Are opinions of people who pirate games less valid than opinions of people who buy them.
Are opinions of people who pirate games less valid than opinions of people who buy them
Other urls found in this thread:
arstechnica.com
torrentfreak.com
youtube.com
jstor.org
twitter.com
No. On the contrary, actually
No, in fact they're more valid because pirates are not subject to post-purchase rationalization.
cuntboy
I have all this garbage.
I've actually played about 200 of them.
Over 200 more are in backlog.
The rest is a mix of buyer's remorse and indie bundle trash, but I did start them up and at least tried them out. The majority were completely forgettable, and a handful weren't even possible to get through the main menu on before I quit.
Of course
Why should you create a product for people who don't intend to pay for it?
It's the opposite, actually. Firstly, people who pirate are more likely to be enthusiasts who consume a lot of media in general, and as such have more points of comparison and more realistic idea of what they should be able to demand. Secondly, they aren't subject to post-purchase rationalization.
that otter looks very suspicious
Yes. Pirates are usually biased against the developer, which is why they pirate.
no, if anything theyre more valid because they aren't bound by money and post purchase rationalization
Pirates pirate because they lack money.
they're more valid because they're immune to post purchase rationalization
If anything people who pirate have more honest opinions has they don't have to justify their purchase bias.
Yeah, sure they do
Also that isn't a valid reason to pirate.
Your a retard
More relevant to other potential customers looking for an unbiased opinion as pointed out,
but completely irrelevant to developers/publishers
People who pirate have way less investement into the game, they didn't sacrifice anything for it.
Is it less or more valid? Hard to say, but since pirating a game has an obviously lower entry hurdle (it's free) on average you'll have way more people who try it out even if they don't like the genre/the developer/the game at all, so they'll criticize it more.
If someone buys the game it's obviously because it has an invested interest in it that justifies purchasing it, so buyers on average will be more satisfied with what they buy.
tl;dr they're both skewed points of view
This is like the furry version of those human fanarts of ponies.
People who pirate by large spend MORE money on media than people who don't, though (arstechnica.com
who cares they both play games
This may be true, but on an individual basis, if a person pirates a game and never buys it, their opinion is completely irrelevant so far as the developer is concerned. Now more than ever vidya is a money-first industry.
If its the case of the person not buying it because its a sub-par product, then they are part of a minority that is unfortunately not worth catering to as for each of them there are ten idiots who will lap shit up regardless.
tl;dr the pirate who refuses to pay for shit quality is not profitable in modern vidya
look, I think most of us know why this thread exists
It isnt
They fucked up her tail, I thought it was a normal otter tail
Op here.
I was not trying to start a Mikhaila art thread.
I just posted a random picture because i am too lazy to find a relevant one.
alright
sorry for the intrusion
Its furry art its not supposed to be anatomically or species correct.
No every other pic that has her has the proper tail
Remove Mikhalia and I would use this as a background.
It's so pretty
Only the non official artwork.
tsampikos the owner of the character draws her whit the strange tail officially.
I'd say more valid, save for any opinion they might have on multiplayer, which is usually inaccessible.
well fuck him and his faggot name pronunciations
I would like you to continue if you don't mind.
I kinda agree with this actually
Because they won't feel the need to justify their purchase
Not at all. That is a semi-retarded statement infact.
Pirates have no investment in the game. Therefore their opinions come with less bias. If it is a shit game, they will call it a shit game. A buyfag on the other hand is more likely to put up with a shit game and look for that silver lining because they are already invested.
Wouldn't someone who bought something also be more likely to more disappointed?
If you got a shitty flash game for free, you probably wouldn't mind but if you paid 60 bucks for it you definitely would
This is gross. Otters should only be loved by other otters.
I guess it would depend on the person
otters are fucking niggers
This is the only valid option.
People who buy games, even if they're shit will try to make it seem like it's a good game just because they bought it. Pirates don't have to.
To be fair.
If i you buy a game you cant refund on and it turns out its kinda meh you are more likely to be disappointed.
If you just pirated it you only lost a few hours and no money.
Fuck buying physical games that have an online activation.
Its literally a no refund scheme.
I am almost glad its not a thing anymore and you can only buy them digitally and have a refund window.
I still cant believe i sold my DJ hero controller for this pile of broken online play shit.
Let me sing you the song of my people.
Oh now I get it
No. If anything they can be more valid as there's no post-purchase rationalization or buyer's remorse.
Lack of fiscal baggage to not dilute the opinion of the game. also DmC was a piece of shit and I pirated that.
This isnt true at all but just something elitists like to think to validate themselves. Most people are able to determine if a gaming experience is good or not regardless. I've purchased my share of a few shit games that just sit on the shelf collecting dust.
