Crysis 2 Most Pirated Game of 2011 [Slashdot]

[DP ServBot]

http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Y4aGQPVyGqMBghwycsDwmM1x_Ho/0/di (http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Y4aGQPVyGqMBghwycsDwmM1x_Ho/0/da)
http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Y4aGQPVyGqMBghwycsDwmM1x_Ho/1/di (http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Y4aGQPVyGqMBghwycsDwmM1x_Ho/1/da)

MojoKid writes "When an advance copy of Crysis 2 leaked to the Internet a full month before the game's scheduled release, Crytek and Electronic Arts (EA) were understandably miffed and, as it turns out, justified in their fears of mass piracy. Crysis 2 was illegally download on the PC platform 3,920,000 time, 'beating out' Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 with 3,650,000 illegal downloads. Numbers like these don't bode well for PC gamers and will only serve to encourage even more draconian DRM measures than we've seen in the past."http://a.fsdn.com/sd/facebook_icon_large.png (http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fgames.slashdot.org%2Fsto ry%2F12%2F01%2F01%2F1425227%2Fcrysis-2-most-pirated-game-of-2011%3Futm_source%3Dslashdot%26utm_medium%3Dfacebo ok) http://a.fsdn.com/sd/twitter_icon_large.png (http://twitter.com/home?status=Crysis+2+Most+Pirated+Game+of+2011%3A+ http%3A%2F%2Fbit.ly%2Fu60s8P)

Read more of this story (http://games.slashdot.org/story/12/01/01/1425227/crysis-2-most-pirated-game-of-2011?utm_source=rss1.0moreanon&utm_medium=feed) at Slashdot.

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Slashdot/slashdotGames/~4/-4UAPZ4fpTw

More... (http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdotGames/~3/-4UAPZ4fpTw/crysis-2-most-pirated-game-of-2011)

[j_factor]

will only serve to encourage even more draconian DRM measures than we've seen in the past."

Because DRM is so effective at reducing piracy...

[kedawa]

It's funny that they think they have accurate numbers for this kind of thing.
Even funnier is that this will undoubtedly wind up on some bogus piracy report as 3,920,000 lost sales.

[BetaWolf47]

Hmm, this may be true piracy this time. Crysis 2 had a demo at one point, so I doubt many people pirated it to demo it.

[Gamevet]

And PC gamers wonder why they aren't getting the premium treatment with PC releases.

It's funny how everytime a PC game gets compared to the console versions, the PC gamers get in an uproar over the console versions.

Wakeup PC gamer, you did it to yourself. Maybe if you didn't throw all of your money into the latest and greatest hardware, you could spend a little money on software. Yes, I paid for the PC version of Crysis 2, but I waited until the DX11 patch.

[BetaWolf47]

And PC gamers wonder why they aren't getting the premium treatment with PC releases.

It's funny how everytime a PC game gets compared to the console versions, the PC gamers get in an uproar over the console versions.

Wakeup PC gamer, you did it to yourself. Maybe if you didn't throw all of your money into the latest and greatest hardware, you could spend a little money on software.

Don't lump us all into one. The majority of PC gamers I know are disgusted at how piracy has become a scapegoat for developer laziness. Crysis 2 wasn't going to sell 4 million on PC even if pirating it wasn't possible.

[Gamevet]

Don't lump us all into one. The majority of PC gamers I know are disgusted at how piracy has become a scapegoat for developer laziness. Crysis 2 wasn't going to sell 4 million on PC even if pirating it wasn't possible.

Then how do explain how the much larger userbase of the PC, hasn't posted the largest sales numbers on the premium titles? MW3 sold better on the 360 and there's no reason why the PC shouldn't be dominating the FPS market.

[Gameguy]

Hmm, this may be true piracy this time. Crysis 2 had a demo at one point, so I doubt many people pirated it to demo it.
People wanted to play it "first", it was available for download a month before it was available for purchase. If it wasn't leaked early I doubt so many people would have wanted to download it, if it was only available online after it was available in stores not so many people would bother to pirate it.

[LaughingMAN.S9]

then how do explain how the much larger userbase of the pc, hasn't posted the largest sales numbers on the premium titles? Mw3 sold better on the 360 and there's no reason why the pc shouldn't be dominating the fps market.



thank you.

[Kitsune Sniper]

Then how do explain how the much larger userbase of the PC, hasn't posted the largest sales numbers on the premium titles? MW3 sold better on the 360 and there's no reason why the PC shouldn't be dominating the FPS market.Easy. WE HAVE BETTER GAMES TO CHOOSE FROM THAN A REHASH OF MODERN WARFARE 2. We also have at least twice as many choices when it comes to games than console players do.

And I'm pretty sure these PC sale numbers only include physical copies. If we had a way to know the exact amount of sales done via digital distribution you'd see just how little difference there is. Places like Steam, Direct2Drive, or even EA's own Origin rarely reveal just how many copies of a game they sell.

[Gamevet]

Easy. WE HAVE BETTER GAMES TO CHOOSE FROM THAN A REHASH OF MODERN WARFARE 2. We also have at least twice as many choices when it comes to games than console players do.

And I'm pretty sure these PC sale numbers only include physical copies. If we had a way to know the exact amount of sales done via digital distribution you'd see just how little difference there is. Places like Steam, Direct2Drive, or even EA's own Origin rarely reveal just how many copies of a game they sell.

The 360 would not be the lead developer platform, if that was true.

Activision posted its first day sales numbers for MW3 and it was the 360 with 55%, PS3 with 33% and the PC at 12%. I don't recall any other new FPS on the PC market, beyond BF3. Did everyone on the PC hold out for digital distribution, or were they all playing their free Crysis 2 game online?

Skyrim should have been a PC showcase title, but its a DX9 game that was held back to accomodate the console versions. Crysis 2 should have been a DX11 game at launch, but the focus was on making it a solid DX9 game that would work across all platforms. DX11 patches are hardly being PC optimized either. (http://www.anandtech.com/show/5149/batman-arkham-city-new-villain-dx11-man-on-pcs)

The PC software section in Best Buy is pathetic, and looking at the huge selection in Fry's, it's just a bunch of older titles, MMOs and the same games you see on the console.

I invested quite a bit of money into DX11 capable video cards for my PC and I'm not seeing the plethora of software to support it. The PCs best is few and far between and if people really were buying the top tier software on the PC, we'd have tons of DX11 games by now. It's been over 2 years since those cards became available, so where's the software?

[Kitsune Sniper]

The 360 would not be the lead developer platform, if that was true.

Activision posted its first day sales numbers for MW3 and it was the 360 with 55%, PS3 with 33% and the PC at 12%. I don't recall any other new FPS on the PC market, beyond BF3. Did everyone on the PC hold out for digital distribution, or were they all playing their free Crysis 2 game online?

Skyrim should have been a PC showcase title, but its a DX9 game that was held back to accomodate the console versions. Crysis 2 should have been a DX11 game at launch, but the focus was on making it a solid DX9 game that would work across all platforms. DX11 patches are hardly being PC optimized either. (http://www.anandtech.com/show/5149/batman-arkham-city-new-villain-dx11-man-on-pcs)

The PC software section in Best Buy is pathetic, and looking at the huge selection in Fry's, it's just a bunch of older titles, MMOs and the same games you see on the console.

I invested quite a bit of money into DX11 capable video cards for my PC and I'm not seeing the plethora of software to support it. The PCs best is few and far between and if people really were buying the top tier software on the PC, we'd have tons of DX11 games by now. It's been over 2 years since those cards became available, so where's the software?

The main reason publishers sell games on consoles is DLC. Console players are more likely to pay a relatively large amount of money for a couple of maps.

And I don't usually blame the devs that hold off DirectX 11 support and updating. It's the publisher who won't let them do so, or just won't fund that.

Your Best Buy example isn't really important since there is little money to be made on physical games anymore, unless your name is Blizzard and the words "Collector's Edition" are in the box... PC games haven't been big sellers in stores for years. (Casual games don't count. They're usually super cheap, and don't need to have the million sales that these big ones do.) Why bother printing a large amount of copies and shipping them to stores when companies can make twice the amount via digital sales, with next to no money other than hosting and connection / transfer costs?

[Gamevet]

The main reason publishers sell games on consoles is DLC. Console players are more likely to pay a relatively large amount of money for a couple of maps.

Part of that has to do with MS setting the prices. Why do you think Gabe was touting the PS3 version of Portal 2?


And I don't usually blame the devs that hold off DirectX 11 support and updating. It's the publisher who won't let them do so, or just won't fund that.

Then why would the developers take the time to release DX11 patches (buggy) at no profit to them?




Your Best Buy example isn't really important since there is little money to be made on physical games anymore, unless your name is Blizzard and the words "Collector's Edition" are in the box... PC games haven't been big sellers in stores for years. (Casual games don't count. They're usually super cheap, and don't need to have the million sales that these big ones do.) Why bother printing a large amount of copies and shipping them to stores when companies can make twice the amount via digital sales, with next to no money other than hosting and connection / transfer costs?

