still have to deal with all the people who didn't pay anything but played it. Your friend bought a game, you played it? Sorry, you didn't pay for it, you can't talk about it.
Watch a DVD at a friend's house? Sorry, don't tell us what you thought of it, cause you didn't buy the DVD or pay for a movie ticket.
 
I think this is a question that most people need to ask themselves.

Imagine the sequel to your favorite game is coming out next week and you absolutely cannot wait for it to come out.

Then one day you are walking through Walmart/Target and you see it on the shelves, and they are obviously selling it early. So you quickly buy a copy of rush home to play it. It is the greatest thing in the world just like you thought, and would love to share this with other CAGs. However, now you get accused of being a pirate, and possibly have your post/thread deleted or locked. Sure you could post pictures, but maybe your Girlfriend/wife/roommate/kid/friend has the camera, or maybe you don't have one at all.

So now you are screwed over, unable to talk about a great game, just because of when the release date is. This IS NOT a poll about piracy, it is a poll about posting reviews of games early. I guarantee that each and everyone of us would want to do that if we got a game early. It is not supporting the pirates, because wether we talk about them or not, they still exist. This is about keeping your right to talk about the games you are playing, even if they aren't officialy released yet.

Just keep that mind if you choose to vote "No."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']In that case, is an early review really going to sway your opinion that much? Most of the "ridiculous value" (which I'm guessing meant marquee) titles don't need early reviews to justify your purchase, because you already have a good idea of what to expect from the game well ahead of time, from other sources (like legit early impressions, from websites or magazines).[/QUOTE]
On its own no. But I've already said that. Its another source of information to add to the other sources. Early impressions from alpha/beta builds from gaming news sites come far in advance of people getting early full copies. Using that knowledge base as a whole is very useful, and I don't want a source of interactive information being removed from my knowledge base.

Obviously, if I cared so much about it, I would simply get the early info from another site that DID allow it. But there are people on CAG whos opinions reflect many of my own concerning game interest, and, as it has already been said, it is those opinions that I give more weight to.

There has only been one game I bought at release (and preordered) in recent memory for value. And that was the Orange Box. I had played none of those games, and while information on Half-Life 2 and its episodes were already available, the game that got me to preorder was Portal, specifically, leaked and legit footage I had seen of it prior to release. Had it not been for seeing Portal in action (because picture don't really describe the game very well) I would not have preordered the Orange Box.
 
[quote name='darthbudge'] I guarantee that each and everyone of us would want to do that if we got a game early. It is not supporting the pirates, because wether we talk about them or not, they still exist. This is about keeping your right to talk about the games you are playing, even if they aren't officialy released yet.[/QUOTE]

I'm still waiting to hear whether this question is regarding general posts or just bloggers posting up reviews...
 
[quote name='darthbudge']I think this is a question that most people need to ask themselves.

Imagine the sequel to your favorite game is coming out next week and you absolutely cannot wait for it to come out.

Then one day you are w[/QUOTE]

Exactly.
 
I would say no. Titan Quest was a great example of why this creates problems. People were using cracked copies of the game, which they thought was indicative of the final product. It turns out that the game was crashing because of an anti-piracy check that ran during the first dungeon. The game garnered a reputation of being buggy and glitchy before release. See the attached post by the THQ CEO on the quartertothree forums.

http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showthread.php?t=42663

You also might want to think about the relationships you have with the developers Cheapy. As the site grows your exposure and interaction with the developement community will grow along with it. We already know developers listen to the Cagcast, and we've seen you appearing on Bloomberg, etc. Allowing the posting of impressions based on pirated software will give you a reputation that is guilty by association. Sure, most posts would fly under the radar, but all it could take is one accusation by a developer that names a post on this site. Maybe most users don't care about that, or see it as insignificant. I think it better serves the community for your site to be respected in the industry, such that the CAG Community has its voice heard (the power of gaming communities) when it comes to getting the most out of our gaming dollar, rather than getting some early impressions of a game.
 
I have to say what if you know someone or are a reviewer and got a copy early and are posting some impressions?

No matter how you get the game, a review or opinions of the game should be allowed, as long as you state that it's not the final build, or say if it is. One thing that shouldn't be allowed is the talks of how to obtain pirated software, how cool it is, how stupid it is, how much cooler I am compared to you because I got a pirate version, .etc Thought provoking conversation is good.
 
[quote name='darthbudge']I think this is a question that most people need to ask themselves.

Imagine the sequel to your favorite game is coming out next week and you absolutely cannot wait for it to come out.

Then one day you are w[/quote]

What? :rofl:
 
I don't support piracy, so I voted no you shouldn't allow early impressions based off pirated material. However, without being able to tell if someone pirated something for absolute certain this will be extremely hard to enforce.

I think this will have to be an on your honor sorta thing. People do legitimately get retail copies ahead of the release date and shouldn't be penalized. Realistically there is no way to tell (save like something like when Valve was hacked and people were playing Half Life 2 over a year before the retail release), so the issue is pretty moot.
 
Gotta say No. It seems to me that while the impressions of the game are of interest, they are being gathered by illegal means that shouldn't be rewarded. Piracy hurts all of us that buy our games and should be frowned upon more than it is in game forums.
 
