I'd say it's ethical as long as you've purchased the game legally through some avenue. Just don't broadcast it (especially not on DRM platforms) if you've done so and definitely don't share links, just to be on the safe side legally-speaking. If a publisher is too lazy or if there are stupid licensing issues preventing you from playing a game you've purchased, I see no problem downloading it elsewhere as long as you've legally purchased it at some point.

That's like the abandonware debate, there are plenty of people that criticize it and say it's immoral to download games from abandonware sites because it's technically illegal but if you can't purchase a game through any current stores, what else are you supposed to do? There are some abandonware sites out there (not sure if I'm allowed to name names) that immediately remove download links as soon as a game is re-released via a modern store platform because they only care about preserving game history; I'd say downloading from sites like that is completely ethical so long as you're willing to maintain your own integrity and delete the game files if/whenever they're made available for purchase via a modern store.

I can't address what you can do about those you may already "have", but ethically it's harmful both to yourself and to others to "buy" anything with DRM. This post of your own shows the harm to yourself quite easily. But you're reinforcing the system that causes the harm to others at a greater scale as well.

Another thing: When considering what games to purchase, I don't consider any games I pirated to be owned. In other words, if I pirate a game without owning it through legal channels first, and the game becomes available in a manner I find acceptable, I will certainly buy it. (This does assume the game is worth it, though, and it still has to follow my other criteria, like the fact that it must not be DRM-encumbered.)

(That, for example, justifies my buying Final Fantasy Anthology. While the ports aren't that good, and I did own Final Fantasy 6 at the time (albeit under a different name), and I had played and enjoyed Final Fantasy 5, I still didn't count it as owning the game. With that said, I should point out that PSX FF5 has a horrible translation; get the GBA version instead if you want a legit copy with a good translation.)

Edit: One unrelated point: I consider Steam keys to have negative value. So, if the same game is available on GOG and itch.io, I will currently prefer the itch.io if the price and contents are equal, but if the itch.io version has a Steam key (in addition to the DRM-free download) and the GOG version does not, I will choose the GOG version.

-----
Two definitions first:
(1) What is abandonware (respectively: when are games becoming abandonware)?

If a rightholder apparently is no longer interested in
(A) upholding their right to monetize a game, and
(B) they don't try to keep it from being distributed freely through non-official channels (aka: abandonware sites).

(2) What is (software-) piracy?

My(!) definition of (software-) piracy is downloading a free copy of some software, that is still up for legal purchase.

So, going by that definition, using abandonware (which is software, fullfilling the criteria under (1)) is not piracy.
-----

Now to your question, which is really split into two scenarios:

The first scenario is rather straightforward, the second scenario is morally slightly twisted.

In the first scenario, a game isn't available anymore for legal purchase in any way (more or less only possible with modern "download only" games).

In the second scenario, a game isn't available anymore for legal purchase online, yet it's still available on the (legally grey) second hand market (probably in form of a retail version on disk/CD/DVD).

Now, basically, the answer to both of your scenarios is the same: if a rightholder is apparently no longer actively interested in monetizing their property, abandonware is (while not exactly legal) a viable route to obtain a copy of a game.

However...
In your second scenario (the morally slightly twisted one), there still is a purchasable (retail) version available to you.
And even if it's only available on the second hand market (meaning: it's legally exactly as grey as the abandonware version) - you should go for that version.

For as long as there is a functional(!)(**) version available for purchase, that version should always be your first choice.

Because the free abandonware version can only ever be the final option.

Let's be honest: if you head for the free abandonware version, while there's still a functional(!) purchasable version available to you - you should go the whole way, and get a parrot and an eye patch, too.
Because in that case, owning the game legally was never of your concern.

(**) meaning: activation key (if existent) is still valid.

this makes no sense
dvoted

Hello, I appreciate the long detailed response. I guess life really is unfair and difficult, because even if you own property and a home to live on, you can get evicted and kicked out of it. However, to live drm-free life, you could run out to the wild and live off by yourself without worrying about losing anything except you life. Wow, the times we have and are still living in are very confusing, strange, and just destructible.

Yes you are correct, owning the game legally is not my concern. I was asking if it was justifiable in a moral stand point, sorry if I was not that clear. :)

In my opinion, if the game is already taken away and not available, but only available in the hands of others, then I see no legal or illegal things. Since the company took their games off the market and now do not fund it, then I do not see it as being illegal to own it since they will not lose any profit from a dead game. You might disagree, which is alright since this is my opinion of course. I apologize for any confusion that I may have brought from my post.

U hv a gd & vaild point, the way i see it if i interpret ur qn correctly is u r thinking of getting urself a 'pirated' copy of a game u owned so that u can play it yrs later in case the platform u bought the game fr go down or bust.

Well, my opinion is u dun 2 worry abt that as u hv already paid 4 the game so as long as the watever other copy of the exact same game u gotten elsewhere is ONLY played by u then i dun really c any problem.

Personally, that is the reason y i prefer buy my games over here on GOG as they r all DRM-free so i nv hv 2 worry abt any issues with playing them many yrs later with regards 2 DRM. Other reason is i prefer 2 own my games rather than hving just a 'license' 2 play them which may be revoked anytime as per ur concern.

Otherwsie i wld usually only consider buying elsewhere is if they r also DRM-free on other platforms or if the exact version i wanted is not available here on GOG.

Whatever decision u choose, i feel as long as u r not trying 2 profit off the copy (as in reselling it or giving 2 another person) u shd be fine. Hope this helps.

Not if getting said version would involve an ethical cost that exceeds that of piracy.

What if the exact version you want is not available *anywhere*? (For example, maybe you're looking for a specific patch version for speedrunning purposes, or you want a historically significant version, like a version that has some critical bug (that would be risky for the copyright holders to distribute due to liability concerns), or something like Skyrim 1.2 (which is the reason that Steam has a separate beta release channel for some games).)

His whole view has 0 ethicality in it, is just follow the law to 100%%%%% that is not ethical at all, that's why it makes no sense to have it in this topic.
just dvote it

Hello there! :)

How are you doing today? :)

Hi
Fine as always , you?

Yup, just like superman

Just wanted to address a few points here:

As to the word 'buy': One does actually buy games, even from DRM infested stores, if one lives in countries where it is legal to strip out DRM to make a backup copy of one's games. That DRM free backup, if allowed in one's home country, makes obtaining said games from said stores actually buying and not just renting(as it is with DRM games usually). Of course, this requires a bit of work, and of course for such to be legal in one's area.

It's true......the more people that blindly buy from said companies(game/etc), the more it feeds such practices.

The problem is, getting a few people to stop buying isn't likely going to change much. To do so(to maybe get some game companies to reconsider DRM), a large percentage(maybe 20-40% or so, at least) of gamers would have to commit more to buying only DRM free, and I sadly don't think that will happen anytime soon.

(plus some games are only on DRM laden stores, and having people deny buying from said stores limits their freedom of choice)

The best thing for people to do at this point, imo, would be for more people to limit their purchases on DRM laden stores and to buy said games on deep sale when doing so(and then back up said games as DRM free backups if their local laws allow such)......and also for gamers to recommend DRM free alternatives to their fellow gamers, as well.

This makes little to no sense whatsoever.

So you're saying that if the only copies of an old game are from some eBay/etc seller selling copies for 100-200 bucks each, that it's better for people to buy those(and give money to some greedy reseller who is likely gouging prices) instead of going the other route?

I mean c'mon....at least in the case of old games being sold on GOG/Steam/etc, the games are more reasonably priced and the money goes into the rights holder's pockets.....unlike with a reseller.