a flat amount

Nope, the amount is anything but flat. For bigger youtubers the ad money start to be significant, and for bigger podcasters spotify pays something, but for the most, amount of money from ads is negligible.

Before piracy there were demos and shareware, which let you see if your machine could handle the game or content and give you a vertical slice, and let you show it to friends for word of mouth advertising.

Then, Steam put a two hour refund window with no questions asked, which helped a lot of "this crashes on start, I can't open this at all on a RTX 4090/high end PC, 15 FPS in the fog, etc".

Developers learned from that and they began padding/gating content behind two hours of gameplay, so you wouldn't know until 3-4 hours in that the game was grindy dogshit (SCUM, Ark, Empyrion, and countless other Early Access and sometimes full release titles like NMS on launch day for example).

So the correct thing to do, and it's what I do: Pirate the game, make sure it runs/works and is fun and there's no "gotcha" traps or hidden DLCs or other predatory mechanics involved, and THEN pay for the full title on Steam+DLCs and just continue the save.

My Steam Account has actually already been flagged over a dozen times for this because my primary savegames are like Razor1911.sav, and so far it's still in good status because I am actually spending a couple thousand/year on content.

The only damage that exists from piracy is to the copyright holders profits.....

Since the copyright holder is usually a corporation that is owned by shareholders, the majority of which are richer than all of us combined, ask me if I give a shit and I will show you my field of shits to give, and you will see that it is barren.

Eat the rich. Or Luigi them... I don't care.

Ironically, it's actually doesn't work on a small scale. It works on a medium scale, big enough to have a stable audience, not big enough to get lucrative deals from brands.
It might not work to support a lifestyle of AAA company CEO, and it might not work at pushing out hundreds of unimaginative boring microtransaction machines, but I would say it's just a bonus

Yeah, why the fuck not?

Obviously, something made in a specialized vehicle manufacturing plant will be better/more durable/whatever, but given the option between downloading a car vs spending a year's salary to buy one.... I'd rather download one.

Unless my wages get better (which they are not) or cars get cheaper (which they won't), I'll continue to have this opinion.

There's a nontrivial number of cars that cost more than a house did in the 80's and 90's. So it's entirely possible for someone to spend the same dollar value on their home, when purchasing it in the 90's, as they do 25 years later, buying a house in the 2020's.

Stupid.

Using insurance means your premiums will go up, meaning you are still going to pay for it. There is also some emotional damage depending on how the theft happens.

,You can say "I think intellectual property is a dumb idea" and I'd love to hear your arguments for that,

Read the above comments then.

but to act like it isn't real just because we came up with the idea relatively recently, is just asinine.

Again, read my comments. I didn't say it wasn't real, I said it has no basis in human culture or history.

If they dont, they kinda don't get to do their art. It's a whole thing.

Id say 'or they starve/die on yhe street' but that's what they get service jobs for.

I have a lot of monetarily worthless stuff that means a lot to me. Souvenirs from trips, some heirlooms from my grandparents, stuff like that. Not gonna be worth anything in insurance but means a lot to me.. it's a dumb take that theft isn't a crime.

No, the problem is you trusting a capitalist system to make you whole again. Under any other economic system in the world if you steal someones personal property- it's a shitty thing to do.

And they invested knowing that piracy was a thing and figured that into their calculations regard to the risk vs potential return. If they didn't get that right and end up with a loss, well, that's capitalism for you.

Triple A games are often over funded and under deliver in experience in my recent experience. A little less funding might tighten up some of waste and deliver better games.

The problem with almost every pro-piracy argument like this is that they fundamentally require a significant percentage of the population to disagree with it.

This assumes that people who are ok with piracy are also against paying for content. That's a nice fantasy and it makes anti-piracy people feel good about themselves, but it doesn't reflect reality.

People who can pay will pay and I’m not taking anything from them” only works for as long as both the general population and retailers regard piracy as wrong and keep funding all those games, movies etc for you.

This assumes that 'pro piracy' people are against artists getting paid for their work. Seeing as how pirates tend to purchase more legal content than the 'general population' that is clearly not the case.

There could be a million different reasons why someone might 'pirate' a piece of media, and simply not wanting to pay for it is usually pretty low on the list. That attitude also relies on the assumption that every single piece of content that is copied is something the 'pirate' would have paid for in the first place.

As an artist, my job is to inspire people, to make them feel, to share my experience with them. I have absolutely zero problem with someone who can't afford to pay for my work pirating it. I also appreciate the ones who do pay, but I would still be making art even if no one paid, because while the money is nice it's not the point of it for me. Id much rather someone copy a work of mine and enjoy it than not enjoy it because they couldn't pay for the privilege.

I understand that some 'artists' are in it for the money and that's fine. It doesn't mean I have to agree with them that they deserve to get paid for every eyeball that falls upon their work, regardless of the circumstance.

Heck, all you pirates should be upvoting anti-piracy posts like this, we’re the ones keeping your habit funded…

Have an upvote from me for being the hero we don't deserve and protecting the mega-corps bottom lines. Truly you are a modern day Jesus.

I just got reminded of that sick anti piracy ad that would play before every film back in the 2000s lol

How's the weather up there on that extremely high horse?

Just because you personally steal stuff you can afford to pay for doesn't mean that is what everyone else does. It's good that you own up to that, but don't project your failings onto others. If it's against your morals to 'pirate', quit doing it.

If you are unwilling to listen to or comprehend others peoples reasons, that's fine- just don't act like that makes us the same as you, because it doesn't.

I am not a Christian so I'm not beholden to their rules. Someone like you could claim I am a sinner and I should just own it. No, I don't have the same beliefs that you do so I am under no obligation to behave how you think I should.

The music and editing of that ad were lowkey fire. The message... got burnt in that same fire

it does definitely take away from the creator’s/distributor’s profit.

Oh no! Not the distributor's profit!! Oh holy Supply Side Jesus, I pray in your name- protect the profits of the Capitalists. Take the money I worked hard for and give it to the do-nothing rich, they clearly deserve it more than me. Amen

Ok there buddy. There is no ‘high horse’ here. Piracy is piracy. People need to quit with their bullshit justifications. Just own up to it. I do. The fuck are you on about Christianity? There is literally no connection to religion/beliefs here.

People can’t afford to pay for it? Cool. It’s still piracy. One is still depriving the creator/studio/publisher/whatever of a sale.

But I can’t afford it! Therefore I deserve to have it for free!

Ridiculous.

They're are a million wrong ways to come at the wrong conclusion. So why then would we be surprised when many of the people who come to the right conclusion still do it for a variety of reasons? Perhaps the initial premise of why copyright should exist is conceptually riddled with holes.

Owning an idea is inherently capitalist, but the average person who encounters a problem won't spontaneously become anti-capitalist. They just know something seems wrong about this, but don't understand why. So they make up a story to address their cognitive dissonance, like nihilism.

I don't even call it piracy, because piracy has a definition that this doesn't meet. I call it what it is: unauthorized reproduction. That's it. That's all "piracy" is, it's literally just unauthorized reproduction. Doesn't sound nearly as scary and dramatic when you call it what it actual is, does it?