Its only viewed this way because the big companies that make these products say so. Makes the people who don't know anything about piracy think that piracy is a sure-fire way to kill the industry.

Personally, I like the term "Piracy", and calling us pirates, it sounds kinda awesome.

Vampire cat:
You know, Bethesda's got it... And Mojang too. Release great games at fair prices with wide mod support for the PC, and your name will last forever...

Couldn't have said it better myself, unless I included VALVe in the mix. Seriously, they're rolling in dough.

Vampire cat:

...
How the hell did Minecraft sell so well if one assumes 95% of those playing are doing so on a pirated version?! Half of the PC owners in the world must be playing! Or maybe people actually bought Minecraft for real instead of pirating it because Mojang hasn't been complete cocks...

You know, Bethesda's got it... And Mojang too. Release great games at fair prices with wide mod support for the PC, and your name will last forever...

I'm pretty sure that's the logic behind it.
Although, I bought minecraft practically straight after ZP reviewed it, and I noticed a little while later that most of the people in my software design class were playing pirated versions of it. There was only me and some other kid who actually bought it out of like 7 people in the class playing it.

It's immensly popular + it would feel far worse to steal from an indie gaming company = less piracy.

Oh, also, it's really easy to access, all you have to do is download it, register an account and buy it and vola, you own it forever. A lot less screwing around than a lot of other games, with registration codes and shit.

On one side we have Ubisoft, bitching aboud baaad pirates and how people don't like it when Ubisoft treates them like shit for actual buying the game.

On the other side we have Gabe who fills his fifth pool with money because he actually realised that the best way to combat piracy is better service.

Just for some people protecting Ubisoft in their piracy bitching: Russia, the land of software pirates, is one of the biggest continental markets of Valve. Yes, those people there pump their money into games when they actually get the chance and a good enough service.

And the only reason they believe they have an 'increase' in piracy is probably because people who bought their games initially went out of their way to crack it to get rid of the super annoying always-online DRM. Another thing they don't quite seem to grasp is that for every pirated copy of the game, that doesn't necessarily mean a lost sale. Plenty of people pirate games to either use it as a 'demo' or just to test if it runs on their PC rig. And a lot of them actually buy the game afterwards if they feel it's worth it.

So Ubisoft just needs to get it's head out of it's ass and start to think about how to NOT alienate your customers. And instead think of how to best please your customers so they keep coming back and spending their money. Like mentioned above; Valve, Bethesda, etc.

It's not ignorance. I highly doubt they don't know the reality of piracy. It's not unlike what they're trying to do with second-hand purchases now; they relied on Gamestop's rotten business model and suddenly they've vilified the consumer who looks for an affordable product. The only reason they combat piracy with such fervor is simply because they want to maximize their profits.

In addition, the supposition that their audience is mostly relied on piracy is one that's just not true. People who take gaming seriously, the people who will consider spending money on more than one game every six months are customers that live for this kind of thing; for the pretty case with the shiny manuals (which companies themselves have effectively eliminated, but let's not dwell on hypocricy), the DLC and just the inherent joy of knowing that you own a game. It's always been like that, it'll always be like that. The free market is based upon this principle and it hasn't failed yet.

Not to mention that the games industry owes a lot to piracy. It wouldn't have been nearly as big today if not for it. Everyone who has downloaded a game off the Internet in here has undoubtedly at least one story according to which they purchased the product afterwards regardless (and usually without this intention having been on the table originally). What many pretend to not understand is that piracy can be a tool they can use to their advantage.

Alternatively, we can always just pretend it's the audience's fault that their barrage of sub-par titles that ship with DRM and bad controls get burried.

saucecode:
Its only viewed this way because the big companies that make these products say so. Makes the people who don't know anything about piracy think that piracy is a sure-fire way to kill the industry.

Personally, I like the term "Piracy", and calling us pirates, it sounds kinda awesome.

