Starforce, that Reputable Russian Company

Sander said:
Of course, but this goes for everything, not just games, and it's a completely unpragmatic answer to a very pragmatic proposition.
I'm a very unpragmatic person.

Damn, I'm getting tired of this line.

It's been attempted about a dozen times, and most of those studies contradict eachother. It's not easily measured at all, mainly because it must rely solely on questionnaires that are almost always either loaded or answered unfaithfully by the people answering them.
Exactly.

Also, the detrimental effect of stealing isn't easily measured either, because you need a comparison to a model where there is no theft, which is non-existant. As I said, theft of games can actually make for a higher income for publishers, because the shop-owners will order new copies to replace the old ones.
Sure, I agree, but doesn't all of that essentially mean that you (and by "you" I mean "Kharn") can't assert as an indisputable fact that stealing > downloading from economic standpoint, since economic standpoint itself can't make the heads or tails of the issue.

Move out of Croatia.
Probably the best suggestion in this entire thread.

Stop diverging, Ratty, I mentioned specifically 3 times already that theft is logically worse than piracy without buying.
You did so, but can your logic be sound if it fails to incorporate deeper economic implications of theft?

If you want to move on to another subject fine, but stop trying to answer to an argument by dragging something in kicking and screaming that has nothing to do with it.
God, no, I want to wrap this topic up, not expand it with a new subject.
 
Ratty said:
Sure, I agree, but doesn't all of that essentially mean that you (and by "you" I mean "Kharn") can't assert as an indisputable fact that stealing > downloading from economic standpoint, since economic standpoint itself can't make the heads or tails of the issue.
Yes, because Kharn has shown it to be *logically* sound, which holds regardless of economic implications. Downloading without buying in no way at all can possibly support the gaming industry, simply because you're not putting in any money at all. Economically, that has a negative effect if you would've bought the game, and a neutral effect if you wouldn't have bought the game anyway. There is no positive effect here.
Note that we're looking solely at downloading without buying.

Now, we look at the thievery situation. The implications there are that only the store-owner gets hurt, I don't really know the margins, but hey, whatever. Overall it's positive for the publisher, because the shops order more games.

Hence downloading without buying is solely negative, and stealing is only negative in one aspect, and positive in another. One would need to look at profit margins and the frequency of stealing leading to re-ordering to know the ratio between the negative and positive, but you would need to know the ratio between the neutral and negative in downloading as well. We have neither of those numbers, and looking at the situation it is much more likely that stealing is economically better.
 
Back
Top