[Question] DS or PSP for ME?

Originally Posted by RacinReaver

Do you have a problem with people like myself (as in, those that will never buy a new copy unless it's cheaper than a used copy) pirating?

I have a bit of a problem with that, especially if you have the money and want the game, but are too cheap to actually spend money on it. If you don't think the game is worth its price at launch then wait until it's price is reduced to a point that you are happy to pay. If, however, you pirate on day one because you want to play the game but don't want to spend money, then yeah, that's a bit off and if you're happy with what that is then so be it.

But the issue Skills has with Acer's original statements is that it he attempts to justify piracy and make it sound like a "hey, it's OK to do this" sort of deal, which it isn't. We get that it happens, and in some cases it wasn't a lost sale anyway, but don't act like you're Mr Cool Guy by pirating.

I agree understand Acer's point that used games don't see profit going back to the devs/publisher, but I disagree that that's a good enough reason to justify piracy.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Zergrinch

Am I a bad person?

The fact you feel the need to ask the question speak volumes about how you view your own actions, and how they would be perceived.

Shin: I'd much rather someone spend money on used-games than resort to piracy.

See whilst Acer's argument is that because used games don't see money going back to the devs it's OK to pirate, what that argument handily skips over is that it potentially hurts consumers. See if everyone took that attitude then stores would no longer offer money for used games which means they wouldn't take trade-ins, which for quite a few people (especially kids) is one of they key ways they can get money towards new titles (new titles which do contribute to their developers).

There's nowhere I can't reach.

OK, it's fairly evident that some crossed wires are at play between Acer and Skills, and it seems by and large you're on the same page (mostly), just Acer was talking about the option being there if someone so chooses to do it.

Originally Posted by AcerBandit

Sometimes... sometimes... I play games by Square Enix on my Cyclo just because I'm disappointed by their lack of support of good games on the console front (mainly Wii because I'm a crass act like that) and this is my way at getting back at them oh ho ho ho.

Because Square Enix are the only ones failing to put out decent games on the Wii right?... Oh wait, oops.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by AcerBandit

It's just in those situations where I'd really like to support the developers but can't easily do so because I've decided to buy a game a few weeks or months after its release for whatever reason and then don't see it in stores unused that I then just give up and buy it used in the best condition I can find.

What the god damn fuck?! What shit-hole backwards fucktard staffing miniscule scale backwater stores do you go to that don't have copies of titles a few months, let alone the fucking 'few weeks' after release? That sir, is bull-fucking-shit by the truck load. I could walk out into the high street tomorrow and find brand new copies of all the launch title games for the current generation of consoles, which, if memory serves is a bit more than 'a few months'.

And even if that weren't the case, even if the store in my nearest town didn't stock new copies of the games, I could, as Shin has suggested, quite easily go online where I can find games going back more than a few years, that I can still purchase brand new copies of. I understand your point that sometimes it's hard to get copies of really old games, or platforms no longer supported, but don't try and claim some cock and bull story about your local stores not stocking titles a few weeks after release. Unless you're local store is actual a tramp with a shoebox I've seen stores in London that can barely contain more than the member of staff and one customer that have stocked titles longer than 'a few weeks'.

ness: Not to shit on your fine rant against Shin, but GameStop do not own GAME in the UK. The merger created a separate company which eventually split with a settlement, which is why GameStop are now looking to introduce stores over here.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by ^-^

However, my point is that you still have A GameStop store AS well as that little bit of chain you call GAME.

We also have Gamestation (owned by GAME) and probably a few other specialist stores floating about. HMV, WHSmiths, Woolworths and other retail chains also stock games, not to mention various supermarkets that tend to carry a number of games. That doesn't cover the various sites that you can also buy things from online. Now, are you going to claim that in the US you don't have at least a similar number of stores that stock games both on- and off-line?

I was speaking idiomatically.

OK, after having spent far longer than I'd like discussing this with ness, I can see where this little ness/Shin spat has originated, and it's in error (as far as I can tell).

Shin was having a go at Acer's defense of people who pirate instead of purchasing, because they might not be able to get hold of the game, stating that it's pretty easy to get hold of a lot of things online (which it is).

ness has pirated games because they were either things he owns or things that you can't get hold of (at least not without paying excessive fees I'm guessing), which is a situation many people will agree is not bad (as it sort of forces your hand). However, because ness sees himself as falling into that group of people who pirate because they can't purchase in store on online he took the attack personally and defended the stance.

By doing so Shin sees ness as defending the same stance myself, Skills and Shin are against (saying piracy is OK because devs don't get money from used game - see my earlier argument against that point and why it's bad for the industry/consumers) and hence this little argument breaks out.

ness: I think we were at cross purposes, I get now that you were saying that GAME is a store that sells used games LIKE GameStop (rather than the implication I read, you saying that GAME was owned by GameStop, which is all I refuting in my earlier statement).

However, I still completely disagree that piracy is no worse than buying used games. It does hurt the industry, and it hurts consumers. If you find yourself needing/wanting to pirate games, fine, do whatever you like, but don't try to justify it.

(Just as an additional note: I don't consider downloading a game you already own as piracy really, since you already own it)

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?