I shouldn't have to pay extra money just to protect myself from being punked by UBI.

That's like giving the neighborhood bully your lunch money. "Here's my milk money, just don't hurt me."

i dont know if i would agree with that, i think its the investment in game developement or lack there of thats effected by piracy not the price.

game companies charge THE most they can force customers to pay them even if there was NO piracy but they definately would or might be able to spend those extra profits gained from not having piracy to make better games by hiring more devs and giving larger budgets to the builders.

Nein

Many people make a living by developing open source software. The point is that open source in commercial game development just doesn't work. So you will never see a Falcon 5 or SH 10 etc.... open source.
On the other hand, simulators developed in the free time by people that share a common passion can be viable. You just have to refocus your expectations. Now before you go on saying that open source games are "s h i t" , or cannot compete with commercial offerings you're wrong. And you're wrong because commercial offerings have to cater to the larger market (why do thing that SH 5 has all those "arcade" like settings in the first place ? ) whereas the community developed sims no.

Take for instance Orbiter, its a space simulator (way way better and more complex than the only other commerical sim Microsoft Space Simulator 1994/1995), it was developed by one man over the course of several years and he had the insight to make the core of the sim "closed source" but he gave to the community a great SDK and API with which to develop add-ons. The community is way way less numerous than that of subsim members, and yet if you look at the quality of several add-ons well they are commercial quality. And all of them are freeware and most are also open source. It works because the man found its audience. He develops in his free time, its a hobby of his (his main job is being a professor....) and the add-on developers do it in their free time too.
And with all this being a hobby, the quality and scope of the project is just mind boggling. I can tell you that if a commercial space sim should ever see the light of day they are going to have one hell of a time surpassing the hardcore Orbiter.

In the field of flight simulators, you have Flight Gear. This one is 100% open source. Everything from models, to textures etc... It has been in development for more than 10 years I think and its pretty good. Of course compared to FS 2004/ Fs X its way way back but can you play Fs X on linux ? No. Can you modify the inner working of the sim because you want to improve it ? No.

In the field of subsims, there is a WWII subsim called Danger of the Deep. Its open source and the graphics have nothing to envy to SH3/4. The pace of development is slow because there isn't a lot of manpower available. I can tell you this, if all the guys that focused on GWX 3 should focus on bringing and devloping content for Danger of the Deep, well in a 3-4 years we could have a real product competing with SH 3/4/5. And with nothing of the restrictions of DRM/modding and what else. The bonus thing is that you could run it everywhere, windows, mac, linux etc.... It wouldn't have a dynamic campaign but even so the game we could have an extremely complete mission editor and multiplayer and whatever else the communioty comes up with.

I'm always astounded how a small, very small community like that of Orbiter has achieved an outstanding simulator, and yet more mainstream simulators like WW 2 subsims with an enormous community and talented modders and/or developers just don't have the same kind of "passion" for developing or contributing to an open source WW2 subsim.

No Sale
 

I bought a new car.....Want bucket seats? Nope...Are you sure? Yep...What about DRM? Is it standard? Yep..Can I pay to have it not installed? Nope. Sorry I don't want it..Sorry NO SALE.

If they charge less that it cost rto make, they go tits up.

They are a business, they can afford to lose some of the time, game dev and release is a gamble sort of like movies. Overall, however, they either make money or they tank.

They SHOULD charge what the market will bear, IMO. It's their duty to make the most money possible for their investors, andf the gravy for us is that it allows them to gamble on less popular titles---like submarines.

I'm always stunned by anyone who thinks these games, or even add-ons are some sort of money-grubbing rip off. Games have been pretty flat at ~$50 for ages. What a deal!

my point was you seamed to imply they would lower prices if piracy was stopped and im saying there is no way the would lower prices no matter what for the very reasons you just brought up.

but if they had more profits they might invest more into the games they produce

Yup, i would......

errr, pay the extra money....

Games are already cheap entertainment, I see no reason to decrease the cost unless they can move enough more units.

No, why would I pay for a watered down version of 3...

Understatement of the year.
It makes me think their pulling a Dragon age:origins strategy.
Release game one day, release DLC that could have been in the game originaly the next, and then an expansion ( which is just as big as the original game, therefore must have already been done at the time of release) the next month. All yours for the price of the original game, thus doubleing their profit if you want the "entire" experience.

======>>> +1

@ goldorak -- re: Orbiter .... GREAT fricken sim!! Love it!! of course, it could do with better damage dynamics (I've re-enterd the DG IV upside-down and not burned up many a time), but you're absolutely right about the quality of the add-ons. Simply astounding!
Also, thanks for bringing to my awareness Flight Gear and Danger from the Deep ... with the quality of modders here, I'd think we could put together a kick-ass sim with commercial viability, at least within our niche community, plus it would have everything we all want. hmmmm ...
:yeah: :hmmm:

... oh, and HELL NO I won't pay even an extra $0.25 for a game that should already be without DRM ... that's just extortion, plain and simple ...

Hello Tater!

Sorry, but I wasn't talking about having something free, or was I? The question was about extra money, wasn't it? Here in Finland one meal in McD's cost about 6,50 euros. I would not mind pay 10 euros just for that I could eat the very same meal at home. To me UBI's planned DRM model is just the same...


Greetings,
-RC-

Why should I pay for not having something I don't want!

Mafia Guy "Give me your money, or I'll instal DRM in your computer,"

:D

I would

because its a double negatory. paying NOT to have something you do NOT want is the same as paying to have something you want :rotfl2:.

That's a loaded question, so I won't answer it.

If I say "No," I could be sending the message that I'm willing to live with the DRM.

If I say "yes," I'm sending a message that I agree with this shenanigans.


Car Dealer: So, you all ready to get into your new car?
Customer: Absolutely!
Car Dealer: Okay then! Let's just fill out the papers... oh... there's one more thing I forgot to offer you...
Customer: Oh? What's that?
Car Dealer: Well, when we came into the office, I asked one of my co-workers to go defecate on your seat and flatten your tires.
Customer: :o
Car Dealer: But, have I got a deal for you!! :D For an extra $200, I'll call him up right now and tell him to leave it alone.
Customer: :stare:

I'm a notwanting notwanter :D