Starcraft II, World of Warcraft, Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3, Batman: AC, Crysis 2, Mafia II, Mass Effect 2, Portal 2, Borderlands, Metro 2033 and SW: The Old Republic were readily available at retail for the PC. Digital download or not, the push for PC gaming isn't what it used to be by publishers and developers, and you have to wonder why?

The numbers on digital download are being inflated by sales on mobile devices and Indy titles like Bastion (500K). I visit a thread on another board that often talks about what they are buying on Steam. Most of the stuff people are posting about is older PC titles they bought on the cheap through Steam.

Yes, companies do track and talk about their sales through digital distribution. It's not like they would hide the sales numbers that are so easily tracked.

http://store.steampowered.com/

http://www.theuen.com/forum/starcraft-2-general/531-current-starcraft-ii-sales-figures-not-including-china.html




Crysis 2 has become Electronic Arts' most popular release so far this year, beating out other major titles such as Dragon Age 2 and Dead Space 2. According to the sales figures, the Xbox 360 was the most popular console too, thoroughly dominating the PS3 and PC.

The 360 accounts for 57% of Crysis 2's sales, with the PS3 taking 29% and the PC raking in a miserable 14%. Maybe they were too busy torrenting it or something.

This news is notable for the fact that Crysis was always a major PC title and being able to run it was the hallmark of a powerful gaming computer. PC fans have been upset at the console inclusion, blaming it for "dumbing down" the game and not looking pretty enough without manual tweaking.

I wouldn't expect EA to care much now, though, since the PC is apparently not where the money is. Can't fault people for wanting their games to actually sell, y'know?

http://www.destructoid.com/crysis-2-huge-success-xbox-360-dominates-sales-197396.phtml

[Kitsune Sniper]

Part of that has to do with MS setting the prices. Why do you think Gabe was touting the PS3 version of Portal 2?Microsoft told Activision to sell a map pack for $15? On XBLA, PSN and Steam? I really doubt it.
Then why would the developers take the time to release DX11 patches (buggy) at no profit to them?Additional PC sales. The publishers want to make money on consoles and don't give a fuck about PC players until later on. The devs may not agree, but they're not the ones funding the project.

Starcraft II, World of Warcraft, Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3, Batman: AC, Crysis 2, Mafia II, Mass Effect 2, Portal 2, Borderlands, Metro 2033 and SW: The Old Republic were readily available at retail for the PC. Digital download or not, the push for PC gaming isn't what it used to be by publishers and developers, and you have to wonder why?But pretty much all of those require signing up to a company's website or service to play:

Starcraft / WOW: Battle.net
Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3, Crysis 2: EA Origin (Optional on Crysis 2)
Mass Effect 2: BioWare account (EA Origin too but I think it isn't required for retail.)
Mafia 2, Portal 2, Metro 2033: Steam
The Old Republic: BioWare account
Batman: Arkham City: Games for Windows Live (required by the game)

Only Borderlands does not require you to sign up... unless you want to play with other people, in which case you need a GameSpy account.


The numbers on digital download are being inflated by sales on mobile devices and Indy titles like Bastion (500K). I visit a thread on another board that often talks about what they are buying on Steam. Most of the stuff people are posting about is older PC titles they bought on the cheap through Steam.I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Yes, a lot of companies sell a lot of games on Steam. I was talking about the big name console / PC games, not older stuff. Older stuff will always sell at a constant pace, especially during the holiday season.


Yes, companies do track and talk about their sales through digital distribution. It's not like they would hide the sales numbers that are so easily tracked.Zeboyd Games, the Cthulhu Saves The World / Breath of Death VII developer, had to ask Valve for permission to publish their sales numbers. They tweeted about this for a while until they finally got it.

Why would Valve prohibit them from doing so?

http://zeboyd.com/2011/11/21/cthulhu-saves-the-world-bundle-sells-over-100000-copies-on-steam-in-less-than-4-months/

[NE146]

I don't see what's the difference between console & PC game players. Pretty much anyone who has a console obviously has a PC as well so it's like arguing about using the bathroom sink vs. using the kitchen sink. :p

[BetaWolf47]

I don't see what's the difference between console & PC game players. Pretty much anyone who has a console obviously has a PC as well so it's like arguing about using the bathroom sink vs. using the kitchen sink. :p
It's actually a really large difference. Having a PC is one thing, having a gaming PC is another.

Also, Gamevet, I'm curious as to why you are so bothered about PC gamers complaining about PC versions of games. It's us that has to deal with it, and you seem content with your consoles. I don't get the logic.

[Sunnyvale]

But pretty much all of those require signing up to a company's website or service to play:

Starcraft / WOW: Battle.net
Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3, Crysis 2: EA Origin (Optional on Crysis 2)
Mass Effect 2: BioWare account (EA Origin too but I think it isn't required for retail.)
Mafia 2, Portal 2, Metro 2033: Steam
The Old Republic: BioWare account
Batman: Arkham City: Games for Windows Live (required by the game)

Only Borderlands does not require you to sign up... unless you want to play with other people, in which case you need a GameSpy account.

PC gamers are different than console gamers. Consoles have a larger degree of 'stability', (constant required updates) where the PC seems to offer more 'freedom' (none o that shieat). Kitsune does well in addressing this. A popular PC game either uses Everquestish clamps to regulate, or they let it go nuts. If someone wants GTA on the PC over PS2, it's probably about some hot coffee. Or, they play D2, and quit when the rust storm hit. One or the other, in my experience.



Also, Gamevet, I'm curious as to why you are so bothered about PC gamers complaining about PC versions of games. It's us that has to deal with it, and you seem content with your consoles. I don't get the logic.

Even as a non-PC gamer, I agree. If someone complains about their PSP selection, I STFU, cause what do I know bout PSP's? Nada. Let the experts chat, and be happy I can watch ;)

[Griking]

And PC gamers wonder why they aren't getting the premium treatment with PC releases.

It's funny how everytime a PC game gets compared to the console versions, the PC gamers get in an uproar over the console versions.

Wakeup PC gamer, you did it to yourself. Maybe if you didn't throw all of your money into the latest and greatest hardware, you could spend a little money on software. Yes, I paid for the PC version of Crysis 2, but I waited until the DX11 patch.

Lets not pretend that console gamers are saints who are beyond piracy. In fact, console games probably have more piracy preventive measure built into them than PC games do.

[BetaWolf47]

Lets not pretend that console gamers are saints who are beyond piracy. In fact, console games probably have more piracy preventive measure built into them than PC games do.

I was going to mention that too! You can pirate games for any console now. Look up the latest Call of Duty or Sonic game on popular torrent sites and you'll see. What are we going to do then, when developers see people pirating console games, and then using that as an excuse to put less effort into the port for that particular console? It can and will happen, and PC gamers will be laughing in console gamers' faces when it does.

Either way, it's inexcusable on the developer's part. The idea that charging legitimate customers $60 for an unfinished game is justified because of piracy is utter crap. When people are pirating your games, things won't improve by taking a piss on the people who aren't. And saying that "we" deserve it, because of what others did is an insult to the whole userbase.

Would you be okay with a price hike at your local grocery store because your neighbors are stealing food from them?

[Gamevet]

Lets not pretend that console gamers are saints who are beyond piracy. In fact, console games probably have more piracy preventive measure built into them than PC games do.

I don't recall ever hearing about a console game being readily available to torrent before it even hits retail. This isn't the first instance of this happening to a PC title.


It's actually a really large difference. Having a PC is one thing, having a gaming PC is another.

Also, Gamevet, I'm curious as to why you are so bothered about PC gamers complaining about PC versions of games. It's us that has to deal with it, and you seem content with your consoles. I don't get the logic.

My very first post noted that I did buy the PC version once the DX11 patch came out.

I do PC game, so I should be very concerned about the state of the PC software market. I've spent plenty of money to put together a nice Mid-level PC, with an Intel Q9650 @3.5 Ghz, 8 gigs of PC2-8500 ram @ 1066 Mhz, (2) 1 gig GTX 460s in sli. I've also set up a dual-boot with Windows 7 Premium and XP Pro. I've bought Starcraft II, Metro 2033, Crysis 2, Crysis Maximum Edition, Mafia II, Bioshock 2 and The Witcher from retail.

My concern is that there isn't a lot of top-tier software to support the money I've invested into a PC. If a game is DX9, I don't really see the need to buy it on PC, when I can play it on my PS3, or 360 from the couch. Yeah, the PC will have higher-res textures on the walls and floors, but for the most part it's not a huge leap over the console version. I can at least sell the console version when I'm done, where I'm pretty much stuck with it on PC. If I'm going to spend money on what is supposed to be the premium gaming system, I expect developers to treat the PC as such.


Microsoft told Activision to sell a map pack for $15? On XBLA, PSN and Steam? I really doubt it.

Activision sold the map packs at the price MS suggested. MS didn't want companies underselling content, so they set prices on items being sold through LIVE. It's just like MS and Sony setting prices for new games on their consoles for $60. The publishers followed that pricing structure on PC as well.

