PC game piracy in US estimated at 75-80%

one of the big time game makers needs to take a cue from Radiohead. for those of you not familiar, Radiohead released their latest album on their own website for "whatever you want to pay us". by selling it on their own, they didn't need a publisher so they didn't have to pay the publisher's crazy fees. i'll have to go find the figures but it turns out that with an average take of around 4 pounds (i think that's what it was) per CD, they are making more money than if they had been with a lable. the publishers take that much money.

let the gamers pay what they feel the game is worth. it will be a lot less than the $50 they take now, but they would have less pirating and by not using a publisher i bet they would make more than they are now. there have been so many games that i've played that just aren't worth $50 so i won't buy them. if i could pay about $25-$30 i would do it. someone should try it once... it worked for Radiohead.

marklar123

The problem is that videogames have WAAAAY higher production costs than radiohead's album. You need 2 or more years worth of salaries for the whole dev team, all the computer equipment they need to use, and tons of other costs. Easily in the tens of millions for a AAA game.

one of the big time game makers needs to take a cue from Radiohead. for those of you not familiar, Radiohead released their latest album on their own website for "whatever you want to pay us". by selling it on their own, they didn't need a publisher so they didn't have to pay the publisher's crazy fees. i'll have to go find the figures but it turns out that with an average take of around 4 pounds (i think that's what it was) per CD, they are making more money than if they had been with a lable. the publishers take that much money.

let the gamers pay what they feel the game is worth. it will be a lot less than the $50 they take now, but they would have less pirating and by not using a publisher i bet they would make more than they are now. there have been so many games that i've played that just aren't worth $50 so i won't buy them. if i could pay about $25-$30 i would do it. someone should try it once... it worked for Radiohead.

marklar123

Doesn't piracy already do this? People pirate a game, see if they would want to buy it, and if they like it they'll buy it.

[QUOTE="CubePrime_basic"]

[QUOTE="Tuzolord"]What a lie, I know so many people (who play pc games) that dont even know how to download a Torrent.spacedog1973

Again most of them don't play online, play games rated below 7 and have no clue about anything. They listen to hip-hop, only think about money and go clubbing almost daily.

Sounds like one of those old anti-cannabis public service announcements. :cry: Listen, you pirates, this^^ could happen to you.

now that you mention it ;)

cannabis pwnz for the record.

[QUOTE="marklar123"]

one of the big time game makers needs to take a cue from Radiohead. for those of you not familiar, Radiohead released their latest album on their own website for "whatever you want to pay us". by selling it on their own, they didn't need a publisher so they didn't have to pay the publisher's crazy fees. i'll have to go find the figures but it turns out that with an average take of around 4 pounds (i think that's what it was) per CD, they are making more money than if they had been with a lable. the publishers take that much money.

let the gamers pay what they feel the game is worth. it will be a lot less than the $50 they take now, but they would have less pirating and by not using a publisher i bet they would make more than they are now. there have been so many games that i've played that just aren't worth $50 so i won't buy them. if i could pay about $25-$30 i would do it. someone should try it once... it worked for Radiohead.

GodLovesDead

Doesn't piracy already do this? People pirate a game, see if they would want to buy it, and if they like it they'll buy it.

I wonder how many people produce a false act of loyalty by saying they never pirate games or software when the truth is just the opposite??Snaptrap

For the purpose of these forums it's a great idea not to get into such details as it will lead to moderation.

piracy is undoubtedly a problem, but these figures seem very high. i hate software pirates - and the way they think they deserve a free ride, or are sticking it to the man.

do they not realise that the less money devs/publishers make, the less games they will make- and whats worse the less they will want to spend on them (meaning more and more copycat games with barely any changes) and that's bad for anyone who likes gaming.

I think that people are getting hooked on the whole "Pirates are thieving scum bags" thing, I know people that pirate software for 2 reasons.

1, Pirated versions are available first.

2, Pirated versions are easier to get a hold of.

The people that I know that pirate, will actually buy the game if it's any good but sometimes they don't because game is crap. The fact remains though that some people do pirate just because it's easier.

Personally, I think that if companies embraced digital distribution to the point where they were making their games available for download when the game goes Gold, there would be a reduction in piracy. Then the people that really want the game on disc, can wait a week or so, but those that are impatient can download now and play.

