next »

[Paul Eres]

well, if you're creating weekly free content for subscribers, that means you can't work on any other game, and you'll basically be tied to a single game. the reduced piracy would probably not cover the losses from not being able to make any other games.

[Yellowboy]

well, if you're creating weekly free content for subscribers, that means you can't work on any other game, and you'll basically be tied to a single game. the reduced piracy would probably not cover the losses from not being able to make any other games.

Perhaps if there was a service that was dedicated to doing this for you? That's not quite dependent, and it's a good way to get noticed as a musician, artist, developer, etc. That way, people wouldn't be tied to a single game, and piracy would be reduced.

[Paul Eres]

a service dedicated to adding new content to your games for you? i'm not sure how many customers such a service would have. besides, i'd be uncomfortable with the idea of other people making new content for my games -- it'd be like other people adding new chapters to someone's novel. part of the appeal of indie games to me is that they're personal, a lens on the developer's own likes and life, and that might make a game more impersonal.

[Yellowboy]

a service dedicated to adding new content to your games for you? i'm not sure how many customers such a service would have. besides, i'd be uncomfortable with the idea of other people making new content for my games -- it'd be like other people adding new chapters to someone's novel. part of the appeal of indie games to me is that they're personal, a lens on the developer's own likes and life, and that might make a game more impersonal.

No, no, no! Not add to the games' actual content; the people who want to get noticed would have their free/discounted stuff (that isn't part of the game, as in tickets to live performances, etc.) thrown in as part of a bundle of the purchase.

With that being said, that would mean that the free/discounted stuff wouldn't be included after purchase, so pirates would have to repurchase the game for the new stuff or find a different game to purchase that has this, too.


Allow me to elaborate;

Let's say that you want to publish your new game. You head for a service that does this for you BUT, to reduce piracy, it adds extra content weekly to your game to encourage payment.

Now let's say that you aren't a game developer, but a musician, and you want your next live performance to get some attention. So you submit it to the site, and the website automatically (or by the musician's decision) places the content as an included "bundle" with the developer's game.

So basically, you have a game, and an optional, discounted live performance ticket you can purchase for a show. That way, people are more inclined to purchase the game, because they're getting other cool stuff with it, too. If they see an added extra that they REALLY wanted to get, they can search for that extra for a game or other independent product that also has it.

Pirates can take a ten-minute video clip that would come free with the game, but this would only last until next week, when the game now includes an art show ticket, or even a free convention admission ticket. Where I'm going with this is that we should have a site that's dedicated to rewarding paying customers with other cool stuff.

[Paul Eres]

i'm not sure that would actually discourage piracy. it might even encourage it. i know i'd be annoyed at a weekly update with discounted deals and so on sent to me every week just because i bought a game. i'd treat such things as spam, even if it had free things in it. things like that don't really appeal to me: when i buy a game, i want the game, not a bunch of free and discounted stuff; that just adds confusion and feel spammy.

[Yellowboy]

i'm not sure that would actually discourage piracy. it might even encourage it. i know i'd be annoyed at a weekly update with discounted deals and so on sent to me every week just because i bought a game. i'd treat such things as spam, even if it had free things in it. things like that don't really appeal to me: when i buy a game, i want the game, not a bunch of free and discounted stuff; that just adds confusion and feel spammy.

I don't know how to respond to this. I mean, you visit a blog regularly that does the same thing, minus purchasing games to get them (of course, the blog doesn't offer discounted tickets, etc). It's a good way to get into a new live performance. If it takes encouraging to get you into the idea, that doesn't mean that the whole idea should be given up.

I don't mean to get personal here; some of your arguments are actually good, but it feels like that you're simply out to shoot down ideas that are intended to fight piracy and then complain that there are no good enough ideas to fight piracy. There's no idea that will obliterate piracy altogether. I wonder when the ideas will actually be used. "It feels spammy" is not a reason why the idea should never take off. But of course, if you're not implying that, I apologize.

[Paul Eres]

i'm not trying to shoot down ideas intended to fight piracy at all, i just feel that the ideas you present come from a lack of experience. do you sell games? have you had them pirated? do you have experience in trying to prevent piracy? do you have any evidence these methods work? did you ever consider asking those of us who *do* sell games and try to reduce piracy how it's done, what works and what doesn't work in our experience, instead of just coming up with random ideas?

[Yellowboy]

i'm not trying to shoot down ideas intended to fight piracy at all, i just feel that the ideas you present come from a lack of experience. do you sell games? have you had them pirated? do you have experience in trying to prevent piracy? do you have any evidence these methods work? did you ever consider asking those of us who *do* sell games and try to reduce piracy how it's done, what works and what doesn't work in our experience, instead of just coming up with random ideas?

The random ideas are at least new. If the past ideas that have been implemented haven't worked, I assumed that we needed new ones. I've never sold a game or have yet had experience on how much my ideas work, but I understand how pirating is done and how easy it is to take another person's hard work and sell it off as your own. Instead of setting up blockades to keep people from doing it, since they'd just go around it, my answer is to shut down those who make/host pirated copies and win the public a favor of purchasing games by offering extra rewards for doing so. It's a little aggressive, but I feel that it could work.

I have, in fact, looked at numerous research papers on how independent developers fight piracy, and these ideas have worked to a certain extent, I admit that. They avoid using DRM, they lower the prices to compete with pirates, they keep in contact with members, etc. I may not be as informed as you are, that's quite likely, but I'm confident that I know an amount that would constitute some authority. This is a self-evident truth, probably, but I strongly feel confident in my knowledge of how piracy works.

[Paul Eres]

that's a fair response, but it's just that the ideas you presented are *not* new, they've been done and have been tried, to little success. the ideas which work are the ones which survive, the ideas which fail are forgotten, only to be continually re-invented.