Like I said ealier. Gabe at Valve is backlashing with MS over pricing for added content for Portal 2, so he decided to throw his support behind the PS3 version. This was the same guy that said years earlier, that he didn't want anything to do with the PS3.




But pretty much all of those require signing up to a company's website or service to play:

Starcraft / WOW: Battle.net
Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3, Crysis 2: EA Origin (Optional on Crysis 2)
Mass Effect 2: BioWare account (EA Origin too but I think it isn't required for retail.)
Mafia 2, Portal 2, Metro 2033: Steam
The Old Republic: BioWare account
Batman: Arkham City: Games for Windows Live (required by the game)

Only Borderlands does not require you to sign up... unless you want to play with other people, in which case you need a GameSpy account.


Well yeah, but it doesn't mean you have to purchase it through digital distribution. The patches and add-on content you do.

Yes, I'm well aware of signing in with steam. I do it everytime I play Metro 2033 and Mafia II.

[Kitsune Sniper]

I don't recall ever hearing about a console game being readily available to torrent before it even hits retail. This isn't the first instance of this happening to a PC title.Really now. Skyward Sword was leaked before the game was released on stores. COD Black Ops for the 360 was too. Both were big name releases, I'm surprised you never heard of them.



Activision sold the map packs at the price MS suggested. MS didn't want companies underselling content, so they set prices on items being sold through LIVE. It's just like MS and Sony setting prices for new games on their consoles for $60. The publishers followed that pricing structure on PC as well.Got a quote or news page to back this up? I don't believe Microsoft had anything to do with the price.


Like I said ealier. Gabe at Valve is backlashing with MS over pricing for added content for Portal 2, so he decided to throw his support behind the PS3 version. This was the same guy that said years earlier, that he didn't want anything to do with the PS3.What I heard was that Microsoft -did not want- to have a cross-compatible game. So they went with PS3. Again; hearsay. I wish I had a quote to back this up but I don't.

[Gamevet]

Really now. Skyward Sword was leaked before the game was released on stores. COD Black Ops for the 360 was too. Both were big name releases, I'm surprised you never heard of them.


The E3 demo of Skyward Sword was leaked, not the full game. And no, I did not hear about Black Ops being leaked, because it never happened. (http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/57712/Call-of-Duty-Black-Ops-Almost-Leaks-On-Xbox-360-Foiled-By-Investigators)

http://www.zeldainformer.com/2011/11/uh-oh-skyward-sword-leaks-to-the-internet-sort-of.html

I'm talking about a game being all over torrent, before it was released. I don't recall ever hearing about this happening to a console game before launch, like what we are seeing with Crysis 2.

Here are a few examples of what I'm talking about. Piracy has more than taken its toll on PC gaming, over any other gaming format available. It's been killing the movie industry for years now.

Battlefield 3

http://www.g7gaming.net/t2545-battlefield-3-pc-leaked-12-days-before-release


Half-Life 2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-Life_2


Half-Life 2 was merely a rumor until a strong impression at E3 in May 2003 launched it into high levels of hype where it won several awards for best in show. It had a release date of September 2003, but was delayed. This pushing back of HL2's release date came in the wake of the cracking of Valve's internal network[38] through a null session connection to Tangis which was hosted in Valve's network and a subsequent upload of an ASP shell, resulting in the leak of the game's source code and many other files including maps, models and a playable early version of Half-Life Source and Counter-Strike Source in early September 2003.[39] On October 2, 2003, Valve CEO Gabe Newell publicly explained in the HalfLife2.net forums[40] the events that Valve experienced around the time of the leak, and requested users to track down the perpetrators if possible.

In June 2004, Valve Software announced in a press release that the FBI had arrested several people suspected of involvement in the source code leak.[41] Valve claimed the game had been leaked by a German black-hat hacker named Axel "Ago" Gembe. After the leak, Gembe had contacted Newell through e-mail (also providing an unreleased document planning the E3 events). Newell kept corresponding with Gembe, and Gembe was led into believing that Valve wanted to employ him as an in-house security auditor. He was to be offered a flight to the USA and was to be arrested on arrival by the FBI. When the German government became aware of the plan, Gembe was arrested in Germany instead, and put on trial for the leak as well as other computer crimes in November 2006, such as the creation of Agobot, a highly successful trojan which harvested users' data.[42][43][44]


http://www.gamesthirst.com/2011/11/23/i-am-alive-wont-be-released-on-pc-because-sales-are-not-worth-it-ubisoft/



To the PC gamer who’s also an I Am Alive fan: buy a console if you really want to play the upcoming reboot.

It was Stanislas Mettra, creative director at Ubisoft who bluntly shared the news with IncGamers, telling the site that because of piracy, a port of I Am Alive to PC just “isn’t worth it”.

“Are these people just making noise just because there’s no version or because it’s a game they actually want to play? Would they buy it if we made it?,” asked Mettra.

“It’s hard because there’s so much piracy and so few people are paying for PC games that we have to precisely weigh it up against the cost of making it,” he continued.

“Perhaps it will only take 12 guys three months to port the game to PC; it’s not a massive cost but it’s still a cost. If only 50,000 people buy the game then it’s not worth it.”

There. I Am Alive goes on sale this winter on PSN and Xbox Live.







Got a quote or news page to back this up? I don't believe Microsoft had anything to do with the price.

MS controls everything that is available though LIVE. You don't need some headline to tell you something everyone already knows. It's just like when a console is announced, the pricing of games goes right along with the system announcement.

PC titles were selling for $50, even a year of so after the 360 launched. Once publishers got comfortable with charging $60 for the console version of the game, the price on the PC games jumped up as well.

I used to pay less than $10 a month to play SW: Galaxies, but the pricing on MMOs jumped up once people saw that Blizzard could get away with charging $15 a month for WOW. It's no different than what Activision is charging for map packs for the Call of Duty games.



What I heard was that Microsoft -did not want- to have a cross-compatible game. So they went with PS3. Again; hearsay. I wish I had a quote to back this up but I don't.

MS didn't want Valve having control over their content for Portal 2, including Steam accounts. But, it goes beyond just Steam cross-platform gaming. If Valve chose to offer free maps and such, they would have to get approval through MS.

http://www.vg247.com/2011/07/12/why-valve-needs-to-come-clean-on-steams-ea-aversion/


Valve’s relationship with both console networks fell apart after the launch of The Orange Box. Team Fortress 2, the collection’s most enduring success, has gained notoriety for its constant updates, but the certification processes for both the PlayStation Network and Xbox Live are lengthy, troublesome affairs, and Valve got well and truly tired of jumping through hoops for every new hat.

Sony, astonishingly, has since opened its tightly-guarded borders and let a rival platform in. To wield a loaded analogy, Steam is a parasite, sneaking onto PS3 consoles with every copy of Portal 2, building a nest inside the box’s body.

This is, in fact, great for Sony, who can boast the “best” console version of Portal 2, and it’s great for players. Portal 2 can be patched much more quickly and efficiently on PlayStation 3 than on Xbox 360, should the need arise, and console kids can team up with hardened PC fans to conquer the game’s co-operative multiplayer.


Here's an article about PC piracy, with direct comparisons to consoles. The author has definitly done his homework.

http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_4.html


The Move to Consoles


A noticeable change in PC gaming over the past few years has been the move away from PC exclusives. More and more games are now being developed first and foremost for the popular gaming consoles: the XBox 360, PlayStation 3 and Wii. The fundamental reason for this is a large discrepancy in sales figures - console versions of games routinely outsell the PC versions by many times the number of units. Ok, so what does this phenomenon have to do with piracy? Well as it happens, the majority of PC developers are laying at least part of the blame for their decision to move to focusing on console-based development squarely in the lap of piracy:


Cevat Yerli of Crytek, the makers of Far Cry, Crysis and Crysis Warhead has publicly stated:

We are suffering currently from the huge piracy that is encompassing Crysis. We seem to lead the charts in piracy by a large margin, a chart leading that is not desirable. I believe that’s the core problem of PC Gaming, piracy, to the degree [that PC gamers who] pirate games inherently destroy the platform. Similar games on consoles sell factors of 4-5 more. It was a big lesson for us and I believe we won’t have PC exclusives as we did with Crysis in future.

John Carmack, often called the 'father of PC gaming', and co-founder of id software, makers of the Doom and Quake series, recently stated:

It's hard to second guess exactly what the reasons are. You can say piracy. You can say user migration, but the ground truth is just that the sales numbers on the PC are not what they used to be and are not what they are on the consoles.

Cliffy B, lead creator at Epic Games, makers of the Unreal Tournament and Gears of Wars series, has been quite outspoken on this topic:

Here's the problem right now; the person who is savvy enough to want to have a good PC to upgrade their video card, is a person who is savvy enough to know bit torrent to know all the elements so they can pirate software. Therefore, high-end videogames are suffering very much on the PC. Right now, it makes sense for us to focus on Xbox 360 for a number of reasons. Not least PCs with multiple configurations and piracy.

