Timewalk FFIV, V, VI sealed

[fcgamer | 4,729]

7 minutes ago, Khromak said:

Whether we like it or not, IP law exists for a reason. Nobody would spend $100m paying developers to make a game, including pay voice actors, animators, writers, graphical artists, etc. if they knew that anyone who could produce the disc and sell it on etsy for $20 could cut into their profits.

That's all well and nice, but Microsoft felt differently. If it weren't for bootlegs, who knows who Microsoft Windows products would have faired compared to alternative choices in mainland China when folks actually became affluent and had purchasing power.

The same actually is true for the whole (non-Japanese) "Asia" region for X-box, for example. Used to be a hot bed of piracy, but by now everyone just purchases legitimate products, due to brand loyalty thanks to turning a blind eye in the early days, when no one could afford to purchase the legitimate products anyways (hence the company was not losing out on sales, unlike the misconception that some have).

Does this apply to Timewalk Games and these products? Not really, I'd guess, though it's unlikely these companies were profiting off of these games at the point of these Timewalk productions, and similarly, if someone did fall in love with one of these games (and one of the IP holders were using the IP), it's likely that brand loyalty thing would kick in and they'd get another sale anyways.

[Khromak | 769]

Giving away free products to get "brand loyalty" or turning a blind eye to people stealing your IP because it might lead to future sales is all well and good, but it should be a decision made by the IP holder, not an excuse that thieves use to steal people's hard work.

1 hour ago, fcgamer said:

Does this apply to Timewalk Games and these products? Not really, I'd guess, though it's unlikely these companies were profiting off of these games at the point of these Timewalk productions

This is such a common excuse, that since the IP holder isn't actively selling a SNES cartridge of the game it's OK to create one of your own and sell it because they aren't losing a sale. I don't believe this for a second. They have the right to determine how the game is sold, on any and all platforms, because they created it. These games in particular are still for sale on Steam, Switch, Playstation, Google Play, and Apple store...

If you wrote a book and someone created a digital version of it and sold it on Amazon with the excuse "Well, you aren't selling a digital copy of it anywhere, so I'm not taking any sales from you" I'd imagine you'd be pretty upset that they stole your entire work, whole cloth, and sold it for their own profit.

Similarly, if you paid 20 developers $3m to develop a game and starting selling it on Switch, you'd probably be pretty reasonably upset if someone started selling copies of it for PS5, because "You aren't selling it in this format, so it's not a lost sale for you!"

If you made this game for Wii U, but then stopped producing it 2 years ago because it's a dead console, then someone was making their own copies of the game and selling it for $80 on ebay, you'd probably be pretty upset that they were making a profit using your creative product.

Inb4 "I'd just be thrilled that people were playing my game, and honored that people loved it so much it got a re-release". That's true as long as it's a basement project you spent your own free time on, and stops being true when yours and thousands of your employees' livelihoods is dependent on the sale of your games, which is your business.

[a3quit4s | 4,103]

31 minutes ago, Khromak said:

Giving away free products to get "brand loyalty" or turning a blind eye to people stealing your IP because it might lead to future sales is all well and good, but it should be a decision made by the IP holder, not an excuse that thieves use to steal people's hard work.

This is such a common excuse, that since the IP holder isn't actively selling a SNES cartridge of the game it's OK to create one of your own and sell it because they aren't losing a sale. I don't believe this for a second. They have the right to determine how the game is sold, on any and all platforms, because they created it. These games in particular are still for sale on Steam, Switch, Playstation, Google Play, and Apple store...

If you wrote a book and someone created a digital version of it and sold it on Amazon with the excuse "Well, you aren't selling a digital copy of it anywhere, so I'm not taking any sales from you" I'd imagine you'd be pretty upset that they stole your entire work, whole cloth, and sold it for their own profit.

Similarly, if you paid 20 developers $3m to develop a game and starting selling it on Switch, you'd probably be pretty reasonably upset if someone started selling copies of it for PS5, because "You aren't selling it in this format, so it's not a lost sale for you!"

If you made this game for Wii U, but then stopped producing it 2 years ago because it's a dead console, then someone was making their own copies of the game and selling it for $80 on ebay, you'd probably be pretty upset that they were making a profit using your creative product.

Inb4 "I'd just be thrilled that people were playing my game, and honored that people loved it so much it got a re-release". That's true as long as it's a basement project you spent your own free time on, and stops being true when yours and thousands of your employees' livelihoods is dependent on the sale of your games, which is your business.