The whole getting your hours worth out of a game doesn't really hold over well when it's with a fame you don't like but are forcing yourself to play to get your money's worth. You would just be losing time playing a game you dislike ontop of the money you paid.
>this thread
what the hell is this memery
I've never seen so much buzzword on Sup Forums before
No. All opinions are completely and totally invalid, all the time, of anything.
>memery
I don't care if you have a source for the terminology. I've just never seen Sup Forumsirgins behaving so much like robots before.
It can't be, after all, if that were the case why would we trust the opinion of reviewers who get free copies from the publisher?
fuck otters
Is that your fursona, OP? :3
Not sure. As Said, they are not subject to post purchase rationalization.
However, this does also provide a problem as you don't learn the value for money. The game I regret buying the most is destiny, as I pre-ordered it. This made me more annoyed at how low on content it was. (60$)
Had the game been f2p, I probably wouldn't have minded the lack of content as it wouldn't have felt remorse for buying it.
It's a tricky question. I really don't know.
thread's dying
INCOMING
get to it, then
CUNTBOY
Aye aye, cap'n!
Fucking cuntboy
Pirates are some of the most entitled manbabies on earth.
You are really hung up on that, aren't you? The dick isn't everything
ARRRGH
If you ask a pirate if a game is worth buying, the answer is always "no."
she's just flat chested, user
Yes.
>Scar
Fucking faggot
I've played maybe 50 of mine to completion
Send help
>there are people in this thread that hate the otterfu
I hate that the cuntboy has a fucked up tail
The design isn't very appealing to me
That's because you're gay
I hate that the tail comes out of her back
that wouldn't stop me from plowing her ottercunt, though
Nah I'm bi. But the design isn't very good. Nothing about it stands out and looks very generic. Only reason it's notable is because of the artstyle.
Its because she's a fucking nigger
Luckily, I'm easily impressed
Nah, there's plenty of "black" furry characters I can get off to.
Is that otter a cuntboy or girl, I could never figure that out
hey look a proper tail
KEK
GET FUCKED OTTERFAGGOTS
The artist says it's an athletic, flat chested a girl.
Pirates don't have the post purchase rationalization phase.
Great argument
goats > otters > my feces > sheep
Thank you.
Turn up the lewd!
cuntboys need to fuck off
>However, this does also provide a problem as you don't learn the value for money.
This assessment is doomed to failure from the start, because the apparent value of money varies wildly depending on the person. In plain words: The more dollars in one's bank account, the less valuable each individual dollar seems to be.
To the heir of a Middle Eastern kingdom, $10,000 for the super deluxe version of After Burner Climax will doubtless seem like chump change, whilst the Darfur refugee, who barely managed to scrape together the Sudanese pound equivalent of five bucks by scavenging the corpses of his fellow villagers after they were massacred by rampaging bandits, would no doubt balk at the thought of spending it all to download Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved.
These are of course extreme examples, but the point is that all of us lie at different points somewhere between them, and therefore the arbitrary assessment of complete strangers who has no idea of our financial situation is in no way helpful to any of us (not even to the mythical "average gamer", who, if he exists at all, is doubtless in the minority).
What at the end of the day you expect (or should expect), is not an assessment of a game's price but of its quality compared to other games in the same genre; once you have that, you can then contrast your bank balance and your desire to play a game against the publisher's asking price, and make your decision.
How could a modern action game ever compete in the "value for money" stakes with something like Chess or Europa Universalis? And what would be the point of us pitting them against each other anyway? Is an hour-long game of basketball more worthwhile than a one-minute long skydive, simply because it lasts longer? Would you like some apples with your oranges, sir? Have you ever had an orgasm?
...
>piratefag opinions are less valid than buyfag opinions
>vote with your wallet
You can't have it both ways. If playing a game is a prerequisite to having a valid opinion then you can't just discredit anyone who doesn't pay the same amount you did for it.
Im not replying to you faggot
fuck off you stupid jew
stop trying to derail a derailed thread
bazinga
The opinions of those that buy games might be biased because they spent money on it. The opinions of those that don't buy games might be biased because they didn't spend money on it.
I've seen this image probably 20 times on Sup Forums and not once have I replied to it. My mother is still alive. Maybe if I reply to it she will die.
>The opinions of those that don't buy games might be biased because they didn't spend money on it.
That's not how it works. Unless you're saying all critics are biased.
She's not a cuntboy, just a flat-chested girl.
let me help you forget about mr. bazorple here
>athletic
>wears hoop earrings
Im calling bullshit on this character
darn