Chris Taylor of Gas Powered Games, makers of Supreme Commander, also chimes in with his assessment:

...people are going to stop making [games] on the PC because of my earlier point, what's happened on the PC with piracy. The economics are ugly right now on the PC. You're not going to see these gigantic, epic investments of dollars on the PC when it just doesn't work. The economics have to work. You're going to see those investments made on the console side and it's going to become a more console-centric investment. And then you're going to see them ported back over to the PC and that creates a different experience on the PC.

Robert Bowling, Community Manager at Infinity Ward, the makers of games such as Call of Duty 2 and Call of Duty 4, provided a fairly blunt opinion on the issue. He made a blog post entitled 'They Wonder Why People Don’t Make PC Games Any More', the title of his post along with the contents clearly linking the move away from PC game development with piracy:

On another PC related note, we pulled some disturbing numbers this past week about the amount of PC players currently playing Multiplayer (which was fantastic). What wasn’t fantastic was the percentage of those numbers who were playing on stolen copies of the game on stolen / cracked CD keys of pirated copies (and that was only people playing online).... the amount of people who pirate PC games is astounding.

The people quoted above are some of the most successful and prominent PC developers of our time. Virtually every PC gamer has played one of their games, and all of them have demonstrated a high degree of dedication to PC development over the years. I doubt any of them would suddenly start abandoning PC development based only on flimsy information and false perceptions. The logic of their argument is quite sound: if the same game has the potential to sell many times more copies on a particular platform because sales are not being undermined by piracy, then quite clearly the priority of the developers and publishers should be to focus on that platform in their design, development and marketing decisions. As with any other business, games developers and publishers want to best accommodate the needs of the majority of their paying customers. Unfortunately all of these developers have received public abuse for making the above claims, the problem being that on the surface the disparity between PC and console game sales appears to have nothing to do with piracy. It seems to be a simple case of there being many times more console gamers than there are PC gamers. It's only when we take a closer look at the available data that it becomes apparent that things are not quite that simple.

[The 1 2 P]

I can't understand the mentality of pirates. I mean, we all want to save money but you don't have to pay full retail for your games. Just wait until they go on sale. I got my copy of Crysis 2 as part of a three game lot on craigs list for $30 and sold the other two games. Theres always deals to be found.

[Gameguy]

I got my copy of Crysis 2 as part of a three game lot on craigs list for $30 and sold the other two games. Theres always deals to be found.
How did buying it used off craigslist help support the game makers at all?

[Colorado Rockies]

How did buying it used off craigslist help support the game makers at all?

He's just talking about saving money. Nowhere does he mention supporting game developers.

[Gameguy]

He's just talking about saving money. Nowhere does he mention supporting game developers.
Then I don't get his first sentence about not understanding the mentality of pirates. If you're not going to be supporting developers either way, why pay more money than nothing? It would be easier too as you won't have to shop around for better deals or arrange to meet up with people on craigslist, unless you need a physical copy for your shelf it's very easy to understand why people do it.

[The 1 2 P]

Then I don't get his first sentence about not understanding the mentality of pirates.

As Colorado Rockies stated, I was talking about saving money. Isn't that the most common excuse pirates use: that games cost too much money to buy legit copies? I agree they are expensive when they first come out, which is why I was talking about finding cheaper more affordable deals.


If you're not going to be supporting developers either way, why pay more money than nothing? It would be easier too as you won't have to shop around for better deals or arrange to meet up with people on craigslist, unless you need a physical copy for your shelf it's very easy to understand why people do it.

But thats just another excuse to pirate. And while some people may think it's easier to make bootlegs then shop around I could never get behind that mentality. Just as if I were a game maker or book writer or movie producer or recording artist, I wouldn't want people stealing my hard earned work either.

[JSoup]

I don't recall ever hearing about a console game being readily available to torrent before it even hits retail. This isn't the first instance of this happening to a PC title.

I have fond memories of the summer of 2003. A crap load of big name Nintendo titles, that were to hit shelves that fall, were on the net for download two to three months in advance. I personally didn't have the capabilities to properly pirate the console games, but a small pile of GBA games I was somewhat interested in were also leaked.

[NayusDante]

I don't get why people spend $1500+ on their computers, then resort to piracy over paying $50 for a game. If your computer can even run Crysis 2, you can probably afford to buy the game.

[Gamevet]

I have fond memories of the summer of 2003. A crap load of big name Nintendo titles, that were to hit shelves that fall, were on the net for download two to three months in advance. I personally didn't have the capabilities to properly pirate the console games, but a small pile of GBA games I was somewhat interested in were also leaked.

I'd love to hear the names of those titles. Seriously, if it was on the Wii, chances are it was a steaming pile of crap shovelware game anyways. I doubt there were a lot of soccer moms downloading and burning titles for the kids. :p

Yeah, I got ahold of several GBA games through a torrent, with a GBA player. I enjoyed the games so much, that I bought a GBA SP.

I doubt those titles were being downloaded in the millions per game.

[JSoup]

I'd love to hear the names of those titles.

So would I, actually, but I was only really paying attention to the GBA games and the piracy drama that consumed GFAQs for three months. I probably still have a bunch of the ROMs somewhere, but, off the top of my head, all I can recall is Mario & Luigi: Super Star Saga and.....Tactics Ogre, I think (it was tactics something).

And, no, people were not pirating Wii games in 2003, 3 years before it was released.

[Gamevet]

So would I, actually, but I was only really paying attention to the GBA games and the piracy drama that consumed GFAQs for three months. I probably still have a bunch of the ROMs somewhere, but, off the top of my head, all I can recall is Mario & Luigi: Super Star Saga and.....Tactics Ogre, I think (it was tactics something).

And, no, people were not pirating Wii games in 2003, 3 years before it was released.

Oops! ;)

[NE146]

I don't get why people spend $1500+ on their computers, then resort to piracy over paying $50 for a game. If your computer can even run Crysis 2, you can probably afford to buy the game.

Really you can build a nice Sandy Bridge PC, a Z68 board, and 8 gigs of RAM for just a few hundred. I don't see it hitting the thousands anymore unless you're SLI'ng top of the line videocards. But really the truth is it will probably run just fine on a good PC with a sub $200 video card. Don't overpay on a case and you're good to go. :)

[Gamevet]

Really you can build a nice Sandy Bridge PC, a Z68 board, and 8 gigs of RAM for just a few hundred. I don't see it hitting the thousands anymore unless you're SLI'ng top of the line videocards. But really the truth is it will probably run just fine on a good PC with a sub $200 video card. Don't overpay on a case and you're good to go. :)

Don't forget you need a decent power-supply though. ;)

I'd bought a mid-tower for under $60 when Best Buy was clearing it out. It's not a bad case either, with front and side fans, plus a plexiglass sideview. The only thing I don't like about the case is the lack of a rear side- panel for hiding your cables in.

Really, for around $700 you can build a pretty solid gaming PC.

[JSoup]

The $300 rig I bought at Costco four years ago runs everything I've try to play on it at normal settings just fine. :/

[Gameguy]

As Colorado Rockies stated, I was talking about saving money. Isn't that the most common excuse pirates use: that games cost too much money to buy legit copies? I agree they are expensive when they first come out, which is why I was talking about finding cheaper more affordable deals.
Nothing is cheaper than free, and the deal you mentioned was a one off type of thing so not all deals will be that cheap. It's like finding a Stadium Events at a yard sale, it doesn't mean everyone can find a copy that cheap. I know it's easier with recent PC games compared to that NES game but I don't see all that many used PC games listed where I am, it's mostly console stuff that people are trying to sell.


But thats just another excuse to pirate. And while some people may think it's easier to make bootlegs then shop around I could never get behind that mentality. Just as if I were a game maker or book writer or movie producer or recording artist, I wouldn't want people stealing my hard earned work either.
That's the mentality of a pirate, I don't agree with it but it's pretty simple to understand. There's a whole bunch of old PC games I want to play but I won't play them until I find an actual copy of the game. I tracked down a legit copy of Dreamfall but I still won't be able to play it on Windows 7 without a crack(the game itself is compatible, the DRM isn't), I knew this ahead of time but still wanted a legit copy of it instead of just downloading it.


There was one recent PC game I was interested in playing, but it's not compatible with my 1 year old laptop as my processor apparently isn't fast enough. I can't imagine why they designed a 2D adventure game with hand drawn backgrounds needing such high requirements. The game is The Whispered World, at the time of it's release my new laptop was just 1 year old and the processor needed would have to be at least 1Ghz faster than the one I have. It's ridiculous.

[The 1 2 P]

Nothing is cheaper than free, and the deal you mentioned was a one off type of thing so not all deals will be that cheap. It's like finding a Stadium Events at a yard sale, it doesn't mean everyone can find a copy that cheap. I know it's easier with recent PC games compared to that NES game but I don't see all that many used PC games listed where I am, it's mostly console stuff that people are trying to sell.

Obviously free is cheaper but getting something for free that was meant to be free is not the same as stealing something that cost money. And although that was a unique craigs list ad, as I already mentioned there are always deals to be found. Craigs list is just one of the many places I use.



That's the mentality of a pirate, I don't agree with it but it's pretty simple to understand.