Don't get me wrong, there will always be people that are too cheap to buy and will pirate anyway, but I think it would reduce it.

Have fun

yes i think that it is possibly one of the worst things there is in the technology world for people too download cracks and then just take the game back, or just download the games, develepers are putting in so much money and time into making great games like:

-crysis

-cod 4

-ressistance

then people just pirate them, so bad

[QUOTE="Tuzolord"]What a lie, I know so many people (who play pc games) that dont even know how to download a Torrent.CubePrime_basic

Again most of them don't play online, play games rated below 7 and have no clue about anything. They listen to hip-hop, only think about money and go clubbing almost daily.

Sounds like its time to find new friends

do they not realise that the less money devs/publishers make, the less games they will make- and whats worse the less they will want to spend on them (meaning more and more copycat games with barely any changes) and that's bad for anyone who likes gaming.

matt120282

Yeah, I think they do realise this. That's sort of the point, ya know? Like, we don't want shoddy games, so if a shoddy game developer goes out of business, a job well done.

Behold the wall of text! Hopefully you are goofing off at work or something and enjoy the read...

That assertion is ridiculous, unfounded and I am very sure without any proof but I will add that I would not waste my time even going to read more about it given the obvious fallacy of that statement.

Someone else mentioned there will always be piracy and for as long as games run client side I would agree that is correct. Short of encrypting the entire game and requiring a key to unlock and run it which is unique per user, the only other way to exert full control is server side computing and even there creative hackers sometimes have a field day although it is rare in contrast to rampant piracy of software on the Internet today. Yes, piracy is rampant is not hard to believe if you use a search engine and poke around but numbers that high are laughable. I would say on the world wild web this would be very difficult to quantify.

I bring that up as I think the days of pirated software and to some extent other media possibly are numbered as we see a move towards a client - server model of distribution versus client only. There is a reason I believe that companies like Microsoft are developing services like Live Microsoft Office that will run server side and also why you see even game companies like Valve, EA and Ubi starting to explore this model of distribution. Traditional productivity apps will lead the way here but I think you can expect to see entertainment titles and possibly other media follow suit in the years to come. Right now the greatest issue probably centers on bandwidth and possibly startup and development costs as this technology rolls out and we see this happening right now. Google is another early player in this scenario with their now free office applications.

Making services and content free to Internet users until they are accepted and the value of them is proven has become something of a "traditional" method at this point of rolling out new Internet content in loss leader fashion until users come to desire and rely on it. At this point, you see content segment into limited free and the full content for a subscription or sometimes even one time fee. I believe this is why so many Google offerings which are all really in various forms of beta whether they call it that or not along with currently free Microsoft Live content will later all cost money to use when they have demonstrated real value and won acceptance.

By the time the client server model for retail applications starts becoming the norm I think Internet bandwidth will have improved enough to support moving gaming and other entertainment to this model as well. At that point, the pirating party is effectively over. The ramifications for publishers and developers in terms of fully capturing profit from their efforts is obvious and therefore no doubt strongly motivates the activity we are seeing presently in this direction.

Of course nobody can know timelines in advance on such things but when you consider how close we are to this now it could happen sooner than one might expect looking at it today. We have already seen how well this can work for a game for years now when you look at MMOs which generally have a lot of their content installed locally for performance reasons but are impossible to play without logging into an owned and paid account. Yes, I know about illegal free servers and perhaps illegal free content servers down the road could become the new piracy versus the self applied cracks to local installations prevalent today among those stealing software.

As it stands right now, a simple and very popular version of this is Valve's Steam. If I want to play my purchased copy of Counter-Strike Source purchased via Steam, the one and only way to do so is to logon to my account that is associated with that purchase. I like this for other reasons but this is very good for Valve as well since they have a lot of control over use here. Undoubtedly people have worked ways around this but I doubt with anywhere near the frequency of a stand alone retail boxed game that has no online ties beyond a serial number.

There are a lot of reasons this is going to come to be and not all of them are just good for the owners of intellectual properties of all sorts. For consumers this is going to mean you can purchase virtually all of the media you want from the comfort of home without driving to your local retailer and your ownership is not tied to some physical boxed item or plastic disc that can be lost, damaged, etc. In this world to come, my house could burn to the ground in the worst case scenario and assuming I live, when I rebuild I can go online and retrieve all of my digital belongings. It means I can access all of my digital belongings from anywhere and everywhere as time goes by. This is going to be a wonderful thing down the road in my opinion. I already like it where I can find it, such as with Valve's Steam for example.