You still shouldn't pirate though. Of course it won't "kill" the industry, but it damages it. Game devs are already criminally underpaid as it is and the more money the company loses, the more of a chance there is that those devs will loose their jobs as well, simply because the company isn't performing as well as it should be.
But look who I'm taking to. A 13-year-old Java protigy such as yourself? You can probably pirate whatever you want. But I just wanted to remind you that just because you can doesn't automatically make it right.

As for you OP, I just wanted to note about minecraft that you have to remember that it was put together by one person. And at the time, all busy with the creativity of it, that one person probably didn't pay a lot of (if any) attention to protecting the software from piracy.
So Minecraft is already a very special sort of game in that sense anyway. Other, more professionally crafted games are harder to distribute illegally.

And as a final note, I think you might have used a different analogy than the War on Terror. I know you didn't mean it in that way, but what can be very much taken away from your statement is that "we should just let terrorists perform their attacks and not resist because it's pointless anyway".
That's pretty insensitive to all the people who have lost loved ones to those attacks and it undermines all the work that's being done by NATO and the national securities of the West to combat that terrorism. Personally, for instance, I like the fact that there are people out there stopping more terrorist acts from occurring, rather than just letting the extremists run riot.

The ratio of first sales to piracy on the PC is only getting lower and lower and the fools at Ubisoft choose to complain to PC gamers now.

Before 2000, many PC gamers typically couldn't even buy PC games in town even if they wanted to and had to go far out of their way to get a box. Piracy was the only norm then.
Around 2000 games started to get on the shelves in the smaller places too and alot more gamers started to actually buying games instead of copying cracked versions.
In the last few years we see PC games disappearing from shelves again, but mailorder is still flying and digital sales are skyrocketing.

While triple-A games still sell less on PC than on the 360 and PS3, the difference is not all that much (counting digital sales). Since most we get is PC ports and making a decent PC port of a 360 game is relatively easy and cheap, not going PC is just leaving a large market to competing publishers.

yahaaa, audience aliented
if its such an issue, why not sub-contact out the pc porting

its Veiwed as a Major Problem because the thought of not getting EVERY cent outta people they can, scares some of the Execs, companys and record Labels

veloper:
The ratio of first sales to piracy on the PC is only getting lower and lower and the fools at Ubisoft choose to complain to PC gamers now.

Before 2000, many PC gamers typically couldn't even buy PC games in town even if they wanted to and had to go far out of their way to get a box. Piracy was the only norm then.
Around 2000 games started to get on the shelves in the smaller places too and alot more gamers started to actually buying games instead of copying cracked versions.
In the last few years we see PC games disappearing from shelves again, but mailorder is still flying and digital sales are skyrocketing.

While triple-A games still sell less on PC than on the 360 and PS3, the difference is not all that much (counting digital sales). Since most we get is PC ports and making a decent PC port of a 360 game is relatively easy and cheap, not going PC is just leaving a large market to competing publishers.

I remember the days of share-ware, and I often think to myself if that's the right way to go about things. How things have changed, though.

I don't think anyone can deny that piracy isn't an issue --it simply is-- but adapting distribution to better service models has shown great potential as retail gasps its last dying breaths. Give consumers good deals and a 'no bullshit' way of getting them their entertainment and you reduce the impetus to acquire a product through less ethical means. I think that Ubisoft has been extraordinarily unprofessional recently and is alienating potential customers by treating them with contempt. There is no way I will touch a Ubisoft game because the quality of their products and service are exceptionally mediocre.

At the end of the day those who want to pirate will. Looking at recent releases which have turned over large amounts of cash on the PC, it's facetious to say that PC gamers are inherently all pirates. I do believe that the debate has been blown out of proportion as well, as certain sales charts (which ironically factor in digital distribution) show PC gaming to be lucrative when offering a good product/service and that a large proportion of pirated software is being distributed in third world and/or isolated regions.... Oh, and China.

If you can make it harder for pirates to get their games to work whilst simultaneously making it easier for legitimate customers to enjoy their experience at a reasonable cost then you come out on top.

The industry has a lot of maturing ahead of it.