I suppose. I mean, I wish all the cool stuff that I wanted in this world was free too but as a working responsible adult I know that I can only get what I can afford. Piracy will never be an option for me but obviously isn't an issue for others, even if we both agree(talking about the pirates again) that video games are an expensive entertainment option at launch.


There's a whole bunch of old PC games I want to play but I won't play them until I find an actual copy of the game. I tracked down a legit copy of Dreamfall but I still won't be able to play it on Windows 7 without a crack(the game itself is compatible, the DRM isn't), I knew this ahead of time but still wanted a legit copy of it instead of just downloading it.

I wasn't calling you a pirate. Initially I was just speaking about how I don't share or fully understand the mentality of them. Yes I know that "free=better than paying" to them. I compare it this way: They think games are expensive. I think games are expensive. They go make bootlegs and use the prices of legit software as an excuse. I go out and find cheap deals and save anywhere from 60-90% off mfsr. Two very different outcomes from the same issue.

[calthaer]

Then how do explain how the much larger userbase of the PC, hasn't posted the largest sales numbers on the premium titles? MW3 sold better on the 360 and there's no reason why the PC shouldn't be dominating the FPS market.

Kitsune Sniper has it right - PC gamers have better games to play than this Modern Call of Crysis Warfare XXVII garbage that EA and its close competitors keep releasing. People are playing older games that they get on Steam "on the cheap", as you say, because many older games are often just-as-good or better than modern games - and, that being the case, why pay more? Given DOSBox and everything else, it's never been easier to enjoy almost any great title of the past 20 years of PC gaming (and there are a lot of gems) - that creates a lot of competition for Age of Operation: Assassin's Battlefield Effect Creed IX and the other derivative games (your "premium titles" - lol) that get pumped out of the big publishers, who subsequently blame their lack of sales on piracy rather than their own lack of creativity. All this on a platform (PC) that is now, after several years of being a barren wasteland of boring, a burgeoning center of indie activity (http://indiegames.com/desktop/) that is producing games of substantial quality or interest that are available - mainly via digital distribution - for extremely reasonable prices.

Alternatively, perhaps people are - 20 or so years after PC gaming really hit its stride in the MS-DOS / Windows 3.1 days - realizing how much of a backlog they have (http://backloggery.com/) and are trying to do something about it. I buy games "on the cheap" these days because I am becoming more realistic about when, exactly, I'm going to get around to playing the games I buy, and discount that future enjoyment accordingly. Digital distribution has done one thing that nobody's really mentioned so far: I no longer have to fear a PC game "selling out" and then never being available again, possibly being expensive on eBay in the future - a la Alpha Centauri Alien Crossfire, the Ultima Collection, the Quest for Glory Collection, or any number of other PC titles that went "rare" and then got hard to find. If I'm not going to be able to play the game for a few years, and I know that it will also (probably) be available in a few years as well via digital distribution at the very least for $5-10, then why pay $60 for it now?

There are legions of other explanations other than piracy for why "big-franchise" (or, as you have chosen to call them: "premium," which I would say applies only to its price and not at all to its quality) titles don't do well at a high price point in retail stores on the PC - which, of course, discounts digital distribution, one of PC's big movers and shakers these days. As others have said: why you seem hell-bent on coming here and arguing the invalidity of all those other reasons a hackneyed, derivative game's sales are lagging is beyond me.

[Rob2600]

How is piracy any worse than buying games used? In both situations, the publishers/developers don't get any money.

(I don't condone piracy or condemn buying used, it's just something to think about.)

[Kitsune Sniper]

How is piracy any worse than buying games used? In both situations, the publishers/developers don't get any money.

(I don't condone piracy or condemn buying used, it's just something to think about.)You can't pay for DLC with pirated games. We may buy used games - but they don't include DLC content on the disc, and they can still make some money from used game buyers off of that. (I'm not counting online passes, those things are fucking stupid.)

[Berserker]

How is piracy any worse than buying games used? In both situations, the publishers/developers don't get any money.

(I don't condone piracy or condemn buying used, it's just something to think about.)

Another point to consider is how big companies' actions toward both of these are starting to converge - after all, what is a one-time-use code for online access if not Digital Rights Management?

[The 1 2 P]

I don't recall ever hearing about a console game being readily available to torrent before it even hits retail.

I know a french version of Halo 3 and a version of Gears of War 3 were both available for torrent before they officially released.

[JSoup]

You can't pay for DLC with pirated games. We may buy used games - but they don't include DLC content on the disc, and they can still make some money from used game buyers off of that. (I'm not counting online passes, those things are fucking stupid.)

If I never plan on buying DLC......

[Sunnyvale]

How is piracy any worse than buying games used? In both situations, the publishers/developers don't get any money.

(I don't condone piracy or condemn buying used, it's just something to think about.)

Yes, the manufacturers are out of the money loop with a used game. But it is quite a different story than piracy. The manufacturers did get money for the used game once, and there is a possibility the seller will have a change of heart and get another copy. A pirated game not only never gives a penny to the makers, but it also takes from potential sales.

Look at it like cars. Toyota would rather you bought a new car than used, but they'd rather you bought a used Toyota than make your own Toyota knock-off. Especially if you make said knock-off available to the public.

[Gamevet]

Kitsune Sniper has it right - PC gamers have better games to play than this Modern Call of Crysis Warfare XXVII garbage that EA and its close competitors keep releasing. People are playing older games that they get on Steam "on the cheap", as you say, because many older games are often just-as-good or better than modern games - and, that being the case, why pay more? Given DOSBox and everything else, it's never been easier to enjoy almost any great title of the past 20 years of PC gaming (and there are a lot of gems) - that creates a lot of competition for Age of Operation: Assassin's Battlefield Effect Creed IX and the other derivative games (your "premium titles" - lol) that get pumped out of the big publishers, who subsequently blame their lack of sales on piracy rather than their own lack of creativity. All this on a platform (PC) that is now, after several years of being a barren wasteland of boring, a burgeoning center of indie activity (http://indiegames.com/desktop/) that is producing games of substantial quality or interest that are available - mainly via digital distribution - for extremely reasonable prices.




Alternatively, perhaps people are - 20 or so years after PC gaming really hit its stride in the MS-DOS / Windows 3.1 days - realizing how much of a backlog they have (http://backloggery.com/) and are trying to do something about it. I buy games "on the cheap" these days because I am becoming more realistic about when, exactly, I'm going to get around to playing the games I buy, and discount that future enjoyment accordingly. Digital distribution has done one thing that nobody's really mentioned so far: I no longer have to fear a PC game "selling out" and then never being available again, possibly being expensive on eBay in the future - a la Alpha Centauri Alien Crossfire, the Ultima Collection, the Quest for Glory Collection, or any number of other PC titles that went "rare" and then got hard to find. If I'm not going to be able to play the game for a few years, and I know that it will also (probably) be available in a few years as well via digital distribution at the very least for $5-10, then why pay $60 for it now?

There are legions of other explanations other than piracy for why "big-franchise" (or, as you have chosen to call them: "premium," which I would say applies only to its price and not at all to its quality) titles don't do well at a high price point in retail stores on the PC - which, of course, discounts digital distribution, one of PC's big movers and shakers these days.

You're mixing facts with your own disdain towards the modern high budget games. Judging by your comments, I don't believe you've read all that was said between KS and I.

I pointed out to Kitsune Sniper, that the staggering number of digital downloads was padded with indyware, older titles and apps. He was trying to say that the numbers for the PC version of Modern Warfare 3 weren't accurate, because of digital downloads that aren't tracked, which is clearly not the case, because Steam does track its sales numbers. He was also trying to say that over half of the sales of Modern Warfare 3 for PC were digital downloads, and weren't a part of the overall sales numbers posted by Activision. Why would Activision boast about its sales records for Modern Warfare 3 and not bother to include its digital sales?


As popular as those discounted titles and indyware are, they were still not the dominant titles on Steam's sales charts. Here are the top sellers on Steam. http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d76/Gamevet/Steamtop.jpg

I've aleady posted this link, that has an interesting article about how piracy has corrupted the once lucrative/innovative PC gaming market. You should at least read it, before passing judgement on the effects of piracy on the PC industry.

http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_5.html

Again, here are some of the quotes from that article that back up what is being said by publishers about the state of PC gaming.



Robert Bowling, Community Manager at Infinity Ward, the makers of games such as Call of Duty 2 and Call of Duty 4, provided a fairly blunt opinion on the issue. He made a blog post entitled 'They Wonder Why People Don’t Make PC Games Any More', the title of his post along with the contents clearly linking the move away from PC game development with piracy:

On another PC related note, we pulled some disturbing numbers this past week about the amount of PC players currently playing Multiplayer (which was fantastic). What wasn’t fantastic was the percentage of those numbers who were playing on stolen copies of the game on stolen / cracked CD keys of pirated copies (and that was only people playing online).... the amount of people who pirate PC games is astounding.