Even library books are now available online in readable and audio formats in growing numbers. All media is going to come to us this way and given enough time, this will become the norm not the exception.

People have soundly rejected DRM but down the line improved forms of rights management will come to be that take into account traditional rights and uses of media we've historically had with physical copies of it in our possession. I can see a time coming when it won't be a big deal to loan a copy of anything I digitally own to a friend or family member with constraints just like the physical lending of books, cds, etc. When I loan it, they can use it and I can't. When they give it back, I can use it and they can't. This is exactly how lending someone a book or music CD works with physical media and I would be willing to be this is eventually implemented in an easy to use fashion for common forms of digital media. It almost has to happen for the masses to accept and move to it I would think. At that point, nobody can complain about being limited in ways they were not in the physical world eliminating that objection to the control publishers want. P2P sharing lovers will complain plenty but in legal and moral terms those complaints are baseless however passionately made.

It's a very interesting subject. I already use Microsoft's Live suite of online software and have signed up for the Office online beta which I expect is eventually going to be the only way to run office. It's just a matter of time. These guys want their hard earned money - all of it. I'd be willing to bet most software, including games, even console games, is all or nearly all client server delivered within about a decade or less.

linmukai

Which brings me to games. Blizzard have already stumbled across the formula of monthly payments to play their game, I am surprised that they still make people pay for the game to start with, if I was them I would just give the game away and try and sign up as many people as I could to monthly payments, maybe thats what they already do?. N3xus9

they sort of do. you can buy it in store or you can download it online.

If server-side is so damn great, why do hackers have a field day stealing or creating Steam accounts to play free games with? I think you should look past the technology and understand the motivation of these people.SKaREO

Is it at the same level as people downloading torrents?

As server side becomes more ubiquitous it will become harder and harder to trick the system. When a user is given access based on their login/password, IP address and MAC address + how many other verifications they want to throw in there. Only the really determined will be able to fool the system.

Whereas nowadays any idiot with a net connection and the ability to search and download torrents can pirate a game.

[QUOTE="SKaREO"]If server-side is so damn great, why do hackers have a field day stealing or creating Steam accounts to play free games with? I think you should look past the technology and understand the motivation of these people.N3xus9

Is it at the same level as people downloading torrents?

As server side becomes more ubiquitous it will become harder and harder to trick the system. When a user is given access based on their login/password, IP address and MAC address + how many other verifications they want to throw in there. Only the really determined will be able to fool the system.

Whereas nowadays any idiot with a net connection and the ability to search and download torrents can pirate a game.

Look what happened when DRM came out, the ultimate protection to piracy! LOL. Customers were complaining so much they stopped buying games with SecureROM, etc. Also, you say any idiot can download torrents, but that's simply not true. It takes a bit of knowledge to understand how to use torrents, just as it takes a bit of knowledge to hack a server-side application. As for checking MAC addresses, IP addresses, login/password, all of these things can easily be spoofed. So we can't play the game if the master server goes down? That's no too convenient.

In the end, I see server-side based applications restricting access to paying customers more than it deters the current piracy statistics.

Well my mum can download torrents, but she sure as hell won't be hacking a server.

I am not saying it's foolproof, especially not with todays technology. But if you don't believe that this is the way of the future then there is nothing that I can say that will convince you. Only time and research into why the big players are following this path will change that.

But hey it is a while away still, don't worry it aint here yet!

[QUOTE="matt120282"]

do they not realise that the less money devs/publishers make, the less games they will make- and whats worse the less they will want to spend on them (meaning more and more copycat games with barely any changes) and that's bad for anyone who likes gaming.

SKaREO

Yeah, I think they do realise this. That's sort of the point, ya know? Like, we don't want shoddy games, so if a shoddy game developer goes out of business, a job well done.

but do you not think if devs/publishers dont make any money from innovative games which get pirated, they will be more rather than less likely to make cruddy knock off games (which cost less to develop)

and also if a developer is "Shoddy" then surely no one would want to play the game, whether it be legally or illegally, so its not going to be the "shoddy" devs affected by piracy as much as the good ones

Look what happened when DRM came out, the ultimate protection to piracy! LOL. Customers were complaining so much they stopped buying games with SecureROM, etc. Also, you say any idiot can download torrents, but that's simply not true. It takes a bit of knowledge to understand how to use torrents, just as it takes a bit of knowledge to hack a server-side application. As for checking MAC addresses, IP addresses, login/password, all of these things can easily be spoofed. So we can't play the game if the master server goes down? That's no too convenient.