I'm not going to touch on the "Piracy is bad" issue right now, because my thoughts are so conveluted and long-winded about it. However, what I will say is that: I've played most of my ubisoft games on a console, bought new. Now I will buy an ubisoft game only if I find it used, because I don't want to support such disrespect towards a customerbase.

Still Life:

veloper:
The ratio of first sales to piracy on the PC is only getting lower and lower and the fools at Ubisoft choose to complain to PC gamers now.

Before 2000, many PC gamers typically couldn't even buy PC games in town even if they wanted to and had to go far out of their way to get a box. Piracy was the only norm then.
Around 2000 games started to get on the shelves in the smaller places too and alot more gamers started to actually buying games instead of copying cracked versions.
In the last few years we see PC games disappearing from shelves again, but mailorder is still flying and digital sales are skyrocketing.

While triple-A games still sell less on PC than on the 360 and PS3, the difference is not all that much (counting digital sales). Since most we get is PC ports and making a decent PC port of a 360 game is relatively easy and cheap, not going PC is just leaving a large market to competing publishers.

I remember the days of share-ware, and I often think to myself if that's the right way to go about things. How things have changed, though.

I don't think anyone can deny that piracy isn't an issue --it simply is-- but adapting distribution to better service models has shown great potential as retail gasps its last dying breaths. Give consumers good deals and a 'no bullshit' way of getting them their entertainment and you reduce the impetus to acquire a product through less ethical means. I think that Ubisoft has been extraordinarily unprofessional recently and is alienating potential customers by treating them with contempt. There is no way I will touch a Ubisoft game because the quality of their products and service are exceptionally mediocre.

At the end of the day those who want to pirate will. Looking at recent releases which have turned over large amounts of cash on the PC, it's facetious to say that PC gamers are inherently all pirates. I do believe that the debate has been blown out of proportion as well, as certain sales charts (which ironically factor in digital distribution) show PC gaming to be lucrative when offering a good product/service and that a large proportion of pirated software is being distributed in third world and/or isolated regions.... Oh, and China.

If you can make it harder for pirates to get their games to work whilst simultaneously making it easier for legitimate customers to enjoy their experience at a reasonable cost then you come out on top.

The industry has a lot of maturing ahead of it.

Piracy may be an issue, but it's also a given, because people simply can. It's easy and no measures can stop it.

The baseline for game sales, with or without piracy, is ZERO and the only way to get people to give you money is to appeal to them.

Whether a game is copied illegally, traded or resold, the publisher makes no money anyway, though the game studio may still receive wider recognition this way (a small positive side-effect of piracy), so making gamers wanting to support the type of games you make is everything. That means fans, enthousiasts and the rare honest fool.

First sales during the important first weeks typically come from fans, so image and relations are the key to everything.

Vampire cat:
The flailing has been endless, so well... The question up for discussion is in bold just bellow here, and there is no TL;DR... This is the amount of text I felt I needed, so this is the amount of text there is. Enjoy, hoping for some nice grown-up discussion.

Why is it piracy is viewed as such a majorly destructive force in PC gaming?

For a comparable example, lets look at the music industry. Being substantially larger it's granted easier to keep afloat, but in said industry it is generally agreed that the sharing of Mp3's has in the end turned out to be a positive and at times lucrative arangement for artists, publishers and consumers alike. Artists can much more easily get their music out there and become known. As a result publishers save millions if not billions on advertizing every year, and they can put out a vast number of artists compared to before, where one had to get the CDs into shops and make sure to rustle up some awareness and interest in the product, a massively expensive thing to do! Now YouTube does the advertizing for you, something that benefits the consumer too, by allowing us to "look in the box" before making the buy. Despite global file sharing, the music industry is posting record earnings.

This right here is where I stopped reading.

If you're going to use the music industry as an analogy, at least try to do some research first, rather than pulling self-serving arguments from out of nowhere.

The music industry has not benefitted from piracy. The music industry has experienced drop in profits year after year because people would rather pirate music than buy it. Last year alone, profits were down by 8.4% from the prior year. The UK music industry lost £189 million in 2011 alone because of piracy.

