So, if these games are as terrible as you say, why do you even bother pirating and playing them? LOL. What's the fucking logic? If you hate publishers/developers so much just don't play their game. Don't you have anything better to do than playing "shitty" games? GOG has many games already, you could spend years just playing them and never looking at modern games.

In the end, you just came up with another lame excuse for piracy.
So the fact that the guy lives in China makes his arguments invalid? You have to be kidding me, you'll never be taken seriously this way. You completely twisted the discussion into something that has nothing to do with the subject.

I don't think you have any right to play a game without paying for it. Make up all the excuses you want, I still think it's not cool.

Not that I haven't pirated shit myself before by the way. I admit I'm a dick for doing it.

If you hate what Capcom has done to DmC, why even bother playing it? I just don't get it. Some people justify piracy by saying that the game sucks or whatever, yet they waste their time pirating and playing it. Why? If it's so bad, don't you have anything better to do? There are plenty of good games everywhere, GOG's games alone could provide you years of enjoyment. This is why i think that this reasoning is just a lame excuse for piracy. In the end, people are pirating it because they're greedy and they don't want to pay for it.

And i don't agree with the idea of downloading a pirated copy as a demo. I just don't buy this excuse either. FIrst, most people will not buy a game after finishing it. Second, playing the game before buying it reduces your perceveid value of the game.

Also, piracy as a form of protest is really stupid. If you really want to protest against Capcom, just ignore DmC.

Dude, these people buy and enjoy these games. Accuse them of bad taste as much as you want but there's people who don't care about some practices that you consider awful, they enjoy the games for what they are and they buy and play them - as long as they consider them worth buying it's okay that publishers and developers make money with that kind of products. Blind consumerism is what you're doing. "These games are shit, they aren't worth my money but I just NEED to play them so I pirate them!" Who's the blind consumer here?

Also CoD is an incredibly bad choice for a "casual" game since a huge part of the fan-base mostly cares about the multiplayer portion and playing shooters online is anything but casual.

Also it's idiotic to just accuse the whole industry of being assholes etc.. Obviously you don't really care about the people making the games, you just read somewhere about some jerks at the top of some big companies and have been using it as an excuse to feel better about yourself ever since. Heck, your own post basically states "MOST devs/publishers are assholes so I'm free to pirate ANY game".

I've pirated some games I anime I can't buy anymore without forking over hundreds to an ebay seller. It's not really the right thing to do, but well I do it. Or games I can't buy in english and were never released in the US. At least with PS3 being region free, there are a couple japanese games I might import.

Not invalid, but you gotta take them with a grain of salt. I never like when someone says they hate piracy and become moral crusaders saying they buy everything legally. Everyone has been a pirate at some point of their lives for whatever reason. Specially when it's an integral part of the culture and the economy of a country.
The point I'm trying to get across, if you haven't figured it by now, is that I despise when someone tries to tell what and when can I see, read, play or hear something. If it's available somewhere else, why I shouldn't be able to see it, read it, play it or hear it? They could easily get my money if they weren't so hellbent in being so anachronistic.
And who said anything about being serious? I'm here for the fun, for the discussion, the controversy. After all, this is forum on a site that sells videogames. How serious this could get? At the end of the day, little or nothing is going to change.

Here's what this whole issue of supposed "piracy" ignores; whether or not a sale is lost.

Just because I download an album, it doesn't mean I would have bought it otherwise. Similarly, oftentimes downloading a copyrighted material leads one to spend more than otherwise, as studies back up.

The bottom line is that it's nobodies business who does not own a copyright on the downloaded material what anyone downloads. You don't get to have an opinion on what I download, any more than I get to have an opinion on what drugs you take, or if you hire prostitutes, etc. We all agree to be bound by laws, we do not agree to be bound to our neighbor.

Downloading is the reality. Do you know how many videogames I have pirated in my life, that I can recall? Pirates, The Sims, Diablo I (burnt copy given by a friend), and Hitman 2. That's it. Of these, I own licences for Pirates, and Hitman 2. I have no interest in playing the others any more. The last of these I downloaded was Hitman, and that was just before Steam really opened up as a digital retailer. Since then, I have pirated absolutely zero games. It's "cheaper" for most games to buy them. With sites like GOG and Steam, you typically get a game that isn't brand new for under $20, can install it at will, and get lightning download speeds, usually much faster than torrents, and a guarantee of no viruses. I have a job, and I run a small business. I am not rich by any means, but if I want something bad enough, I can usually save for it.

