Piracy is a net loss for a video game company

>posts the incredibly flawed study

presumably from people who pirate and never buy the game out of laziness/stubborness
while you do have pirates who go on to buy the game, they are not all of the pirates.

I enjoyed the fuck out of Alpha Protocol but fuck if I was paying for it.

Personally, if I pirated a game, I wouldn't have bought it in the first place. There's some games I would buy, so I buy those, and just download the ones I wouldn't buy in the first place.

I feel like a lot of the try-before-you-buy pirates wouldn't be pirates if game demos were still popular.

I believe it depends on the case, but yeah losing money doesn’t necessarily mean going out of business

Honestly this. I've been burned on buying games before because they didn't have demos and turned out to be shit, so I'd rather not have that happen again

Doom 2016 and RE2 Remake get points for actually having demos, which sold me on their games.

If a game is really good it will always have people buying it. Piracy doesnt mean anything because the people who pirate were most likely not going to buy the game anyways.

Same, but with Nier Automata and SAO Fatal Bullet

They need to start to bring back demos.

Piracy is the only viable option of consumers to fight back greedy corporations engaging into shady and scummy corporate practices. Loot boxes, cut content, DLC, pre-orders - the only viable response to this garbage is piracy.

It's a net loss because there's bound to be a percentage of people who pirate and never buy who WOULD have bought it had they no option to pirate.

>Game has short 1-2 minutes videos to show it off
>Shows absolutely no gameplay or short 3 second bursts of gameplay followed by 'epic' shots, review scores, and one-liners
>"Well, I guess they aren't selling a video game since they aren't showing any game play"
When ever a game provides videos showing it off and they don't show game play, I assume the makers are just ashamed/lack confidence in what they made (because again, it's a game not a fucking movie) and lose interest.

Post an unflawed one, then? You won't.

It uses a proprietary memory card that can only be read by a vita. It's too small to make a micro SD adapter fit into the card like what happened to pro duo cards on PSP, and the pin readout is different than even Micro M2 memory sticks. No PC adapter was ever made or planned and they refused to license out third parties to make them or adapters.
Because PSP was so easy to drag and drop files on they made Vita have no direct user access of the file structure.
Everything you put on a Vita had to go through a program called CMA. That even includes screenshots or pictures. CMA would phone home to Sony servers and I've heard it would refuse to work if your Vita wasn't on the most recent firmware.
Because save data exploits were used so often on PSP they tied save data to your PSN account so you couldn't use another persons data aka a simple save data exploit would straight refuse to load because it wouldn't match your PSNID, and they tied save data to digital game data to make the files even bigger and more annoying to deal with
Battery was integrated inside and not removable because of the Pandora battery on PSP. You can still user replace it but it's much more an ordeal than a PSP battery replacement was.

I'm sure there's more but that's off the top of my head.

Tell that to the Dreamcast.

>we did retarded shit that hurt our product out of fear of piracy
>this is piracy's fault

And why is it incredibly flawed?

>so incredibly flawed that the EU was terrified of it and had to supress it

Yeah ok bud. The truth never fears scrutiny.

Hell I'm getting Judgment because the demo was so good.

Thanks for letting me know it had a demo, user.

PIRACY IS NOT A VICTIMLESS CRIME

YOU STREET RAT
HOW ABOUT YOU GO STEAL YOUR OWN BREAD

OH WAIT, YOU HAVE NONE CUZ UR JUST A STREET RAT

It was suppressed because it was a bad study based on anonymous polls and leaps of logic. They ignore certain things, and throw out other data later since it doesn't go along with the narrative they were aiming for.
Try reading the first 20 pages of it. I know you won't but anyone that does would never post that study and argue either for or against piracy because it was inherently flawed. The only reason it gets posted is it makes a good headline. I think all you have to do is control + f "margin of error" and you can see how retarded the whole thing is anyway.

it was a questionnaire

Okay, Aladdin.

Which is what the OP was saying.
You said most pirates weren't going to buy the game anyways. Some of the non-most are those that because they've played and gotten their time's worth and then have no reason to buy it (logically). That's a loss (logically).

I can't because no one does these studies.
What was posted was a strawpoll.

Pirates can't even claim that piracy is good for advertising.
Streamers are advertising gold and they play with a legit copy.
Name a single popular pirate that swings entire populations from game to game.

Attached: 1515560028870.jpg (640x955, 300K)