Pardon me if this comes across as rude, but your talk of the music industry posting 'record earnings' is absolute bullshit. EMI, one of the oldest and biggest major label publishers in the world has just been sold off because its debts were getting so bad. That is not the sign of a healthy industry in the middle of a digital boom. It's the sign of an industry struggling to carry on as more and more of its income dwindles to nothing.

The only reason artists make any money now is because most of them are willing to go out and slog it on the road for a couple of years at a time. Record sales provide fuck all income any more. Piracy does not act as free advertising, except for the occasional music fan who will decide to go and see a band whose album they downloaded.

There's no excusing Ubisoft for being dicks. But that doesn't give you the right to completely make up arguments to suit your purposes. The music industry is in real trouble. Piracy has not had any effect apart from reducing the industry's income by a substantial amount. Trying to paint it as some sort of digital saviour for artists is hyperbolic at best, and downright ignorant at worst.

Piracy is viewed as an issue... because it is an issue. It's a universal constant at this point: if you make it, someone will pirate it. Guaranteed.

Piracy is as easy as:
1. Go to http://www.Google.com
2. Type in "[Insert Game Name Here] + torrent"
3. Download your free game.

It's insane that people argue for it, or argue that it - in fact - is actually a good thing. By your logic OP: if I stole more food, clothes and house hold items I'd find more stuff I'd like, and then buy more - resulting in more money to people I'm stealing from?
This is the logic you're applying here?

Piracy hurts people.
Notice how only AAA games get shelf space at stores, now-a-days? Notice how "Twilight" movies and remakes are the only thing making consistant money these days? This is piracy: if people don't know the brand, they pirate it.
This is why we see remakes, rehashes, retreads and "safe" projects year after year. No original Sci-Fi movies? No original concept large scale video games? This is why.

Some of pirates then buy it, yes, but most don't. They just complain about it when their favourite pirated game, movie, music and TV shows don't receive the financial backing they feel they deserve. And they wonder why other people don't pay for it...

I don't agree with DRM. I don't agree with "Always Online" and allowing people to snoop through my personal files. I don't agree with that kind of Big Brother bullshit.
But don't think for one second that piracy is anything other than immature cheapskates with an inflated sense of entitlement looking to get the best stuff on the market for free because "hey man, corporations, man, are bullshit, ya know man?"

Vampire cat:

For a comparable example, lets look at the music industry. Being substantially larger it's granted easier to keep afloat, but in said industry it is generally agreed that the sharing of Mp3's has in the end turned out to be a positive and at times lucrative arangement for artists, publishers and consumers alike.

Ummm...Despite being "generally agreed" upon....

The argument is still raging in the music industry and the RIAA are still attacking pirates, suspected pirates, and the rights of the consumer in general. While the record industry is now more progressive than the games industry, it's not quite to a point where they're willing to actually agree upon this treatise.

THEY started the "used is the same as stealing" argument, by the way, and they still have rabid fanboys who are against piracy and used sales. You want to thank someone for the current assault on used gaming? That would be the record industry.

saucecode:
Its only viewed this way because the big companies that make these products say so. Makes the people who don't know anything about piracy think that piracy is a sure-fire way to kill the industry.

Personally, I like the term "Piracy", and calling us pirates, it sounds kinda awesome.

^This, a thousand times this.

And I agree with you OP about the music industry comparison. Every single band I listen to, I started listening to thanks to pirated music (not saying I pirated it, mind you, I get CDs given to me by friends to check something out) or because someone lent me their CD (which in the game business, is apparently a "crime" and I think nothing but the worst of that). Every single band I respect and like, I buy copies of new CDs of and go to their concerts whenever I get a chance.

Now, gaming is both the smallest and the most profitable media industry. Those two facts ought to tell you - piracy is not a serious issue. I also don't remember the last time I saw a good studio closing down and blaming piracy. It's always the people with shitty titles (hi Ghost Recon!) that refuse to publicly face the fact their game sucked.

