Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Directly from the PDF of the study linked in the article:
and even more striking:
I understand the reason for DRM, but I personally do what I can to avoid extra layers of DRM on top of the already existing Steamworks DRM, and as you can see, it's questionable (not definitively concluded one way or the other) if piracy even hurts game sales at all. If piracy doesn't hurt sales, then DRM, the thing implemented to stop it, doesn't help sales. All it does is add an extra potential point of failure onto a consumer good that doesn't really need to exist.
Data's not that precise, it's based on everything "computer games" and includes consoles games and even (maybe) hardware and it's also from 2013. There was quite a few changes since then in gaming.
Steam already existed obviously but wasn't as opened nor strong as today : Valve was just getting out of their "we couldn't beleive typically japanese games would sell on PC" mentality they gave up after launching Steam Greenlight, meaning a lot of stuff was available only by piracy or consoles, GoG wasn't on the AAA games market, and our topic of the day, Denuvo, didn't existed.
And that's only PC.
I don't remember the state of then current gen console piracy and how easily doable it was to do when this data was made... which is a significant factor, as you're going to be less willing to go through the hassle if you're not already deep in gaming anyway and likely to pay for games.
But there's also that. Page 138.
"For games the reason for the positive effects may be that players may get
hooked to a game and access a game legally to play the game with all
bonuses, at higher levels or whatever makes playing the game legally more
interesting."
And as gamers and not some EU dude who had to write a report, we know what make games "more interesting", don't we ?
Having the game actually properly work, for starters, but also patches, access to multiplayer, and everything online dependency.
You could say, from that study, that releasing broken or incomplete games, that pirates may want to buy if they're seeing potential, is why we're seeing a positive correlation between piracy and sales.
Now, there's obviously also the goodwill of some pirates who'll actually buy a game they simply pirated to try. But the proportion of them is up in the air.
Remember, we're talking global numbers here, so the most important actor is the normie hooked to AAA games, not the niche gamer dedicated to help indie devs.
Not that it all really matters anyway since
"It is striking that all coefficients [ of effects of illegal online transactions on legal
transactions ] are insignificant. This raises the question to
what extent estimates suffer from problems of respondents to recall exact
numbers of transactions, an issue that also applies for individual channels
discussed earlier. This means that estimates are only most likely effects given
the data, but with no certainty that the true displacement rate is close to the
estimate. Therefore the conclusion is that not too much significance should be
attached to the estimates." (page 139)
Which is why that article (and your post's conclusion) doesn't say there's actually a positive impact of piracy in games either, just that it doesn't seemed to impact much back then.
As to say if DRM help sales or not on PC games...
There's too many crap mixed in that study, with consoles and whatnot, to draw a conclusion on that one part. Plus, again, Denuvo - since it's the one we're talking about here - didn't existed and the most efficient DRMs back then were more hassles than real roadblocks.
or more precisely
DRM is a product designed to prevent piracy. In the event that it does prevent piracy, which it clearly does, that does not mean that a sales are gained from the prevention of piracy. Just because a person is inclined to pirate a game does not mean they would be inclined to buy it if they cannot pirate it.
The study concludes that
Meaning that, in terms of sales, there isn't sufficient evidence to show that piracy actually results in lost sales. Meaning that DRM doesn't actually gain sales (if piracy indeed does not displace sales), since those pirates aren't a "displacement" of sales in the first place, so there's nothing to be gained from them by stopping them.
Basically, they were never going to buy the game in the first place, so no sales were lost in the event of piracy. It's just that they can't play the game now that they weren't willing to pay for if DRM actually manages to stop them.
That aside, including console games means that you have more data and the proportion of PC data is less, sure. That doesn't make the data any less valid.
I've been banned so many times because they consider my mods malware since it doesn't work with pirated versions of Steam games.
Oh yeah, I can hear the corporates shivering in panic because your majesty's will wasn't satisfied yet.