With music, I pretty much download anything that isn't a single, and isn't reasonably priced on itunes. I also have over 1500 songs purchased on itunes. But, for bands I like, when they come here, I go see them, and I drop $100 or so on merch. I never pirate movies, never really did, and I also buy live concert blurays of my favorite bands whenever a good one comes out.

For me, if I was not able to download music, I would just listen to the music I "legally" own more often, go to less concerts by fewer bands, and in general spend less on the industry. I would not buy one of the cd's I downloaded, I would just add them to a youtube playlist, and listen to them that way.

What you people fail to realize is that this issue is about availability, not stealing. If I was never going to buy something, it's not stealing if I consume it. My enjoyment of Deep Purple In Rock does not lessen your copy, or anyone elses, nor does it hurt the band. Have you ever wondered why most musicians are against their record labels suing their fans? More often than not, the people who consume the most music, whether via buying, donwloading, or listening on youtube, are the biggest fans, and spend the most on the medium.

Downloading an album there was a 0% chance you would have bought otherwise is not the same as stealing a loaf of bread, car, purse, or wallet. What art means, and how people interact with it has changed. If any of you seriously thinks that a return to the past, where each person that listens to an album buys a physical or digital copy of said album every time is realistic, or even desirable, I think you have lost touch with reality.

You don't get to take it. Somebody else's idea property or creation isn't yours to take or give It isn't up to you what price is fair or that it should be free. It doesn't make it better that you don't really want it and only did so because it was easy and nobody stopped you... if it has any affect at all it makes it worse.

If you want to take time and money to make something fine. Then it is up to you whether to share that thing for free. And if you decide not to and I take it anyway we both know you'd be pissed too.
It isn't even about the lost potential revenue its about violating their rights to their creation or property.
____________
market works like this: seller gets to decide what price it is. Buyer gets to decide not to buy it. You don't get to take it if you disagree because you're somehow entitled to entertainment. It isn't some inborn right to be entertained and even if it was you don't get to demand to be entertained by them or their stuff.
________________

here how about this.....do you mind if I post nude pictures of you online without your permission? photograph you bathing without your will or knowledge? if so why? it isn't as though it harms you in any way somehow steals your body or removes your ability to show it to other people or take more pictures. It isn't like I'd have paid to see your ugly ass anyway. So what did you loose and what right do you have to be upset?
If it exists to be seen why should you stop me from seeing it?

Lol, sure I do. In the same way that I can stand outside a concert hall and hear a concert I had no intention of paying for, I can download an album, or listen to it on youtube.

Tell me, all you anti "piracy" crusaders, do you watch music videos on youtube that are not vevo? If so, you are just as "bad" as anyone downloading an album. "owning" a file does not change the nature of the infringement.

Once again, all I can say is agree.

Differential pricing is very much supported by businesses. You don't "support a studio" by paying more than you would based on the merits of the individual product.

Why bother playing it? Well, as I said, it's to give them a chance. I'm pretty sure the game is going to be a decent hack&slash game, they wouldn't fuck that up. It may actually be very good. However, as I said, that wouldn't have been enough to push me to a full price sale: it needs to be great, not just decent, and have an engaging storyline (which is also extra hard as they need to compensate for the loss of the previous one). It's for this reasons that I think the game is not worth it.

However, can't you see it's mostly prejudice? What if, when I play the game, it turns out to prove me wrong? Then, I would buy the game. Right now, even. By pirating the game and playing it, I would be giving them a chance to buy it. Maybe the revamp gave birth to a kickass new scenario, which I might want to support, but now I won't because I decided not to pirate it. That's all there is to it.

So why bother? Because I felt like giving them the benefit of doubt, and I also felt like killing things. Now they've lost that potential sale and I'm killing things somewhere else.
Oh, I value entertainment. I pay for good entertainment. However, when it comes to supporting ideas, I much rather support my own beliefs on the convoluted political situation at home rather than open single player games.
It may be supported by businesses all you want, but are seriously thinking that a studio will go for an approach that sells games at 50% discount over one that sells games at full prize? Because that's what we mean by "support a studio"

Does this summarize your core beliefs?

The ends (net sales) justify the means (piracy) - regardless of the copyright holder wishes.
Ethics of justice are idiotic - only the enforceable law should define behavior.
Pragmatism is superior to idealism - everyone else does it anyway.
Piracy is just a quantitatively (lower cost) different distribution channel - there is no qualitative difference between a sale and pirating the content.
Creators rather have the largest exposure possible, instead of keeping strict control over the experience.