If I made $177,000,000 NET income in 2021, IDGAF who is out there selling a game I made 30 years ago which already paid for itself over and over lmao - only Nintendo gets petty about that shit  

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_Enix

You just continue on being the hero these companies need though, your fight for justice is an important one

Edited September 4, 2023 by a3quit4s

[Tanooki | 4,936]

Eh legally he is right, but that's as far as being right goes.  After that, nope, if you don't want to serve a market someone will, and if you don't care to serve that market legally you can nail someone for it, but tangibly it'll piss off the buyers/fans who wanted it when you wouldn't supply it.  Timewalk aside, this is why you can get $10-30 quality copies of carts now externally speaking made from quality parts inside too in the last couple of years.  Pay someone thee exploitation clown rate because the IP holder doesn't leave a viable choice out there in many cases (some they do, like Square-Enix), or find someone to make a modern cheap quality copy and avoid being scalped.  Clearly the people have spoken or this market wouldn't exist. That said though, if the company turned about and did offer it up, it's not going to change production at that rate as it's already committed to it.

[fcgamer | 4,729]

1 hour ago, Khromak said:

Giving away free products to get "brand loyalty" or turning a blind eye to people stealing your IP because it might lead to future sales is all well and good, but it should be a decision made by the IP holder, not an excuse that thieves use to steal people's hard work.

LOL wut? Did you not read what I wrote before? Microsoft turned a blind eye when Windows was being bootlegged to hell and back in China, for the sake of long-term gains. What would you have preferred them to do? Waste money and resources by building demo disks and then distributing them? Waste money and resources and give out full version disks? 

THEY DID make the decision, by letting the piracy occur in the first place. They could have pursued the folks, prosecuted people (anyone remember the situations such as Napster and Metallica prosecuting grandmas and dead corpses?...I do), but they didn't. That was their decision, because they knew what they were doing and understood the end game.

Konami knew folks in many parts of the world couldn't afford to purchase their products during the late eighties and early nineties. So they let people get familiar with their brands via bootlegs. Even more interesting, they decided to cash in by housing their own pcbs inside bootleg shells for a fraction of the price - I know I can't get 100% asking price, as these folks are poor, but if I can get 70% it's still a profit, right? Smart folks.

[Khromak | 769]

Sure, some companies have "allowed" piracy in the past. Or, it was too much of a pain in the ass in certain countries to try to enforce their IP because certain countries don't believe in IP, including their residents...That doesn't make it right to steal someone else's work and profit off of it.

I'm still not seeing the point here. Some company has, in your opinion, strategically not enforced their rights in the past, therefore all companies should do it all the time, and work for exposure?

Other points include: I make enough money, I shouldn't bother trying to make more?

Again, in the case of these games: they actively sell the games, you can buy them 20 ways from Sunday if you want to play them. Therefore it is in their best interest to stop other people from selling their games, so that people who want to play them purchase them from Square, not from some other unaffiliated company.

Here comes: but someone who wants to play it on SNES would NEVER play it on the other 25 platforms Square is selling it on. More copium and vast exaggeration. Even if you want to say that 90% of the people (an extremely generous guess) who bought this game would have NEVER purchased it from any other avenue that pays Square, that still means they stole that 10% of sales directly out of the mouths of the owner of the property, and the people who created the game. I guess this is acceptable because "WAH, I want a brand new SNES game in 2018! If they won't produce it, to hell with them and their rights!"

OK.

[T-Pac | 7,560]

@Khromak - I don't want to get involved here, but I just wanted to thank you for pointing-out that IP theft isn't something to carelessly gloss-over.

I make my living as an artist, and I couldn't do that if there were no enforced laws against IP-theft.

And for anyone who likes to look at big corporations as faceless entities that they feel okay to steal from - please remember that those corporations are made up of people like me. Right now I'm working directly for one of those multi-billion dollar entertainment companies, and for the past month I've had to watch my friends get laid-off left and right because it's been a difficult year for the company financially.
Sure - IP theft may not affect margins on a large scale, but when small-scale financial losses make the difference between me and my co-workers being employed or not, I care. I wish more people cared, too.

We need more good, creative art in the world, and stealing it from others isn't how I want to see that perpetuated.

[T-Pac]

[a3quit4s | 4,103]

1 hour ago, T-Pac said:

@Khromak - I don't want to get involved here, but I just wanted to thank you for pointing-out that IP theft isn't something to carelessly gloss-over.

