If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
i hope you do not consider my statement as a "hinted act of infringement".
Not quite as such, but some might view it that way (And, NO, I wasn't implying you were- you're not in that list... )
so because people suddenly claim they wont buy, because they are for all practical purposes, being treated as criminals, that means people do not wish to buy? this is what stupid moron CEO's think, and thats because they are unintelligent morons which quite frankly, shouldnt be allowed to roam free without extended observation..
ROFLMAO! On that note, you're preaching to the choir...
buying and breaking DRM is perfectly legal most places, i see nothing wrong with it, and neither does the LAW most places.. If stupid title owners or publishers or whatever it is, thinks this is a message of "oooh no a bunch of freeloaders taht wont buy?!?!!? just because we openly call them criminals and put them in a bad light?!?! OHOHH THE HUMANITY", welll, then its them that are stupid, not us..
Unfortunately, if you live in the USA, it's illegal unless it's for compatibility reasons. This means if you're trying to play Blu-Ray and there's no "legal" players, so long as you're doing it for playback on legitimately owned titles, it's legal- anything else is illegal. Same goes for ANYTHING else protected by DRM. Since that which you're talking about was a game, unless it's not got a Linux version and you're busting the DRM to play it under WINE, it's also there in the illegal column.
Now, you say, if you're not a US citizen, you don't have to worry, right? Wrong. Many of the Berne Convention contries are coming up with similar laws as we're writing this. Canada's come up with one vastly more draconian than the DMCA.
"The DMCA, coming to a country near you..."
And btw, i do not pirate software.. I have however on atleast one occasion purchased a piece of software, and (LEGALLY, thats right, LEGALLY!) broken copy protection to be able to use it fairly.
Heh... Sounds all too familiar. It's why I quit having anything to do with Windows stuff. It was just too effin' hard to get it to play nice under WINE without the DRM in place- with it, it was worse.
And...thank you for NOT pirating.
I didn't imply you were one; but it's nice hearing people openly state the same basic thing I've said for YEARS now.
And lastly, i also agree that mailorder for games today is completely insane, and NOT the way to make money.. its like the record industry, trying to force a 10 year obsoleted distribution method upon the world.. its bound to be a failure..
I want to see some screenshots and a big honking button saying "visa", and then afterwards, a big honking "DOWNLOAD" button.
Heh... If the studios and publishers would sign off on something like Steam for e-distribution and allow meatspace distribution the old-fashioned way, shipped upon an e-purchase via Steam, I'd jump at the chance to do things that way. Ditto anything similar.
As for the piracy issue, it's a real one, unfortunately. Moreover, it's one of the bugaboos for the work in obtaining porting rights, believe it or not.
now that i think of it better: it makes sense, we want as many games on Linux as they're on Windows, but somehow we need to accept the same bulls*** as the Windows version ( DRM&co ), now we have to choose the lesser evil between DRM or fewer ( new )games
Moreover, it offers a sales figure point for Linux- and if enough people sign off on it, we can be in a better position to do something a little less obnoxious or more appealing the next pass around.
yes, or maybe it will get nastier, just to get those extra sales that were skipped by people using the easily available P2P cracked version, 'cause if we go the Windows way of DRM we only get worse, limited installs, online registration, heck if LGP could afford pressed CDs that much (so that Linux games are on the retailers shelves) even binary loadable stuff, and we will eat that just for the greater good of Linux gaming... at least if we like the game
this is my main concern, how many players liked the game enough to get it a second time for Linux? or liked it enough to buy it now on Linux?
i feel (and i'm sorry that i feel like this) that the game itself will hurt sales, yet i would buy Fallout1-2/BaldursGate1-2/VampireBloodlines/Diablo1-2/DeusEx/Morrowind/Gothic1-2-3/TheWitcher again if a Linux version is made, so maybe if enough true fans that became Linux users in the mean time will buy the game things will work out
Svartalf, it might be that I'm just plain stupid, but I see some contradictions in your comments.
You're saying (and I agree with that up to a certain extent) that people should vote with their wallet and not send the wrong message by buying games for Windows if their OS is Linux (and if they also would like to see games developed and ported to Linux).
On the other hand, you're trying to present LGP's decision as dictated by the need to offer game protections to get the rights to port certain games (I wouldn't say it's the obvious reason when reading the quotes in Phoronix' article).
Now why doesn't LGP (and you if you help porting these games to Linux) vote where there mouth is by sending the right message and only porting games when publisher don't endorse copy protection schemes?
You could say that there wouldn't be any games to be ported, but that's not what gamers' experience on the Windows side tell us. Egosoft, like I said, has a very nice policy about copy protection, and I can't imagine they would ask LGP to play harder than they do on Windows. Egosoft isn't the only company doing that - just thinking about Stardock there. Here is a company (Stardock) that are a successful Indie developer, cares about their customers, and is run by people proud of their games, and you're telling me they wouldn't want those games ported on Linux?