In the end, I see server-side based applications restricting access to paying customers more than it deters the current piracy statistics.

SKaREO

Oh come on! Did you just compare hacking a server to downloading from a bittorrent?

What if you download a program to hack the server-side application? Someone has to crack something for it to work. Same with torrents, would be sort of useless to download stuff that haven't been cracked. The point I'm making is that a little bit of knowledge can go a long way. One guy can write a program to crack server-side apps and then distribute it to everyone else via a torrent.

There's really no difference except for the method required to produce the same effect, people will still use it the same way.

let the gamers pay what they feel the game is worth. it will be a lot less than the $50 they take now, but they would have less pirating and by not using a publisher i bet they would make more than they are now. there have been so many games that i've played that just aren't worth $50 so i won't buy them. if i could pay about $25-$30 i would do it. someone should try it once... it worked for Radiohead.

marklar123

I agree with this in a way. I purchase games but if a game looks mediocre I either wont' buy it or wait until I see itin a bargain bin 3 or 4 years later fi I can find it at all. With yrou method I woudl be willing to pay $15 to $20 for a mediocre game when it comes out. The only problem I see is don't most of these games cost millions of dollars to develop so I can't see a company betting there return on investment on the generosity fo the gamign community.

What if you download a program to hack the server-side application? Someone has to crack something for it to work. Same with torrents, would be sort of useless to download stuff that haven't been cracked. The point I'm making is that a little bit of knowledge can go a long way. One guy can write a program to crack server-side apps and then distribute it to everyone else via a torrent.

There's really no difference except for the method required to produce the same effect, people will still use it the same way.

SKaREO

There is a difference between hacking a server-side application and using a program that someone else DEVELOPED to break the security. See, when you state hacking/cracking it means that you have extensive knowledge of either networking or programming to allow you to find a back door to the security measures. Using a program that automatically does the deed for you isn't hacking, it is basically using microsoft word. Launch and go.

As for you saying you can spoof logins/passwords, MAC addresses, etc. Most people don't have the knowledge to do this. Hell, I can turn my wireless on and see at least 50% of the wireless networks unsecured. I bet you any money that if I went up to their door and asked them if they could secure their wireless they would scratch their head and wonder what I'm talking about.

[QUOTE="SKaREO"]

What if you download a program to hack the server-side application? Someone has to crack something for it to work. Same with torrents, would be sort of useless to download stuff that haven't been cracked. The point I'm making is that a little bit of knowledge can go a long way. One guy can write a program to crack server-side apps and then distribute it to everyone else via a torrent.

There's really no difference except for the method required to produce the same effect, people will still use it the same way.

Cdscottie

There is a difference between hacking a server-side application and using a program that someone else DEVELOPED to break the security. See, when you state hacking/cracking it means that you have extensive knowledge of either networking or programming to allow you to find a back door to the security measures. Using a program that automatically does the deed for you isn't hacking, it is basically using microsoft word. Launch and go.

As for you saying you can spoof logins/passwords, MAC addresses, etc. Most people don't have the knowledge to do this. Hell, I can turn my wireless on and see at least 50% of the wireless networks unsecured. I bet you any money that if I went up to their door and asked them if they could secure their wireless they would scratch their head and wonder what I'm talking about.

I leave my wireless unsecured just so I can catch someone leeching my internet. In fact, there's a lot of people who know how to fish around by not encrypting their network. It's not common obviously but whoever leeches off my internet gets a good ol' Goatse bomb.

If piracy required any effort (as stated in my rather out-of-control 400 reply thread), then piracy would be greatly reduced to mere shreds of what it once was.

[QUOTE="SKaREO"]

What if you download a program to hack the server-side application? Someone has to crack something for it to work. Same with torrents, would be sort of useless to download stuff that haven't been cracked. The point I'm making is that a little bit of knowledge can go a long way. One guy can write a program to crack server-side apps and then distribute it to everyone else via a torrent.