Obviously, this section was taken from stats up to 2008



PC vs. Console Install Base


Estimates of the total number of gaming consoles sold to date worldwide can be gathered from a range places including VGChartz, Wikipedia articles, NPD, as well as by those who compile their own data from various sources. Taking all these into consideration, the breakdown of 'next-gen' gaming consoles sold to date around the world is approximately:


Wii: 36 million
XBox 360: 23 million
PlayStation 3: 17 million



That's a total of around 76 million 'next-gen' consoles currently in use globally.


In the other corner, while the total number of PCs can only be approximated, Gartner Inc. places the figure at just over 1 billion PCs currently in use globally.


In both cases, it is recognized that the figures are not completely accurate, but they provide a very clear sense of the relative proportions of the install base of PCs vs. consoles - the ratio is at least 10:1 in favor of PCs. However to truly compare PCs to consoles, we need an indication of what proportion of the PCs would have sufficient graphics power to run the latest games.


Publicly available data from reports by Jon Peddie Research published in articles such as this one and this one provides us with sufficient information to deduce that sales of add-in graphics cards made by Nvidia and ATI total around 20-24 million units per quarter in 2008. Extrapolating the quarterly figure to an annual one equates to roughly 80-100 million graphics cards sold each year. This is the figure for only one year of sales, so it's a very conservative estimate of the base number of PCs with modern graphics cards. Of course some of these cards will be low-end, however since the data pertains to add-in graphics cards sold by Nvidia and ATI in the past year, not onboard graphics solutions such as Intel chipsets, then virtually all of them would be capable of some level of gaming. For example even low-end and two year-old cards can pump out over 30FPS or more in Call of Duty 4. Furthermore, since even cards released two years ago, such as the 8800GTS/GTX, can still game very effectively, it's still a low-end estimate of the total number of 'gaming' PCs in total. To add to the rough calculations above, this study claims that approximately 196 million gaming PCs were shipped between the third quarter of 2005 and the third quarter of 2008. One last piece of valuable information comes from Roy Taylor of Nvidia who recently stated that: "...there is a very large installed base of GeForce gamers. We estimate that we have over 180 million active GeForce users. That's a much bigger installed base than PS3 or Xbox 360."


In summary, looking at the data we wind up with what appear to be roughly equal proportions of machines capable of gaming in the console market vs. the PC gaming market: there are approximately 76 million or more 'next-gen' consoles currently in use around the world; and of the 1 billion PCs globally, we can state with a reasonable degree of confidence that at least 80 million, possibly as many as almost 200 million of them are capable of gaming with the latest titles. If we want to refine the figures down to which machines are capable of 'hardcore' gaming, then we can exclude the Wii from the console stats, bringing us down to 40 million consoles (XBox 360 and PS3); and even if we halve the number of PCs with add-in graphics cards to 40-100 million to account only for medium and high-end graphics cards, we still wind up with at least a 1:1 ratio in terms of the number of gaming consoles vs. the number of gaming PCs. What we can say with a high degree of certainty is that at no point does it look like gaming PCs are being outgunned in terms of sheer volume of console hardware by a 4:1, 5:1 or higher ratio as game sales ratios would suggest.



PC vs. Console Game Prices


Perhaps the sales discrepancy can be described by substantial price differences between PC and console versions of games. For example, if a console game is half the price of a PC version of that game, in theory that could lead to double the sales on console. At EBGames online we can directly compare the price of several recently-released multiplatform games (in US dollars) to see if this is true:


Fallout 3: $49.99 (PC) - $59.99 (XBox 360) - $59.99 (PS3)


Dead Space: $49.99 (PC) - $59.99 (XBox 360) - $59.99 (PS3)


Far Cry 2: $49.99 (PC) - $59.99 (XBox 360) - $59.99 (PS3)


The console versions of each of the above games is exactly $10 (20%) more than the PC version, which is actually quite common. Console games will generally cost more than the PC equivalents. Quite clearly, the price of console games would tend to imply that they should in fact be selling fewer copies than their PC equivalents, and being pirated more often due to cost, when the exact opposite is happening in reality.




Update: For 2010, the most pirated PC game as reported in this article was Call of Duty: Black Ops, at 4,270,000 downloads via torrents, compared with 930,000 downloads for the XBox 360 version of the same game. It's not surprising then to see that the PC version of Black Ops is estimated to have only made up only 6% of the total sales for the game in the UK for example, while the XBox 360 version accounted for 54% of sales, and the PS3 at 40%. It's also interesting to note the remainder of that list of top 5 downloaded PC games includes the most popular games of 2010: Battlefield: Bad Company 2, Mafia 2, Mass Effect 2 and StarCraft 2, each one racking up more than 3 million downloads - that's around three times the highest downloaded XBox 360 game, or equivalent to the total number of people playing a PC game on Steam at any one time.



These initial findings shed some interesting light on both the scale and nature of piracy. However examining torrent piracy is only one way to measure the scale of PC game piracy. Gaming companies have other ways in which they can determine and cross-check how many non-legitimate versions of their games are in use. One method which is reasonably robust - and coincidentally highlights one of the directly measurable costs of piracy - is to look at tech support requests made by people who are using a pirated copy of a game. There are several examples which cement the picture of both the scale of piracy being extremely high compared to legitimate sales, and the direct costs of piracy also being high due to their imposition on limited tech support resources. Mike Russell, QA Manager of Ritual Entertainment, makers of the SiN Episodes games, discusses the impact of the scale of piracy on tech support in this article:

Some recent calculations revealed that, last week, gamers with pirated copies of Emergence requesting support outnumbered gamers with legitimate copies of Emergence requesting support by a ratio of nearly five to one. This, understandably, is a source of great frustration for Russell, who is essentially performing two jobs at Ritual and who only has a finite amount of time to spend on each. Responses he has received when attempting to troubleshoot problems have laid painfully bare which users are playing the game illegally. "What's Steam?" one asked. "I don't have one," replied another when asked for his Steam ID. "Oh, my copy didn't come with an installer," replied yet another user, "it's in a folder on a DVD. I just drag it to my machine and then run the game." For an independently funded developer such as Ritual, these time sinks and lost sales have a clear and measurable impact on the company's income and, thus, its long term self-sufficiency.

Bethesda Softworks, makers of The Elder Scrolls series and most recently Fallout 3 had this to say on the issue of the scale and costs of piracy-related tech support:

The amount of times we see stuff coming through where it’s like, the resolution to the problem was [the] guy had a pirated copy of the game… The amount of money we spend supporting people who didn’t pay us for the game in the first place…it’s f–ing ludicrous. We talk to other developers, guys who are [like] ‘Yeah, it’s a third, it’s 50% of our [customer] support.’

Similarly the developers of a popular free mod called Portal: Prelude also speak out about the level of piracy of the game Portal which they've witnessed:

Seriously guys, stop sending us emails because you can't install the game, because you can't launch the game, or because you have weird errors everywhere. We're not going to help you make the mod work on pirated versions of Portal or without Steam. This mod needs an original and legit Portal because it also uses some of the content of Half-Life 2 that extends Portal. Of course, this content doesn't seem to be included in the pirated version of Portal.

In fact piracy of Portal is an interesting case to examine. A quick search on Mininova currently reveals around 30 active torrents for The Orange Box, a game package released in November 2007 of which Portal was a part. For those who don't know, The Orange Box is famous for being one of the best gaming deals of 2007/2008 - five major games in one package (Half Life 2, HL2: Episode 1, HL2: Episode 2, Team Fortress 2, Portal) all for the price of a standard game, distributed via Steam with no intrusive DRM, and receiving nothing but praise from reviewers and gamers alike. Yet here are people who not only pirated this game, but are also requesting support for it.






As others have said: why you seem hell-bent on coming here and arguing the invalidity of all those other reasons a hackneyed, derivative game's sales are lagging is beyond me.


I've already stated my reasons, but I'll go ahead and repeat myself. As an enthusiast PC gamer, I'd like to see software that supports the PC hardware I've spent my hard-earned cash to build. Crysis 2 should have been a showcase title for the PC, but instead we get a console game that was tweaked to look better on PC. Oblivion was a showcase title for PC, but Skyrim is a console game with slightly improved graphics. Skyrim should have been a DX11 powerhouse for the PC, with all of the tessellation and lighting effects put to good use, but instead it's a console game that just runs better on the PC.

People aren't buying video cards like the GTX 480, GTX 560ti, GTX 570, GTX 580, HD 6970, HD 6950, HD 6850, HD 5870 and HD 5850 so they can play older PC games. They are buying those video cards for enthusiast level gaming and the sales numbers for the software that supports those cards isn't adding up. Pickup any issue of PC Gamer or Maximum PC, and you'll often read about the sad state of PC gaming on the enthusiast level.

[Kitsune Sniper]

I'm not really considering sales of older games or indie stuff. I was talking about the big name releases by EA / Activision / Ubisoft or any of the other big companies.

Also, most of the time, the sales charts from places like NPD include all versions of the game. Console and PC. For example, this one (pulled from the Wikipedia article on Assassin's Creed Revelations): http://www.nintendogal.com/2011/12/09/november-2011-npd-group-us-sales-charts/9933/ (Note that AC:Revelations did not go on sale on PCs until December 2, so the numbers for that game -does not include the platform-. That's 1.25 million copies on 360 and PS3 combined.)