[quote name='NATO_Duke']Gotta say No. It seems to me that while the impressions of the game are of interest, they are being gathered by illegal means that shouldn't be rewarded. Piracy hurts all of us that buy our games and should be frowned upon more than it is in game forums.[/QUOTE]

Where the fuck is the reward in posting about it? Internet-cred? So you can rep with e-gangs? It's not like these people are getting paid for their impressions or will get a job in the industry because they shared opinions/impressions of these games before street date.

The only "reward" is already gained by the time they posted/blogged. They played the game before you. They're enjoying the game right now. And guess what? They probably didn't pay for it.

Posting about the game itself is just posting. Regardless of whether it's 3 days before street date, a week before street date, or 5 days after it.

Don't ask, don't tell. Like music said.
 
Impressions yes, reviews no. At least that's how I feel. While I am not one to pirate software, for sake of personal and public impressions it can help the public good on some level by giving a better understanding of the product. If the pirated copy is used for a review its not a fair assessment of the final product as much as one would like to think it is, most notable for pc games.
 
An early impression is an early impression. Should the people be parading around that it is from a pirated game? No but thats none of our problems. I am reading the impression to get a better idea of the game before I decide to purchase it.

I don't know how the people get there early copies. It could be connections, it could be broken street dates, or it could even be the hated piracy, but as I stated before, as long as its not mentioned, all im reading are the impressions...
 
[quote name='corrosivefrost']Is that like becoming V [for Vendetta]?[/quote]It's worse. You sport a Nixon mask and you talk only in haiku's.
 
[quote name='darthbudge']I think this is a question that most people need to ask themselves.

Imagine the sequel to your favorite game is coming out next week and you absolutely cannot wait for it to come out.

Then one day you are walking through Walmart/Target and you see it on the shelves, and they are obviously selling it early. So you quickly buy a copy of rush home to play it. It is the greatest thing in the world just like you thought, and would love to share this with other CAGs. However, now you get accused of being a pirate, and possibly have your post/thread deleted or locked. Sure you could post pictures, but maybe your Girlfriend/wife/roommate/kid/friend has the camera, or maybe you don't have one at all.

So now you are screwed over, unable to talk about a great game, just because of when the release date is. This IS NOT a poll about piracy, it is a poll about posting reviews of games early. I guarantee that each and everyone of us would want to do that if we got a game early. It is not supporting the pirates, because wether we talk about them or not, they still exist. This is about keeping your right to talk about the games you are playing, even if they aren't officialy released yet.

Just keep that mind if you choose to vote "No."[/quote]
So tell everyone which Walmart/Target you bought it at so they can also go experience the joy of playing the game early. Problem solved!
 
[quote name='corrosivefrost']This has no place in your argument.
People here rarely pay full price for ANYTHING.
And you still have to deal with all the people who didn't pay anything but played it. Your friend bought a game, you played it? Sorry, you didn't pay for it, you can't talk about it.
Watch a DVD at a friend's house? Sorry, don't tell us what you thought of it, cause you didn't buy the DVD or pay for a movie ticket.[/quote]


Yes, it is relevant. Most street dated games are triple A titles that many CAG's will pay for full retail on the first day. We are not all cheap, just look at the CAG's most ordered list from Amazon. The number one item was Gears of War 2 Lancer with a free Gears of War 2 game for $149.99. I am talking about getting the game in legal, legitimate ways such as purchsing it, renting it, or borrowing it from a friend. The copy that is being lent out is most traditionally a legitimet retail copy that was purchased. What Cheapy is asking for is if we agree that previews and reviews should be based off of pirated copies, and the anser in my opinion still reamains at no. If you loan a CD to a friend, they can easily pirate the CD on there computer (wich is still wrong in my book) instead of paying for it themselves. You can not easily do that this generation with games like you could in the PS1 and X-Box days so it is most likely that if your friend liked that game, he may want to go out and purchase it himself, or if he knows his websites, he can be schmuck and pirate it.
 
Trakan said it, but a lot of the posts don't even have anything to do with the issue. :cool:[quote name='illpleasa']An early impression is an early impression. Should the people be parading around that it is from a pirated game? No but thats none of our problems. I am reading the impression to get a better idea of the game before I decide to purchase it.

I don't know how the people get there early copies. It could be connections, it could be broken street dates, or it could even be the hated piracy, but as I stated before, as long as its not mentioned, all im reading are the impressions...[/quote]

Which is exactly what the thread is about!

Thanks for putting your two cents in and welcome to CheapAssGamer. :D
 
[quote name='Davestation']The number one item was Gears of War 2 Lancer with a free Gears of War 2 game for $149.99.[/QUOTE]
Thats cool thats cool...

So where does amazon show how many people didn't order this?
 
[quote name='Davestation']Yes, it is relevant. Most street dated games are triple A titles that many CAG's will pay for full retail on the first day.
..
I am talking about getting the game in legal, legitimate ways such as purchsing it, renting it, or borrowing it from a friend. [/QUOTE]

All games are street dated. Just like all music and movies are. For whatever purpose, everything has a street date. And just cause some CAGs will pay full retail on day doesn't mean they all do.