Vampire cat:
What I meant was, you cant effectively combat piracy in the same way you cant terrorism because it's impossible to cover all angles. There will always be SOMEONE that slips trough. In my country Norway there was a terror attack by a single person earlier this year, and after his horrible actions everyone was crying "why wasn't he stopped before?!" Well, how do you spot a person like that? Should we detain everyone with a shaky childhood just because they MAY become terrorists? One cannot get EVERY person that pirates games, and one can't easily secure a game from every angle of attack. If they stopped concentrating on protecting the game and put the money into making a great game that people would WANT to pay for, everyone would be winners.

Call me a cynic, but it sounds like you're trying to catch more flies with honey than vinegar and in this situation I can't help making up a balance of what that means.
What you're saying is that if you spend less resources protecting your software and more on improving it, this will then diminish piracy. But isn't at the same time a game with less protection and a better quality also a more lucrative possession and therefore a greater incentive to pirate it?
You see, you say that you can't combat all angles, but that's not the way I see combat, since combating to me means covering all angles possible, so that the ones you can't cover cause minimum damage.
Anyway, I'd also like to go back to the War on Terror thing, as I agree it's a bit of a tangent, but it's the same basic principle. Do you really believe that extremists are going to stop killing people if we keep our mouths shut about it?
How many eyes were on Norwegian terrorism when this happened? Because I'll wager there weren't a lot, but it still happened. Shouldn't we then at least put this knowledge that we've gained of the situation to good use so as to help ensure that this doesn't happen again?

Vrach:
Now, gaming is both the smallest and the most profitable media industry.

Now this intrigues me, because last time I checked the video game industry was the largest entertainment industry in the world, both in terms of capital and staff. So what exactly do you mean when you say that it's the "smallest media industry"?

Because a song takes like...a week to record/touch up. And only costs what you pay the musicians/technicians.

A video game takes years (usually) and tens of millions of dollars to create.

Basically, the music industry can afford piracy because it costs relatively little to produce music. The video game industry takes it much harder.

It's also kind of shitty when you know that people like your game (otherwise they wouldn't be pirating it in the first place), but they don't feel like paying for something you sunk a ridiculous amount of time, energy, and money into.

HassEsser:

Vampire cat:
You know, Bethesda's got it... And Mojang too. Release great games at fair prices with wide mod support for the PC, and your name will last forever...

Couldn't have said it better myself, unless I included VALVe in the mix. Seriously, they're rolling in dough.

Don't forget GoG, who's entire business strategy revolves around selling games DRM free.

Yeah, they're older games, but older games are even MORE susceptible to piracy. Since there's very, very few ways to buy them legitimately.

They also proved a modern game can sell well with no DRM, with The Witcher 2. An old-school RPG PC exclusive broke 1 million units sold fairly quickly. And the GoG version had no DRM, and sold pretty well. In fact, it did so well publishers are now wanting to get their newer games on GoG, since GoG proved that selling a game with no DRM, packing in a bunch of free extras, and not treating their customers like shit is a valid business strategy.

Yeah, at this point I think the problem lies solely with Ubisoft. Because apparently their DRM was a success. Which if it was, that means piracy is NOT the reason their games aren't selling. And if it wasn't, then Ubisoft straight up lied to everyone.

I think piracy should be a hint to the industry to make it worth our while, pirates can give us a better product for free while we have to pay for yours and it does less and is actually a bigger pain to use.

Irridium:

HassEsser:

Vampire cat:
You know, Bethesda's got it... And Mojang too. Release great games at fair prices with wide mod support for the PC, and your name will last forever...

Couldn't have said it better myself, unless I included VALVe in the mix. Seriously, they're rolling in dough.

Don't forget GoG, who's entire business strategy revolves around selling games DRM free.

Yeah, they're older games, but older games are even MORE susceptible to piracy. Since there's very, very few ways to buy them legitimately.

They also proved a modern game can sell well with no DRM, with The Witcher 2. An old-school RPG PC exclusive broke 1 million units sold fairly quickly. And the GoG version had no DRM, and sold pretty well. In fact, it did so well publishers are now wanting to get their newer games on GoG, since GoG proved that selling a game with no DRM, packing in a bunch of free extras, and not treating their customers like shit is a valid business strategy.