I make my living as an artist, and I couldn't do that if there were no enforced laws against IP-theft.

And for anyone who likes to look at big corporations as faceless entities that they feel okay to steal from - please remember that those corporations are made up of people like me. Right now I'm working directly for one of those multi-billion dollar entertainment companies, and for the past month I've had to watch my friends get laid-off left and right because it's been a difficult year for the company financially.
Sure - IP theft may not affect margins on a large scale, but when small-scale financial losses make the difference between me and my co-workers being employed or not, I care. I wish more people cared, too.

We need more good, creative art in the world, and stealing it from others isn't how I want to see that perpetuated.

[T-Pac]

I don’t disagree with you here and I’m sorry to see you watching friends get laid off. While not helpful in the least, I’d tread lightly on how you victimize your company - it could have been a solid year financially full of stock buybacks and above expected returns on dividends for shareholders and your friends could have still been laid off because it’s acceptable or less public backlash now that a number of companies have done it (I was laid off in April from Amazon Web Services for the record). I’m sure that IP being generated now by AI isn’t going to help folks in the creative field at all (see the latest SAG strike) and corporate greed is at an all time high simply because there is no accountability at the top. I agree with IP laws to protect them but it’s also a two way street; what protects us from them in a capitalist society?

[T-Pac | 7,560]

48 minutes ago, a3quit4s said:

I don’t disagree with you here and I’m sorry to see you watching friends get laid off. While not helpful in the least, I’d tread lightly on how you victimize your company - it could have been a solid year financially full of stock buybacks and above expected returns on dividends for shareholders and your friends could have still been laid off because it’s acceptable or less public backlash now that a number of companies have done it (I was laid off in April from Amazon Web Services for the record). I’m sure that IP being generated now by AI isn’t going to help folks in the creative field at all (see the latest SAG strike) and corporate greed is at an all time high simply because there is no accountability at the top. I agree with IP laws to protect them but it’s also a two way street; what protects us from them in a capitalist society?

You make solid points, but I'm not "victimizing my company" - I'm humanizing the workforce behind it, regardless of corporate greed.

And dated, stranglehold IP laws definitely need reworking in the modern era - but that doesn't excuse all IP theft as so many people like to believe just because it makes their entertainment-consumption more convenient.

Sorry if this is coming off as aggressive - I respect your stance, but this is a contentious issue for me.

[T-Pac]

[fcgamer | 4,729]

On 9/5/2023 at 2:31 AM, Khromak said:

Sure, some companies have "allowed" piracy in the past. Or, it was too much of a pain in the ass in certain countries to try to enforce their IP because certain countries don't believe in IP, including their residents...That doesn't make it right to steal someone else's work and profit off of it.

The issue that is lost amongst 98% of people is that the reason for the piracy isn't because of countries not wanting to enforce IP, including residents, rather it's because the local people can't afford the items, aside from the rich.

Even in the great U.S. of A. one can see a similar situation occurring. Anyone remember when the RIAA was suing a grandma for downloading mp3s? What was the overall response to that, was it "Good, IP rights need to be enforced!" or was it, "The woman said she didn't even know how to operate a computer, and she's 70; likely it was her grandson* who was downloading the music."

*Interesting note while typing this: Why would the average person assume it is the grandson/daughter downloading the music, rather than the grandmother's son/daughter? Likely because the son or daughter would be paying for music. Why? They can afford it more than a jobless tween can.

On 9/5/2023 at 2:31 AM, Khromak said:

I'm still not seeing the point here. Some company has, in your opinion, strategically not enforced their rights in the past, therefore all companies should do it all the time, and work for exposure?

In the long game, brand recognition / advanced exposure is more beneficial than a few (potential) lost sales, something that is not lost on large corporations. 

On 9/5/2023 at 2:31 AM, Khromak said:

Again, in the case of these games: they actively sell the games, you can buy them 20 ways from Sunday if you want to play them. Therefore it is in their best interest to stop other people from selling their games, so that people who want to play them purchase them from Square, not from some other unaffiliated company.

The reason companies protect their IP is in part so that they don't lose their rights to it. It's another misconception that it's all about the sales, it's not. Most large companies don't even care about one sale here and two there, rather looking at the big picture. Aside from Sachen, why don't most companies directly sell to the public? Why do companies have minimal order requirements in place? So it's not about a lost sale here and a lost sale there, rather what they care about is the protection of their IP. That Atari 2600 Princess rescue game or whatever it was (the one that was the port of Super Mario) would be the classic example.