Unless I see in plain writing letters or emails showing that LGP has asked Star Dock if they could port Sins of A Solar Empire for Linux, and Stardock refusing because there's no copy protection in Linux, how do you expect me to believe LGP (or you) when they say the only reason only old games are ported to Linux is because the publishers are against it?
Are these good games to ambitious for LGP? Does LGP know they couldn't handle it? Does LGP give those publishers the impression they couldn't handle it? Maybe. However, who can believe it's because those developers/publishers are against anyone porting those games for Linux?
Isn't LGP actually doing with copy protection the exact thing they/you blame people that by Windows games to play them through wine? If LGP is doing it when it has the choice, who can blame gamers that DON'T have a choice? LGP can chose other games to port, gamers OTOH are stuck with no alternative when they want to play certain kind of games.
(And I precise I'm not saying it's great to buy Windows games)
Seriously, as a whole, the biggest reason people do not buy your games in the numbers that you should have is not because of lack of copyprotection.
It IS distribution. While many people do everything online nowdays, a lot of people are not willing to wait 2-3 weeks for delivery and give financial information over the net.
The majority of sales on games is still done via retail outlets. Even larger companies have figured this out. When it comes to online services and ordering, a majority of customers would rather go out and buy a gift/credit card at their local 7-11 and then use that to purchase their items if they have to purchase online. Gift cards account for over 70% of the largest media distributor on the web (iTunes). Why? The answer is simple, parents don't want to give their kids credit cards for purchasing on-line. And this is with a major company that people have little fear of it going out of business.
One of the biggest reasons WoW took off is because little Johnny can take his $20 allowance and go buy a few more hours on it at the local store by getting a new card.
Every linux game out there I bought was because the binaries were available for it at no extra cost and I could buy it at the local store. If the game was not at my local store, I wouldn't of bought it. People want to buy tangible merchandise that they can put their hands on right away. How well do you think the games such as Guitar Hero, Final Fantasy, etc etc etc would have done if they made it mail order only? I bet they would have sold less then 1% of the volume that they have simply because they didn't have it ready to buy and in hand for the consumer. Or how well do you think steam would have taken off if you had to first pay for the game and then wait for a couple of weeks before actually playing it. Games are impulse buys. It's the reason why now you have retail gaming stores in malls nowdays. A complete industry now evolves around it.
Did you think I didn't know all of this?
The problem is selling the retail chain on it as much as anything else.
Do you want to know what happened with Civilization: Call to Power's sales? They were to be storefront at several differing locations. I barely managed to score the ONLY copy that Electronic Boutique had in the store in my area- they didn't restock it afterwards.
Do you want to know what happened with the Ultimate Quake pack that came out just shortly before Q3:A was supposed to come out (Around June-July of 1999...)? It never showed up in ANY of the stores it was supposed to be in.
We've already gone into part of the problems with Q3:A's sales- did you know that it was also supposed to be storefront in many places and only managed online or sales via Fry's or Micro Center and in limited quantities?
All three of those instances were because the Managers of the store chains get to select what gets delivered to them to a point, inventory-wise, and they couldn't grasp the difference between the Linux SKU, or if they did, they didn't want to deal with the hassle of Windows users buying the wrong SKU.
It's no different now.
The only way you're going to see what you're describing is if you have Linux exceed the critical mass level and end up forcing the issue and pushing Windows stuff out of the floor space.
yet i would buy Fallout1-2/BaldursGate1-2/VampireBloodlines/Diablo1-2/DeusEx/Morrowind/Gothic1-2-3/TheWitcher again if a Linux version is made, so maybe if enough true fans that became Linux users in the mean time will buy the game things will work out
I dream of those (and a couple of others like Planescape & beyond good and evil) games being ported!
Anyway I see a lot of people complaining about not being able to buy linux games/not wanting to wait for shipping as all the stores are based in the EU etc. All I can think of is that someone who wants a bit of extra cash should set up a sellers account on amazon.com because I'm sure all the customers in the US/Canada/etc. would love it. Probably more work then it's worth though but if I lived in the US I'd probably give it a shot.
Here is a company (Stardock) that are a successful Indie developer, cares about their customers, and is run by people proud of their games, and you're telling me they wouldn't want those games ported on Linux?
I have a huge respect for Stardock and their views on copy protection, I wish more developers/Publishers where like them.
An interview is one of the co-owners can be found at bit-tech here and their views on piracy can be seen one page 3
edit: I thought that was the right article but I just read it a bit more and I appear to have gotten it confused with another one... edit 2: I think this forum post is what I was thinking of (only glanced over it but it appears to be correct)