Borrowing and renting do nothing for the game publisher/developer. Used game sales do nothing for them. They get no $$$ to pay their employees and fund bigger and better games that you want to play. All of these are "legal" in the eyes of copyright laws, but in terms of the "effects of piracy", they all play out the same.
 
Hell no. It indirectly supports piracy and encourages people to host it when they see others taking advantage of their hosts. edit: Also those who don't pay for it, will be providing a different type of review then what would be given by those who did pay for it... When you have to pay for something you judge it more critically.
 
You can't police this so it's a moot point, unless the person outright states they're reviewing a pirated copy of the game. I voted "yes" because it seems like the wording of the question was suspect, and is ultimately a question of if reviews of games that haven't been released yet should be permitted. I say they should. Even though the possibility exist that the game was pirated, it can't be proved conclusively, and if that's not enough to convict, that shouldn't be reason enough to call someone a pirate and delete their review.

Plus, I don't even want to know the metrics of general opinions of games. I'm sure day 1 piracy is a much smaller issue when compared to post-release piracy. If you somehow could manage to delete all opinions of games people didn't pay for, that would probably be half of the forum.

Also, if reporting on a game you haven't paid for is the definition being used here, Gamefly rental opinions shouldn't be allowed either. Slippery slope.
 
I'm not sure why this is even a question since the CAG forum discourages/prohibits any warez or otherwise illegal discussions, but of course I had to vote no.
 
I'm sure this has been stated before but reviews of pirated copies? No.

Reviews of early copies by way of stores not honoring street date, won as prizes, etc basically legally acquired, yes.

Also and most importantly: Innocent until proven guilty instead of the other way around. If someone gets the game early because their boss is a soft touch and they write up a review but don't say how they got it, they shouldn't be attacked. They shouldn't be asked to show a receipt.

In a nutshell, if they admit they pirated it, keelhaul them. If not, live and let live. I'd rather think CAGs were a cut above the rest and there only a few bad apples instead of cutting them all open because there is a chance we all might be rotten at the core.
 
[quote name='detectiveconan16']Hell, no! If you're going to pirate, why the hell are you tellin' people about it?[/QUOTE]
WTF? Thats not what this is even asking...
 
[quote name='crystalklear64']Thats cool thats cool...

So where does amazon show how many people didn't order this?[/quote]

I just mentioned that to prove that members of this community are more than willing to pay full price for a game. The suggestion that no one here will pay full price for a game is insane. There are threads about the $149.99 lancer bundle, the $79.99 Resistance 2 Special Edition, and the $89.99 Metal Gear Limited Edition. People love certain franchises and are willing to pay. Corrosivefrost is niave enought to believe otherwise. To have a $149.99 lancer be your number one purchase off of a cheapass website only proves this, why wasn't a cheaper game number one for a website that loves cheap games? It's because people love franchises and cheapassgamer was one of the first to post the deal do to the community.

[quote name='corrosivefrost']All games are street dated. Just like all music and movies are. For whatever purpose, everything has a street date. And just cause some CAGs will pay full retail on day doesn't mean they all do.

Borrowing and renting do nothing for the game publisher/developer. Used game sales do nothing for them. They get no $$$ to pay their employees and fund bigger and better games that you want to play. All of these are "legal" in the eyes of copyright laws, but in terms of the "effects of piracy", they all play out the same.[/quote]

First off, you obviousley do not work in retail. All games are not street dated like Movies and Music. If you go to Gamestop to pick up Dragon Quest IV for the DS, they will most likely get the game the day after it ships. For other retailers such as Target, Wal Mart, and K-Mart they will receive it at there Distribution Centers the day after it ships. After they get it at the DC's it takes time for them to process it and get it on a trailer to their stores. For Street Dated items, everyone usually has the title in store about a week before the street date with big stickers that say "DO NOT SELL UNTIL OCT 17, 2008. Gamestop always brags about being the first to get the game, that is because they get the games shipped straight to the stores. Only big releases have a Street Date, not every game. Your not going to see a Target or Wal Mart employee turn you down if your trying to buy Cooking Mama 2 for the Wii when it comes out.

Also, borroring and renting is legitimate, it can act as a trial for a game before people commit to buy. It helps to determine if someone wants a game, sure there are those people out there that just mooch off of their friends, but at least the game was purchased in legal means. I believe that if there where restrictions on renting and borrowing, it would only create a bigger piracy problem.
 
I said no, because you cannot knowingly allow any pirated game to be reviewed on your site. Nothing good will come of that for sure. There will also be no easy way to figure who pirated and who didn't with out some invasive procedure that will only discourage people from posting reviews early at all. Not to mention it'll put extra work on somebody to have to constantly verify receipts and it would all for nothing because I could photoshop you a nice receipt from gamestop in about 5 minutes. What I suggest is to allow CAGs to post early reviews, and just make it policy that their IP's are logged and kept in case you ever need to cover your ass, if you were ever legally questioned. Leave it to the CAG who published the early review to prove to the publisher that their early copy is legit, if it ever came down to that. Cag gets to stay the neutral 3rd party.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top