On 9/5/2023 at 2:31 AM, Khromak said:

Even if you want to say that 90% of the people (an extremely generous guess) who bought this game would have NEVER purchased it from any other avenue that pays Square, that still means they stole that 10% of sales directly out of the mouths of the owner of the property,

No, one cannot draw such conclusions. This is just your knee-jerk reaction. Who is to say that the 10% didn't purchase it both ways? I personally purchased my licensed Famicom games set for the reason that I felt it was the respectful thing to do, instead of just owning bootleg versions of the games. In terms of sales though, it didn't even make a difference to anyone, since everything was on the second-hand market, and secondly, the large portion of bootleg games I had purchased at the time I had also purchased (and still have) on the NES, when they were brand new (and the companies did receive money for that). 

The large amount of missed sales are from people who wouldn't have bought / wanted the item to begin with, so we can't just go assuming that it is "xyz amount of sales stolen directly from the company" as it's not.

[fcgamer | 4,729]

On 9/5/2023 at 7:02 AM, T-Pac said:

I don't want to get involved here, but I just wanted to thank you for pointing-out that IP theft isn't something to carelessly gloss-over.

As an author, musician, artist, and hobbyist developer, I agree with you that IP theft isn't something to carelessly gloss-over. 

On 9/5/2023 at 7:02 AM, T-Pac said:

I make my living as an artist, and I couldn't do that if there were no enforced laws against IP-theft.

Deeper than that, it also just strikes one at the core to see their pet project stolen or copied - for me, it feels akin to how you feel after your home has been burglarized, just an indescribable feeling of intrusion, a mental or figurative rape*

*To all, I'm not trying to put down anyone that has been physically raped, or even to suggest that being burglarized is on the same level as being physically raped, so don't take it that way, please.

On 9/5/2023 at 7:02 AM, T-Pac said:

And for anyone who likes to look at big corporations as faceless entities that they feel okay to steal from - please remember that those corporations are made up of people like me. Right now I'm working directly for one of those multi-billion dollar entertainment companies, and for the past month I've had to watch my friends get laid-off left and right because it's been a difficult year for the company financially.

I don't think anyone here does that - we are all adults, with jobs and an income stream. We can afford to purchase games, and most likely, we do so and aren't just swapping warez. Even many of the hotbeds of piracy years ago (Taiwan, Hong Kong, Thailand, Central and Eastern Europe, South America) have markets that have matured, and people are now purchasing official games, rather than bootlegs. 

The people who tend to justify piracy due to the faceless corporation analogy are generally kids / teenagers or extremely poor people who can't afford the products. As we discussed earlier, these groups wouldn't have been purchasing said item to begin with. Why do they make such justifications regarding downloading and bootlegging the products? Likely because they aren't bad people, and don't want to think of themselves on the same level as smash-and-grab lootists or convenience store robbers. 

On 9/5/2023 at 7:02 AM, T-Pac said:

Sure - IP theft may not affect margins on a large scale, but when small-scale financial losses make the difference between me and my co-workers being employed or not, I care. I wish more people cared, too.

If everyone in your target market is stealing your IP, you have a problem as a company and need to rethink what you're doing, whereas stolen bits that are out of your target market are not going to affect margins. In some cases it even helps increase growth in the future, i.e. Microsoft with Windows, Nintendo, Konami, etc with brand recognition. In addition, sometimes it makes media or products accessible to an unattended market, and there's such a warm reception that the company can now market there as well, escalating profits.

Playing unofficial translations of games would be an example of this. Unofficial translations of manga or anime would be another large one.

On 9/5/2023 at 7:02 AM, T-Pac said:

We need more good, creative art in the world, and stealing it from others isn't how I want to see that perpetuated.

Yeah, I don't think IP theft is a good thing, but at the same time, it's not necessarily the monster or devil in the room that so many people try to make it out to be.

[fcgamer | 4,729]

Here's an interesting article:

In Fashion, Bootlegging Is No Longer Something to Hide, but to Flout - GARAGE (vice.com)

[fcgamer | 4,729]

Here's another interesting article:

25 of the Most Historically Significant Bootlegs (vulture.com)

[Tyree_Cooper | 757]

oh look another of those threads