From: n4d+@andrew.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: Stopping Piracy... 70% rule
Organization: Free Opinions Freely Given
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 15:53:48 GMT

>I do not see software vendors 'reducing' prices to combat piracy.  If people
>are willing to buy software at its current prices, why should the vendor
>reduce its price?  Sure companies may be losing money because of piracy, but

	I don't see the logic in this.  I think it's obvious that more units
would be sold if the price is lowered, thus people WOULD buy software if the
price was lowered since you're getting more threshold buyers (threshold
buyers:  I'd buy this game if it was $xx cheaper, but not before).

>I seriously doubt anyone can convince a company to reduce the price if everyone
>stops pirating.

	This logic I agree with.  Companies are not altruistic organizations
like the peace corps.  they want to take your money away from you, as much
money as they can prise from your fingers.  they'd charge $200 a game if they
could get some sucker to pay that much.  Regardless, of course, of how much it
cost to develop. 

>
>Some vendors say that they have already tried reducing the price in an effort
>to combat piracy, but without widespread support, such a ploy does not work.

	Without widespread support for the program they're offering.  If a
game like THEXDER went from $39 to $19, I wouldn't be too excited.  However,
if a great game like CIV did that, I'd be more than happy to bite (except for
the fact I already paid $45 for it 8()

>
>The bottom line is that a vendor has no real reason to reduce its prices:
>enough people are willing to legitimately buy the product now such that the
>vendor makes a hefty profit, even with the current levels of piracy.

	Precisely.  If they want more units (and a larger percentage of the
gameplaying public) sold, they'd lower their prices.  since obviously
copyprotect schemes can be handily defeated by people who know DOS.  However,
since lowering prices may lower overall profits while increasing legal
ownership, they still opt to live with the loss from pirating and get more
pure markup profit from each game actually sold.  
	I think it's important to remember what messages are being sent to
whom when pirating is being done, yet still not vigorously gone after.  My
interpretation: Pirates (the larger population, comprised of typical
computer-owning adults, not career geeks and teen hackers) want to play the
game.  They don't necessarily know if they'll like it or not.  There's no way
to find out (their friends won't let them sit at their computer for 4 hours to
demo it properly, no return policy on opened software at local store) if they
like it or not from the box.  Here's the options:  1) buy it, try it, hope
it's good, if not then sorry mac you're fucked.  or, 2) borrow it [pirating
mode begins now], try it, and if you like it, buy it, or 3) the immoral
choice, borrow it, keep it, use it, don't pay.  I believe the majority of
pirating tells the software industry that "We'll buy your wares, but not
blindly.  If you don't offer a legitimate means of thorough evaluation, we
will come up with an illegal, but just as effective, means.  We the consumers
will get what we want, no matter what".  
	The software industry seems to imply "Fine.  Give us an excuse to
raise our profits.  Even if you keep pirating, we will skim skim skim.  The
reason we don't offer a legitimate means of officially testing out the product
thoroughly is that we know if we do, pirating will go down and fewer of our
products will be bought because a lot of our products are crap.  We think it's
more in our interests to tolerate even a lot of pirating and no pre-purchase
support since we make our money off the suckers.  We won't offer a workable
solution to pirating, we'll simply hem and haw and complain about human nature
without coping, since that's where the profits are.  You see, if we were
really hurting, we'd change our ways and give the consumer more power in terms
of choice and flexibility.  but we make more money if we don't do that so we
won't."
	My solution:  Game manufacturers must realize that they are never
going to change human nature.  they are also never going to get people to
willingly fork over money for an unknown quantity.  If their goal is really to
get people to stop pirating (a healthy number I mean) manufacturers will have 
to take the first step.  That first step should be better, more functional, 
more descriptive demos freely available.  Then, in order to get more units sold
the next step is inevitably to lower prices.  Computer games are among the most
expensive forms of entertainment.  A good paperback novel lasts weeks and costs
less than $6.  A good board game that lasts years costs less than $30.  Neither
of these products suffers too greatly from pirating, though they're far easier
for the computer semiliterate to crack.  Same for RPG's, though they do suffer
a bit from photocopy syndrome (especially the $12 sourcebooks that don't offer 
too much besides minutiae) but not on the scale of computer games.  Film rental
is about $2 a nite.  Going to the cinema is between $3 and $7.50.  All these 
things can be easily copied, but aren't to the degree pirating is.  why?  
	Don't be naive, and don't be fooled.  Software publishers only want one thing: profit.  they are not in the game to make high quality games for the 
lowest prices, they're in the game to make the crappiest games for the most 
they can charge.  that's fact.  economics.  The reason they don't go totally
overboard is because of competition and the cost that the market will bear.  
more economic hard fact.  And as long as they take that outdated attitude and
don't respond to pressure from the consumer (yes, including pirating), they 
will continue to suffer their current problems.  Whether they care or not is 
entirely a different matter.

>
>Eugster

- BORROW IT!  - IF YOU LIKE IT, TELL THE MANUFACTURER WITH YOUR DOLLARS!
- IF IT SUCKS, WIPE IT OFF YOUR HD AND DON'T GIVE THE ANTI-PIRATE WHINERS MORE
  PRO-SPA AMMO!

Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games