And I'm quite sure this NPD data does not include any digital sales. This chart (http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly/40902/USA/) says that Star Wars: The Old Republic sold 967,764 copies in around a week, out of a total of 1,399,102 recorded PC game sales. And I bet that this chart does not include Steam. Their Winter sale began on December 19. They didn't only sell 400,000 games in four days. They sold more. A lot more. And let's see Skyrim! 256,083 copies in its first week (http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly/40860/USA/), and 65,980 in its second? (http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly/40867/USA/) And the game vanishes from the list afterwards. Yet, the game has topped the sales charts on Steam SINCE IT WAS RELEASED. 355000 copies of Battlefield 3 sold and it suddenly drops off the charts? (http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly/40860/USA/)

NPD sales data does not include digital sales. And this proves it. Steam does not release accurate sales numbers for their titles. It never has. The most it does is say that a game is topping the charts. That's it.

[Gamevet]

I'm not really considering sales of older games or indie stuff. I was talking about the big name releases by EA / Activision / Ubisoft or any of the other big companies.

NPD sales data does not include digital sales. And this proves it. Steam does not release accurate sales numbers for their titles. It never has. The most it does is say that a game is topping the charts. That's it.

I know what you said, but I was saying that even though the NPD does not include digital sales, the idea that a title has 50%, or more, of it's sales through digital distribution isn't being completely accurate either.

Here's what you had said:



And I'm pretty sure these PC sale numbers only include physical copies. If we had a way to know the exact amount of sales done via digital distribution you'd see just how little difference there is. Places like Steam, Direct2Drive, or even EA's own Origin rarely reveal just how many copies of a game they sell.

What I am saying is: that even though the idea is being spread around that 50% of PC game sales are through digital distribution, it doesn't necessarily mean that every title has 50% of its sales through digital distribution. The number is inflated, because a good percentage of those purchases are indy and older titles you can't get through retail.

Even if one were to assume that 50% of the PC sales of MW3 were through digital distribution, it would still mean that only 25% of the total sales for that game were on PC. The numbers should be much higher for a platform that has a much larger userbase. The availability of pirated copies has surely dimininshed the potential sales for the platform.

DRM was the answer to piracy, but the PC gaming community has been up in arms about it, since they really don't own the physical copy they paid for at retail. http://technologizer.com/2011/08/18/hey-ubisoft-stop-messing-with-pc-gamers/


http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/07/21/whee-downloads-now-48-of-pc-game-sales/



US receipt-collectors NPD are finally encompassing digital distribution in their regular surveys. Which is just as well, as half the time it’s been their bloody surveys which have caused nitwits to cry “the PC is doomed” (most recently, they claimed a 23% drop in PC game sales from 2008 to 2009). They’re now estimating that download sales constitute 48% of the PC market, which means previous recent surveys have ignored about 21.3 million units. Whole lotta cash. That’s even before you factor in the giant cash-pile generated from free-to-play games’ microtransactions and whatnot.

[Kitsune Sniper]

What I am saying is: that even though the idea is being spread around that 50% of PC game sales are through digital distribution, it doesn't necessarily mean that every title has 50% of its sales through digital distribution. The number is inflated, because a good percentage of those purchases are indy and older titles you can't get through retail.

Even if one were to assume that 50% of the PC sales of MW3 were through digital distribution, it would still mean that only 25% of the total sales for that game were on PC. The numbers should be much higher for a platform that has a much larger userbase. The availability of pirated copies has surely dimininshed the potential sales for the platform.I don't think the total sales are up to 50% of the total or whatever, I'm saying they're downplaying the REAL number of digital sales because NPD doesn't report them, they only report physical sales. Battlefield 3 did not sell 350k copies and vanish. It has probably sold close to one million digital copies already (considering the holiday season, I mean.) Why isn't EA making such a big deal out of that, just like they do with console sales?

Also: Unlike the 360 and PS3, a lot of the PC userbase is not a regular FPS player. You have people like me, who play TF2 and FPS. Then you have the casual players who can play stuff from PopCap to item searching games. Then there's the RPG players. Then there's the MMO players. Then there's the racing sim players. And the sport sim players. The flight sim players. And the adventure players. And so on.

Yes, the PC userbase is huge. But most of them are not interested in these big name games... because they don't play that genre. It's not like in consoles, where there's a very good chance the owner will like, or tolerate, FPS games.

Simply put, these publishers are trying to impose the same levels of sales that they get in consoles on the PC, and that won't work, because as I said before, we have a lot more options to choose from.

I can tell this is going nowhere so I think I'm going to stop replying. We won't be finding common ground.

[Gamevet]

Also: Unlike the 360 and PS3, a lot of the PC userbase is not a regular FPS player. You have people like me, who play TF2 and FPS. Then you have the casual players who can play stuff from PopCap to item searching games. Then there's the RPG players. Then there's the MMO players. Then there's the racing sim players. And the sport sim players. The flight sim players. And the adventure players. And so on.

People like to make the general assumption that the current generation of consoles and gamers play nothing but FPS, but that's totally untrue. I've played the Uncharted series, Ace Combat 6, Culdcept Saga, Fallout 3, Rockband 1/2, Fight Night: Round 3/4, Pinball FX2, LIVE arcade games, Super Stardust, Afterburner: Climax, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Final Fantasy XIII, Madden, NCAA FB, NBA 2K series, GTA IV, Dirt 2 and countless other titles that aren't FPS.

Yeah, PC players have a very diverse selection of games, but the enthusiast crowd doesn't build gaming PCs to show off MMOs and flight sims to their gaming friends. They use games like Crysis, Metro 2033, Bad Company 2, Shogun, Mafia II, GTAIV and the like to show just how well their PC can handle those games. I was at Fry's a couple of weeks ago, and was chatting with a guy that was looking to upgrade his PC videocard, so he could play BF3 with his clan. There is still a huge group of people that swear by the PC FPS genre. While this guy more than likely will pay for his copy of BF3, there's still about 4:1 (likely 10:1) ratio of those enthusiasts that would rather torrent a cracked version of the game.



Yes, the PC userbase is huge. But most of them are not interested in these big name games... because they don't play that genre. It's not like in consoles, where there's a very good chance the owner will like, or tolerate, FPS games.

Simply put, these publishers are trying to impose the same levels of sales that they get in consoles on the PC, and that won't work, because as I said before, we have a lot more options to choose from.

The people that are building those enthusiast level PCs are playing games. I've already shown you an article that clearly shows the data to support that.



I can tell this is going nowhere so I think I'm going to stop replying. We won't be finding common ground.

You choose to ignore the fact that gaming publishers have spoken out and shown reasons why they would rather develop their games for consoles. If you think the diversity of PC software is the reason, one could point out that the huge backlog of older console games should have the same effect on console gaming, but it doesn't.

The facts are there. Piracy has had a huge effect on the big budget gaming studios, and how they go about developing games. Blizzard seems to be the only big-budget studio that has put its support behind PC, while the others have moved on to the inferior console. And the general consensus is that they'd rather push the envelope, but the current state of PC gaming doesn't make it the better option for them.

[Gameguy]

There's always been piracy with PC games, it's just becoming more of a problem now because it's easier to do than it's ever been before. No need for a friend to buy a single copy to then duplicate onto cassettes or floppies, you can just download it. Modern games don't require a code wheel or to input specific text from the manual(what manual?), or dongles that had to be plugged into your computer.

I remember when CD-ROM games were just taking hold, hard drives were around 1.18GB or 2GB large if you were lucky. Most people couldn't install the full game because there wasn't enough free space, a single game could take up 1/4 of your hard drive or more. CD burners weren't common yet so you basically had to buy the game(or software) to play it. Now with 500GB or 1TB drives it's easy to fit 50-100 full modern games on it without it being a problem. Add in high speed internet connections that make transfering large files easy and DVD burners, what did they think would happen? Did they think people would fill up their drives with family pictures or Word documents?

Then there's movies. Now PCs are powerful enough to play DVD quality video, these are stored on a format that is readable/compatible with PCs and are stored in a way that's easy to duplicate perfectly with no loss of quality. You couldn't read a VHS tape or Laserdisc with a PC, you'd have to transfer the video differently which would be time consuming and before high speed internet became popular video files would be difficult to transfer anywhere else. Again, what did they think would happen?

It's great now for consumers as you can basically find anything you want, including stuff not officially available in your area. It's super easy now to find fan translated shows and there's no need to pay the expensive costs that were involved with VHS tape trading. Back then you were lucky to find short video or audio clips from TV shows on fan run sites, nobody watched whole films or shows on their computer. You can now find full series unaltered from their original airings, often better than what's officially released due to various licensing problems. Being a consumer has never been better, it's just bad for companies now as people are more careful with what they're buying. No more buying VHS tapes with 2 episodes of a show for $20+, people are now expecting to pay that much for an entire series.