There's really no difference except for the method required to produce the same effect, people will still use it the same way.

Cdscottie

There is a difference between hacking a server-side application and using a program that someone else DEVELOPED to break the security. See, when you state hacking/cracking it means that you have extensive knowledge of either networking or programming to allow you to find a back door to the security measures. Using a program that automatically does the deed for you isn't hacking, it is basically using microsoft word. Launch and go.

As for you saying you can spoof logins/passwords, MAC addresses, etc. Most people don't have the knowledge to do this. Hell, I can turn my wireless on and see at least 50% of the wireless networks unsecured. I bet you any money that if I went up to their door and asked them if they could secure their wireless they would scratch their head and wonder what I'm talking about.

'Joe Bloggs' doesn't need the knowledge to crack a server side app or whatever security measure is put in place, someone will do it for them and share that info and be proud of being the first to do so.

We have to go beyond this tightening up of things, the worship of more and more controls, as if everything becomes great if only we added more security and policing to things.

The boittom line is people will pirate and continue to pirate and there is nothing anyone can do about it, now and forever. Instead of trying to find ways to thwart this reality, finding reasons as to why this happens and solutions to it which do not come with restrictions is the only possible workable outcome.

People want to play games and cannot affrod them. This is the obvious fact. Well, perhaps the games are overpriced? Not worth the money that they are marked with? Over hyped, under deliver? Has anyone considered this as the possible problem? Certainly you rarely hear devs telling us that the reason their game sold so badly was becasue it sucked. And I wouldn't expect to hear that either.

There is too much profit in the gaming industry, too much of our moeny taken - even - with the supposidly high 'theft' of their work. If anyone is suffering for pirating, its the gaming public for having to hear devs whining and whinging because they work hard for less than they think they should get.

Well, join us in the real world.:lol:

[QUOTE="marklar123"]

let the gamers pay what they feel the game is worth. it will be a lot less than the $50 they take now, but they would have less pirating and by not using a publisher i bet they would make more than they are now. there have been so many games that i've played that just aren't worth $50 so i won't buy them. if i could pay about $25-$30 i would do it. someone should try it once... it worked for Radiohead.

rudyroundhead

I agree with this in a way. I purchase games but if a game looks mediocre I either wont' buy it or wait until I see itin a bargain bin 3 or 4 years later fi I can find it at all. With yrou method I woudl be willing to pay $15 to $20 for a mediocre game when it comes out. The only problem I see is don't most of these games cost millions of dollars to develop so I can't see a company betting there return on investment on the generosity fo the gamign community.

i see what you're saying. i never really thought about how much more it costs to make a video game vs. a music album. be that as it may, i still think there's got to be a way around this. it might just be a matter of someone willing to take the risk. IMO it's gonna have to be an established IP so people will already want to play it. i think this could be perfect for Counter Strike 3 (when they release it) everyone knows it so there really wouldn't have to be any advertising. and besides, they'll get enough press for "giving away the game" just like Radiohead got a ton of press for what they did.

with a game like CS3, it wouldn't really be considered a full game so they wouldn't have to charge as much either- limiting the total potential loss in the event of failure. also, Valve already owns it's own distributing platform- another reason i think it would work. they're already gonna have their own game engine so they wouldn't have to pay to license it. i really feel it could work. on top of that, i think Valve is well off enough to be able to "float" if it backfires. i just don't see this happening though. i really feel this could work.

Whats so hard to believe? When was the last time there was a good exclusive or even a good pc game released at all?zepfya

February.

10-1 console sales to PC should have no bearing on the piracy of PC titles.

I buy my games, I enjoy supporting the platform, I'm aware I support it for pirates and that makes me sad that those people contribute nothing or very little to the games they love to play.

I also don't think people should pirate games to try them, thats what we have reviews, demos for.

PC game sales are rising anyway.

nutcrackr

Ha-ha! I know what you are talking about. In my country piracy of software is accepted; when you buy a new computer you get a free (pirated) copy of Windows and MS Office, so basically the concept of paying for software didn't exist for a long time.

I am happy to say that things are changing now. I am buying my games at retail and even though they are expensive, I'll buy a few titles a year that will last me long enough. It's a far more rewarding experience and I am glad I get to support PC gaming in whatever little way I can.