Yeah, at this point I think the problem lies solely with Ubisoft. Because apparently their DRM was a success. Which if it was, that means piracy is NOT the reason their games aren't selling. And if it wasn't, then Ubisoft straight up lied to everyone.

Not necessarily. It could just be that their DRM was a success...until it got cracked.

Actually, that could be the reason that Ubisoft is so pissy about piracy now. They sunk a lot of money into developing a DRM whatever that couldn't be cracked easily...and then it was. I'd be pissed off, too.

Vampire cat:
As for the music thing, well yeah... Maybe if they didn't spit out such shit bands...

That sounds like an attempt to justify piracy. For someone who's not saying it's a good thing, you're certainly putting forth an argument that it's okay.

And based on the information I found in making this thread (and I can only base my statements off what others more educated on the subject say about it...), I wasn't wrong to say what I did.

"Based on sources you have no access to, I was right."

Well, take it from someone more educated than you on the subject, you're not right. It's not generally accepted.

Anyway, I was trying to say that piracy shouldn't be allowed to completely kill off PC gaming based on on numbers that have no factual claim, and it's especially stupid when you factor in how many companies have their games turn in huge profits in the face of what Ubisoft and some others claim are destroying their chances for profit.

And this is true. Even Ubisoft is turning profits, despite all the piracy and used sales and all the EVULS OF DA CONSUMAH!

This goes for the music industry too, some seem to be able to adapt and make loads of money... Others dont, and complain about it.

Most of the people making loads of money are the ones complaining about it. I'm sorry, but you're wrong again. Tying this back to your Ubisoft example, their 2011 year had higher revenue than their 2010 year. And both were obscenely good.

Man, those people who aren't adapting are FAILING AL THE WAY TO THE BANK, eh?

Fair enough, yes they are trying. It's not working, in the same way it's not working against the games industry. Those in the music industry that learned to live with this and adapt are now making good money, while the equivalent of Ubisoft for music is stuck in their hole =p.

As above, false. But since this was specifically addressed to me, I figured I'd restate.

Zeh Don:

Notice how only AAA games get shelf space at stores, now-a-days? Notice how "Twilight" movies and remakes are the only thing making consistant money these days? This is piracy: if people don't know the brand, they pirate it.

If people know the brand, they pirate it. Arguing that this is because of piracy is kinda silly. Especially since large franchises are the biggest targets of piracy. It's also inane to pretend that only Twilight consistently makes money just because it's a phenomenon. Or remakes.

This is why we see remakes, rehashes, retreads and "safe" projects year after year. No original Sci-Fi movies? No original concept large scale video games? This is why.

Remakes are nothing new (no pun intended). None of this is particularly new. None of it's really related to piracy. Corporations rely on improved business statements each year. If you waved your magic wand tomorrow, and all piracy disappeared, they'd still tend towards "safe" projects because it means more money and satisfies their shareholders.

Take that as an indictment of capitalism if you want, but it is what it is, regardless.

Kopikatsu:

Irridium:

HassEsser:
Couldn't have said it better myself, unless I included VALVe in the mix. Seriously, they're rolling in dough.

Don't forget GoG, who's entire business strategy revolves around selling games DRM free.

Yeah, they're older games, but older games are even MORE susceptible to piracy. Since there's very, very few ways to buy them legitimately.

They also proved a modern game can sell well with no DRM, with The Witcher 2. An old-school RPG PC exclusive broke 1 million units sold fairly quickly. And the GoG version had no DRM, and sold pretty well. In fact, it did so well publishers are now wanting to get their newer games on GoG, since GoG proved that selling a game with no DRM, packing in a bunch of free extras, and not treating their customers like shit is a valid business strategy.

Yeah, at this point I think the problem lies solely with Ubisoft. Because apparently their DRM was a success. Which if it was, that means piracy is NOT the reason their games aren't selling. And if it wasn't, then Ubisoft straight up lied to everyone.

