Actually, I always get my games the
other way first, and if they're good, i make a point to buy them when I have the monies.
I just bought Portal 2 today. Another example of the *ahem* gray area making the piracy victim money in the end.
The argument goes like this:
- I'm not rich enough to just walk up and buy it.
- I value my hard-earned money, and will spend it on a decent product.
- If the product sucks, I would've returned it anyway.
- If it's good, I shall buy it both to support the developer and to get stuff like downloadable and/or multiplayer.
- If I get the cracked version and it either sucks and I don't buy it or it's really good and I don't buy it because I have no money, either way the developer doesn't get my money. So why should it matter to the developer if I enjoy an experience and their potential/earned ratio is zero regardless of whether this consumer downloads and enjoys the product or doesn't?