[QUOTE="Cdscottie"][QUOTE="SKaREO"]

What if you download a program to hack the server-side application? Someone has to crack something for it to work. Same with torrents, would be sort of useless to download stuff that haven't been cracked. The point I'm making is that a little bit of knowledge can go a long way. One guy can write a program to crack server-side apps and then distribute it to everyone else via a torrent.

There's really no difference except for the method required to produce the same effect, people will still use it the same way.

GodLovesDead

There is a difference between hacking a server-side application and using a program that someone else DEVELOPED to break the security. See, when you state hacking/cracking it means that you have extensive knowledge of either networking or programming to allow you to find a back door to the security measures. Using a program that automatically does the deed for you isn't hacking, it is basically using microsoft word. Launch and go.

As for you saying you can spoof logins/passwords, MAC addresses, etc. Most people don't have the knowledge to do this. Hell, I can turn my wireless on and see at least 50% of the wireless networks unsecured. I bet you any money that if I went up to their door and asked them if they could secure their wireless they would scratch their head and wonder what I'm talking about.

I leave my wireless unsecured just so I can catch someone leeching my internet. In fact, there's a lot of people who know how to fish around by not encrypting their network. It's not common obviously but whoever leeches off my internet gets a good ol' Goatse bomb.

If piracy required any effort (as stated in my rather out-of-control 400 reply thread), then piracy would be greatly reduced to mere shreds of what it once was.

I have had my wireless unsecured but that was due to me MAC filtering the wireless connection. As for people fishing......ya, not a common sight where I live. I come from an area where computers may be used a lot in businesses but 85% of people only know how to log in, do their work, browse the net, and check their mail. Trust me on this....I've seen people say Veesta instead of Vista when we have a town in the province called BonaVISTA. It also doesn't help that most younger people are leaving the province and only leaving the aging population to fill the jobs and have to move with the times....which can be painful when it comes to computers.

90% of people who want to play the game, as opposed to the people who have any intention of buying it. I think the two are being confused.spacedog1973

[QUOTE="spacedog1973"]90% of people who want to play the game, as opposed to the people who have any intention of buying it. I think the two are being confused.xMedHeadx

No. A Sale means a purchase. A purchase in this context means money. If someone didn't intend to pay now or ever, then no money was lost. We can talk about stolen intellectual property or electronic property or copyright whatever till the cows come home, but lost money it ain't until someone sells that item for money which instead of going to the rightful owners - in this case the game devs and publsihers - it goes to someone else.

That isn't what is being discussed here.

[QUOTE="spacedog1973"]90% of people who want to play the game, as opposed to the people who have any intention of buying it. I think the two are being confused.xMedHeadx

Physical products that took resources to make does not equate to copywrite property.. You are stealing the use for the license there is a difference.. The difference being is that person may not have bought the game or even had access to the game to begin with...

No one is not saying piracy is wrong.. BUT we are saying that they can not be equated to direct losses...

I could play 100 games in a whole year but i only buy 10 or 15 whoever thinks i was going to buy all 100 games if i couldnt pirate them must be really stupid. From those 100 games i buy 90 of them i just try and delete them 1 day after because they just suck...

You cant count every download as a lost sale for god sake thats so freaking stupid...

What pisses developers is that they cant cheat u into buying their crappy games thats all... and that ppl try the full game and after that decide if they are going to buy it...

hahaha

yah, online gaming > pirates, unless you sell your cd keys

You really think only PC games are pirated?

Everything can be stolen, consoles and all...

you just slept, cuz you sold a few thousand units in the golden era
when n#((#az would buy anything on the shelf
but those days are through, and you are through with them - immortal technique

i think this message is perfect for the current situation..these greedy mofos want to switch to a closed platform because they are afraid some 12 year old is gonna get a free copy of shootamonster or wahtever..give me a break..

what happened to when people made things for the feeling it gave them to know they created something amazing?

humble yourselves and realize we do want to pay for your products if you put your heart in them, but if you dont then dont go around crying and **** because you cant sell a million copies of some piece of crap game

there is a MASSIVE saturation of games, way too many for everyone to buy..and to pretend like you are losing all this revenue when we ahve these many options is absurb..sure so so and so might have pirated whatever game but what games did they buy? sure theres some people who wont pay for anything? but who cares it obviously isnt worth it to them..do you really care that much if someone plays your game and doesnt give you 50 dollars? do you really think you deserve to punish them?