Gryzemuis on 14/12/2008 at 11:11
And what is your point ?
So the guy made a few mistakes with a few numbers. So what ? The rest of the article is informative, and tries to be a summarization of all issues involved. He does a fine job there. The fact that you are already aware with all of those issues, and therefor only can nag over a few details, that doesn't make the article useless.
The fact of the matter is:
- a game is owned by the developer and publisher
- the owner decides how they want to sell or promote or package their product
- if the owner wants to do stupid things, it's their right to do so
- if you don't like it, don't buy the game
- there is *zero* justification to pirate games.
Simple as that.
DaBeast on 14/12/2008 at 11:15
Quote Posted by Phatose
Thirdly, I imagine
there are some Australians around here who would solidly kick
your ass for
believing anything that isn't Japan or the USA is Europe.
There are typically just 3 release dates for a game that matter. Japan, America and Europe.
Australia, in gaming terms, is an irrelevance...:ebil:
Jason Moyer on 14/12/2008 at 11:51
Quote Posted by The_Raven
The main reason, from my understanding, for the delay in the release of cracks for these games was the fact that this was one of the first times that the piracy groups encountered these versions of StarForce and SecuROM, repectively.
I'd be interested in knowing how they would have released a 0-day crack for Bioshock since the game's executable is only accessible by downloading it via Securerom.
The_Raven on 14/12/2008 at 18:30
I suppose I didn't word that properly, mostly since I'm posting these days during quick study breaks. What I say trying to get at was not necessarily day-0 piracy, but near day-0 piracy: the type where there's a crack out shortly after the game goes "live."
ercles on 14/12/2008 at 19:44
Quote Posted by LittleFlower
The fact of the matter is:
- a game is owned by the developer and publisher
- the owner decides how they want to sell or promote or package their product
- if the owner wants to do stupid things, it's their right to do so
- if you don't like it, don't buy the game
- there is *zero* justification to pirate games.
Once again I'll say that I can't really see anyone arguing that piracy is can be justified, but I think the point is rather than an honest, well researched and fair article that would be very useful in the ongoing argument, what was produced was a skewed, and poorly researched article that really loses a lot of its impact due to these factors.
The_Raven on 14/12/2008 at 20:32
The real problem with this debate is that there is just no solid, hard data available to the public. This applies to both sales data and however they're measuring their piracy rate. This thread actually reminded me about comments that Ron Gilbert posted on his blog about a different topic; however, I think they are appropriate to the current debate.
Quote Posted by Ron Gilbert
Top 10 lists are nice, but without sales figures you, have no idea the drop-off.
...
The reports I got while working at Humongous showed revenue amounts for each title in each chain. It was a huge report that came out once a week.
You could track how much each and every game made (at retail).
Of course, you were under strong NDA not to release or share any of this information.
...
Because it's ridiculous to make small developers pay $15K for this data. There is no reasonably priced system for putting this information into the hands of anyone but large publishers (and I guess the press).
The problem is that because this information is so expensive to get, it becomes a power tool. Publishers make decision on what games to fund based on these numbers, but unless you have access to that same information, it's next to impossible to formulate a strategy.
It's also worth noting that the full reports from these places are amazingly detailed, showing every unit sold in very retail chain, down to the penny. I'm not asking for that kind of information, which is very valuable to sales people, I'd just like to get the big picture.
As far as the consumers needing this information? Why not? It's cool and it's sexy and it's part of what gives Hollywood it's mystic.
...
That is a good point, but I think we already have that, it's just that the factors making the decisions are keep secret. People inside the game publishing machine know these numbers.
Maybe it would be better for people to know how poorly BG&E did (I'm not saying it did, just using it as an example). But right now, we have no idea.
sh0ck3r on 14/12/2008 at 20:39
Sounds like you majored in philosophy, Zygoptera
Zygoptera on 14/12/2008 at 22:07
Quote Posted by Phatose
First of all, contradict is bullshit. The press release clearly states *over* 2.2 million units. Unless your claim is that the PC version sold under 80k units, they're in perfect agreement.
At the time 2k released their press release they were under threat of hostile takeover by EA. Not only are they
legally obligated, as a publicly traded company, to give accurate figures but it is
in their best interests to give as high a figure as possible so as to convince their shareholders that they are a viable independent company capable of surviving without EA. They simply
will not say 2.2 million plus meaning 2.12 million 360 copies + x (if you really hate the 1 million figure, but certainly more than the 80k to take it over 2.2 million) PC copies = technically more than 2.2 million.
Even that notorious underestimater of PC sales, NPD, has Bioshock PC selling well into the 100ks, in NA alone, by October.
So, simply put, the vgchartz figures do not make sense in the context of the primary source. As a secondary source, they must be discounted.
Quote:
Secondly, if you're going to claim anything about European sales of 360 versus PC, please provide something to back that up. Like, actual numbers.
(
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=15234) "While the Xbox 360 version is the more popular of the two in the U.S., BioShock on PC nevertheless manages to make a strong overall sales impression that few PC titles manage to achieve. Interestingly, though, the PC port outsells both the regular and limited Xbox 360 editions in Europe, where BioShock's PC version emerges as the week's biggest-selling software title on any platform."
Since PC software pretty much always has a longer 'tail' than the 360 it is
likely that that trend continued.
The aim is not to provide explicit figures, which don't, as you probably already know, exist for public consumption, but to prove that the 1 million figure is
plausible.
Quote:
Thirdly, I imagine their are some Australians around here who would solidly kick you ass for believe anything that isn't Japan or the USA is Europe.
Australians are fair minded and even tempered individuals who will probably get over the shock of being lumped in with the eurotrash by one of their transtasman overlor^H^H^H^H cousins.
Quote:
Fourthly, generally speaking, if you're going to call BS on someone else's numbers, fine. But really, if there's like a goddamned million objects out of 2 or 3 million that you're not sure if they're accounted for or not, you should probably just call bullshit instead of tossing out your own figures.
Not really. There's
nothing solid to discount the million sales for PC- it isn't contradicted by the 2k sales number (unlike vgchartz' data) and given the european PC sales is at least plausible. Unlike vgchartz figure, which requires 2k to have underestimated their units shipped figure by
at bare minimum several 100k units.
Quote Posted by LittleFlower
So the guy made a few mistakes with a few numbers. So what ?
When the mistakes include cutting out most of the x360 piracy on two titles by taking the figures for the prior month, when the 360 torrent has been out prior to day one (and having ranted about how day 1 piracy is teh graet ebil, no less) and, as a consequence,
for far longer than a month so is largely excluded from those figures is
really dodgy and makes the figures pretty much worthless.
The only real conclusion is that the author is either ignorant of FC2 and F3 being pirated prior to day 1, on x360, or worse, he's picked criteria specifically to prove exactly what he
wants proved, that the 360 does not have a piracy problem while the PC does (ftr,
both clearly have piracy problems).
Either way, if I can spend ten minutes listing factual errors off the top of my head, while watching cricket, then I don't think that speaks well for the quality of the article.
Oh, yeah, one more reason why it's important:
Quote:
..throughout the article you will find numerous references to reputable data sources and first-hand information rather than just hearsay and conjecture..
Phatose on 14/12/2008 at 22:51
Let's see 2.12 million +.1 million = ....wow 2.22 million. Certainly no one would *ever* round that off and tack on the word over.
Muzman on 15/12/2008 at 02:03
Maybe I missed something. Is it seriously being argued that Bioshock did worse than System Shock 2 on PC after all?
(and Australians are quite accustomed to being 'elsewhere' in just about every statistic. All we need to smile is beating the poms at cricket)