Not necessarily. It could just be that their DRM was a success...until it got cracked.

Actually, that could be the reason that Ubisoft is so pissy about piracy now. They sunk a lot of money into developing a DRM whatever that couldn't be cracked easily...and then it was. I'd be pissed off, too.

It was cracked before that announcement.

Kopikatsu:

Irridium:

HassEsser:
Couldn't have said it better myself, unless I included VALVe in the mix. Seriously, they're rolling in dough.

Don't forget GoG, who's entire business strategy revolves around selling games DRM free.

Yeah, they're older games, but older games are even MORE susceptible to piracy. Since there's very, very few ways to buy them legitimately.

They also proved a modern game can sell well with no DRM, with The Witcher 2. An old-school RPG PC exclusive broke 1 million units sold fairly quickly. And the GoG version had no DRM, and sold pretty well. In fact, it did so well publishers are now wanting to get their newer games on GoG, since GoG proved that selling a game with no DRM, packing in a bunch of free extras, and not treating their customers like shit is a valid business strategy.

Yeah, at this point I think the problem lies solely with Ubisoft. Because apparently their DRM was a success. Which if it was, that means piracy is NOT the reason their games aren't selling. And if it wasn't, then Ubisoft straight up lied to everyone.

Not necessarily. It could just be that their DRM was a success...until it got cracked.

Actually, that could be the reason that Ubisoft is so pissy about piracy now. They sunk a lot of money into developing a DRM whatever that couldn't be cracked easily...and then it was. I'd be pissed off, too.

More like they have a PR problem and need PR training and coordination.

Their DRM was a failure as an anti-piracy measure, because it didh't take long for the AC2 games to be cracked. Still it helps keeping used sales dead, as will any old DRM scheme. There's no good way to spin that.

What's not earning Ubisoft sales in the PC market is their inconsistent behaviour. Ubisoft both want to pull out and continue selling on the PC.

If they pulled out completely, Ubisoft employees could throw any insult at PC gamers with impunity, but instead they pull out only a couple games, while they continue making PC ports all the while losing more and more the few fans they still have in PC land with their hostile statements.

Pulling out a few less promising PC ports and saying nothing at all, would be infinitely smarter than the last 2 statements.

Piracy is a form of theft. You are getting a product for free that cost millions to develop, and the only way to play it is to buy the thing.
"Would the pirate have even bought the title anyway?" Well they obviously wanted to play it as they were willing to wait for hours and jump through hoops at times to get the damn things running, if they didn't want to play the game, why pirate it? If they DO want to play the game...then buy or rent the damn thing. There's no excuse and no justification...too expensive? Prices drop very quickly on new releases nowadays, Deus Ex HR can be had for £9.95 brand new just under four months after release.
DRM? Bull crap! GoG versions of games are DRM free, and very cheap, yet are still copied. The Humble Bundles have all been pirated too despite being for charity, and you could pay anything you wanted.

"But somebody bought an original copy to make the pirated copy!" Wrong...many rips are made from pre-release leaked copies, and hundreds of people may well get a copy from that. The developers get zero return for their investment.
"But they just want profit". No sh** Sherlock, they are providing a product for people to purchase that cost them a lot of money, time and effort to create. Where does this idea of not wanting to pay for stuff come from? Even before money, goods and services were bartered and traded, it's how the world works kiddies. Don't like the idea of DLC? Then don't play the damn game, vote with your wallet and don't support the devs who are milking the udders dry. That DOES NOT give you the right to steal the game, there's no nobility in doing that, there's only selfish desire and a pathetic need to say you 'stuck it to the man'.

Pirates have the cause and effect thing backwards. They claim to be fighting the evil corporations and their greedy and grasping ways, DRM, DLC and the rest. But frankly, it's their kind that caused the need for ever more outlandish and restrictive DRM in the first place which does, ultimately, hurt honest gamers. There will always be those who think they're entitled to something for nothing, it's an unfortunate trait that seems to be getting more and more ingrained in recent generations.