With the current internet it's also super easy to buy used copies of anything you want, it wasn't like that in the past where if you wanted something you basically had to buy it new from a store or get very lucky searching locally(or from people or family you knew to look for you). It's more of a reason to not buy something new now, you can find it used later for cheaper on various online sites.

It's just people being people. People always want to either have things super easy or super cheap, and now then can have it both ways with current piracy. There's no longer much inconvenience involved with piracy(finding a copy to make a copy, photocopying the manual or code wheel, etc). It's like once people buy a car, they tend to just use it to travel everywhere instead of walking or talking public transit. Walking takes too long, having to sort through bus schedules is annoying, etc. When people get used to something being easier or cheaper, they won't go back to how they used to do things. Now that people are used to using their PCs to pirate software, videos, and music they won't go back to buying them unless they don't have another option. That's just how people are.

[Sunnyvale]

I actually agree with almost everything in your post, and find no reason to split hairs over semantics.

And I bet your post ends up on the SOPA legal team's folder, as it basically lays it out point blank:




It's just people being people. People always want to either have things super easy or super cheap, and now then can have it both ways with current piracy. There's no longer much inconvenience involved with piracy(finding a copy to make a copy, photocopying the manual or code wheel, etc). It's like once people buy a car, they tend to just use it to travel everywhere instead of walking or talking public transit. Walking takes too long, having to sort through bus schedules is annoying, etc. When people get used to something being easier or cheaper, they won't go back to how they used to do things. Now that people are used to using their PCs to pirate software, videos, and music they won't go back to buying them unless they don't have another option. That's just how people are.

[calthaer]

Simply put, these publishers are trying to impose the same levels of sales that they get in consoles on the PC, and that won't work, because as I said before, we have a lot more options to choose from.

I can tell this is going nowhere so I think I'm going to stop replying. We won't be finding common ground.

I'm with you. This Gamevet cat keeps quoting publishers who lament the fact that their trite FPS games aren't selling as well as Unreal did in 1998 and using their "authoritative" quotes on piracy to extrapolate that to a majority of PC users - taking their opinions and anecdotal evidence at face-value that this is the reason their software isn't selling (instead of the fact that they haven't produced an original idea in the past 10 years). In addition, there's the argument that "the install base is huge, and it's not selling" but then he switches to the argument that "PC enthusiasts don't build PCs to show off indie games" (as if the proportion of people who have a high-end gaming PC is a majority of all PC users). And - calls to tech support...seriously? This is the measure to say that piracy is awful on the PC, and there are so many more legitimate players, as a percentage, on consoles? Guess there really must be so few modded Wiis, Xbox360s, PS3s, etc. out there that they're not even worth mentioning.

Selective use of evidence, switching arguments - it's a waste of time; nobody's going to convince anybody. There has always been piracy, and I'd even say it has always been this bad - since all we're doing is throwing out anecdotes, I'll throw out one, too. I recall watching Jason Scott's BBS documentary (http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/) and seeing, in the extras, Frank Segler (http://frank-segler.blogspot.com/2008/08/frank-segler-about-myself.html) talk about his tips & tricks for getting Apple ][ games to pirate (which he then promptly distributed to people via BBSes). I'm not going to go so far as saying that piracy is easier now than it has been in the past for the PC user-base (keeping in mind that, with the ubiquity of computers, the user-base has certainly changed), and is therefore a "bigger" problem.

The only thing "bigger" about this problem now is the fact that everybody in America has a PC in their home - and, of course, everybody in Russia does, too, which might do more to explain the increase in piracy than the argument that everybody suddenly decided it was easier & better to pirate than to buy PC software.

[Gamevet]

I'm with you. This Gamevet cat keeps quoting publishers who lament the fact that their trite FPS games aren't selling as well as Unreal did in 1998 and using their "authoritative" quotes on piracy to extrapolate that to a majority of PC users - taking their opinions and anecdotal evidence at face-value that this is the reason their software isn't selling (instead of the fact that they haven't produced an original idea in the past 10 years). In addition, there's the argument that "the install base is huge, and it's not selling" but then he switches to the argument that "PC enthusiasts don't build PCs to show off indie games" (as if the proportion of people who have a high-end gaming PC is a majority of all PC users). And - calls to tech support...seriously? This is the measure to say that piracy is awful on the PC, and there are so many more legitimate players, as a percentage, on consoles? Guess there really must be so few modded Wiis, Xbox360s, PS3s, etc. out there that they're not even worth mentioning.

Read the article I posted, before you make such uninformed comments. The facts are there in writing, proving that piracy on the PC is over 10 fold that of consoles. Blizzard is the only big publisher that is backing the PC with nearly 100% of its software. It's not only FPS games that are being developed first for consoles. The biggest software release for the PC in 2011 was Skyrim and it was not developed to take advantage of DX10 or DX11 videocards.

Dragon Age II was a big seller on the 360, but it only managed 21% of it's sales on PC.

This forum post is just one, of many, examples of PC gamers realizing that piracy has hurt PC sales of a title that should be a big hit on the format.

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6544018/1


PC complaints fall on deaf ears. (unfortunately)

How many PC Players are not on that list because they pirated the game? (Of course, now they feel justified because of all the butthurt players). It has long been known that you get more return out of console games thanks to the piracy issue. It is the sad reason that the industry has put focus on consoles. I am sure EA didn't help this matter since they are more of a console game producer anyways.

http://www.gamezine.co.uk/news-story/2011/03/14/dragon-age-2-claims-number-1-spot



Selective use of evidence, switching arguments - it's a waste of time; nobody's going to convince anybody. There has always been piracy, and I'd even say it has always been this bad - since all we're doing is throwing out anecdotes, I'll throw out one, too. I recall watching Jason Scott's BBS documentary (http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/) and seeing, in the extras, Frank Segler (http://frank-segler.blogspot.com/2008/08/frank-segler-about-myself.html) talk about his tips & tricks for getting Apple ][ games to pirate (which he then promptly distributed to people via BBSes). I'm not going to go so far as saying that piracy is easier now than it has been in the past for the PC user-base (keeping in mind that, with the ubiquity of computers, the user-base has certainly changed), and is therefore a "bigger" problem.

P2P and torrents have made if far easier to download pirated software than it has ever been before. And unlike pirated software for consoles, you don't have to mod your PC to play these games. If you play a pirated game on Xbox LIVE, they'll ban your account for life. It hasn't been that way for the PC, until services like Steam (DRM) came along.

My evidence isn't selective at all. Even the original post, on this thread, shows that Crysis 2 was the most pirated game of 2011. AMD, NVidia and Intel wouldn't be in a technology race, if they weren't selling these hi-end products at mass numbers. People are buying the PC hardware necessary to play hi-end games, and the software to support that hardware should reflect larger sales numbers as well.

The most popular PC strategy game of all-time is Starcraft. Starcraft II has posted records on torrent and had more downloaded files of the game, than sales.

http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Best_selling_Blizzard_games


1.World of Warcraft (10.7 million subscribers) [1]
2.StarCraft including Brood War expansion (9.5 million)
3.Diablo II (4 million)
4.Diablo II: Lord of Destruction diet pills [expansion pack] (1 million; 2 million shipped)
5.Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos (3 million)
6.Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne [expansion pack] (5 million)
7.Diablo (2.5 million)
8.Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness (1 million)


http://www.techspot.com/news/41147-starcraft-ii-sets-piracy-record-with-1577pb-downloaded.html



Touted as the bestselling strategy game of all time, it's no secret that StarCraft II is immensely popular. Unfortunately for Blizzard, that popularity has earned its latest blockbuster a spot on an article titled '5 Torrent Files That Broke Mind Boggling Records'. According to TorrentFreak's numbers, StarCraft II has cemented its place in filesharing history as the torrent that has resulted in the transfer of the most data. That's quite the "achievement" for a title released less than four months ago.

The most popular torrent file for StarCraft II has been downloaded 2.3 million times. For a game that weighs 7.19GB, that amounts to around 15.77 Petabytes of data downloaded. On August 9, TorrentFreak reported that the total number of pirated copies of StarCraft II totaled 260,000, making it the most pirated game of 2010, and we wouldn't be surprised if it has maintained that title as well. By comparison, Blizzard sold 1.5 million copies in the first 48 hours and 3 million by September.





The only thing "bigger" about this problem now is the fact that everybody in America has a PC in their home - and, of course, everybody in Russia does, too, which might do more to explain the increase in piracy than the argument that everybody suddenly decided it was easier & better to pirate than to buy PC software.

If everyone has a PC in their home now in America, shouldn't the sales numbers reflect that?

The PC has had a more diverse library than the consoles going on decades. It's not like it all of the sudden became the place to play a larger variety of games.

[BlastProcessing402]

I don't recall ever hearing about a console game being readily available to torrent before it even hits retail. This isn't the first instance of this happening to a PC title.

I don't know about torrents specifically, but they're certainly out there. I can't remember the last major 360 release that didn't leak at least a few days early.

And it's not just a recent thing either. In our misbegotten youth, someone I know once grabbed a Super Nintendo game off a BBS a few weeks before it was available in stores. And no, it wasn't an instance of getting the Japanese version before the NA version was released.