This is what came to mind:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMhfbLRoGEw

Always picked Atlantean :D

You know, you keep saying that it's "illegal" as if that mattered, but it doesn't really . In a sane world, this DRM crap wouldn't be legal either, because it's a breach of property rights. I paid for something, I have the right to do with it as I wish, including playing it offline, installing it on as many computers as I want,etc. But they get away with it - so why should I feel bad about screwing them right back ?

And again, if enough people pirated (or didn't buy at all) games with draconian DRM, but still purchased games DRM-free or with non-intrusive DRM (serial keys, one time activations,etc.), they would eventually get the message. The problem is too many people still take shit from them, and that affects us all one way or another . So I still think that my way will, eventually, work, primarily because the more drastic DRM measures they take, the more people will start thinking like me . It's quite simple, isn't it ?

I agree with you completely.

Hahahahaha!

Insulting him or trying to propagate anti-piracy rhetoric doesn't forward any interesting debate, nor will it result in him or anyone who reads these lectures into changing their behaviour. You are simply using him for self-appraisal at this point.

Piracy as a response to DRM will continue regardless of whether the underlying reasons are exposed and regardless of efficacy. The best thing to do is to encourage support of GOG to show that DRM free systems are financially viable.

Ohhhh, c'mon, enough with the strawman already. Where exactly did i insult him? Could you please point it out? I just called him a pirate, because, well, people who illegally download games are called pirates.

By the way, i'm not trying to change anyone's behaviour. Pirates will keep pirating because they can and there are no consequences. It has always been like this and it will always be. Pirates never change, they will always download games for free no matter what. The only thing that changes is the lame excuse. Some pirate games because of DRM, others because of the lack of a demo, others because they don't agree with DLC and it goes on and on. The only thing that changes is the excuse to download free games. There's always something you don't agree with to use as an excuse.

I'm just expressing my opinion. This is a discussions board after all, right?

Except that it's the other way around. How exactly do you expect publishers/developers to adopt DRM-free when the DRM-free advocates themselves are the ones defending piracy?

And why do you have to pirate games to "encourage support of GOG to show that DRM free systems are financially viable"? Wouldn't it be better if you just refused to play the game altogether? That way you would be sending the right message to publishers/developers. Piracy is not a response to DRM. It's just an illegal way to download games for free and not pay a dime to those that worked their asses off for years to make a game (the developers are not even the ones to blame for DRM, but they're the ones suffering most of the consequences, if a game sells poorly it's the developers who will lose their jobs, not the top executives).

And to be honest the only thing that is proving to be financially viable right now is always-online. Piracy is exactly what justifies crap like always-online. If piracy rates weren't so high there wouldn't be any reason for anyone to accept any kind of DRM and publishers wouldn't get away with it. DRM is accepted and justfied because of piracy.

The "piracy will solve it all" logic is completely broken. Piracy is not the solution, it's what causes some of the problems. It's gamers who lose, not the publishers. The higher the piracy rates, the more publishers will come up with draconian DRM schemes and alternative business models (like F2P). If we all pirated games (as Licurg suggested), publishers would just adapt their business model to get more money. Turning classic franchises into F2P social crap has already become a reality (like RCT4, Dungeon Keeper and Evil Genious). I'm not saying that piracy is the only reason F2P exists, what i'm saying is that it does make F2P much more attractive because F2P doesn't suffer from piracy.

It does matter.

I think you didn't read what i posted previously, so let me post it again:

"This fallacy involves the attempt to justify a wrong action by pointing to another wrong action. Often, the other wrong action is of the same type or committed by the accuser, in which case it is the subfallacy Tu Quoque. Attempting to justify committing a wrong on the grounds that someone else is guilty of another wrong is clearly a Red Herring, because if this form of argument were cogent, one could justify anything―always assuming that there is another wrong to point to, which is a very safe assumption."

The problem with this kind of logic is that it justifies pretty much everything, not only piracy.

And let's get another thing out of the way: when it comes to software, property rights have never existed. You purchase a license to use the game. This also applies to GOG as well, you don't "own" the games you buy here, you own a license to use them. I think you should start pirating GOG games if "property rights" are your biggest concern. You can't even sell your GOG games to begin with (legally, i mean).


Pirating doesn't send the right message.

The problem is that too many people still pirate their games, forcing them to use DRM, and that affects us all one way or another.

The problem is that your "way" eventually won't work anymore. We already have games that can't be pirated because they require an internet connection (always-online DRM like D3 and F2P). What will you do when more publishers/developers follow it? Piracy won't make the big publishers go bankrupt, it will just force them to explore more draconian DRM methods and new business models (and they already are).

"the more drastic DRM measures they take, the more people will start thinking like me"
Well, D3 Reaper of Souls seems to disagree with you.

A typical response as to why something isn't on Steam. Not that I expected anything different.

Not surprising. Valve's Steam service is a double edge sword. It has its pros and cons. One of those cons is exclusivity. Though publishers don't have to use it exclusively, they often wind up doing exactly that. To be fair, Valve have setup an attractive service for them to use. Fewer headaches and lower cost, in a nutshell.

Nice to see Risen 2 here, which I think is a Steamworks title, but I'm not sure if it had been exclusive to Steam only until recently or not. According to the PC Gaming Wiki, it's available on Origin, which doesn't require Steam, or at least it doesn't state that. It says the retail requires Steam. Don't know if that is a recent change that coincides with GOG adding it too or not.