Russell Carroll has written an interesting article regarding piracy of casual games that can be found on Gamasutra (link below). Carroll was initially motivated to conduct his research after he learned that 92% of copies of Ricochet Infinity are believed to be pirated. 92! Holy Yar! (As you may have guessed, this post is really just an excuse for me to say YAR...as many times as I can). He then continues to talk about common anti-piracy measures that can be taken and the resulting impact of taking those measures. His conclusions are very interesting. First, he finds that for every 1000 pirated copies eliminated, only 1 additional sale is generated. He also concludes that stopping a pirate is more akin to stopping a download, than stopping a sale.

His results seem congruent with my own experiences with pirating pirates: they take mostly what they cannot afford. I have this "friend," who may have played a counterfeit game or two in his youth (and honestly, in his adulthood), but as his salary grew, he ended up buying the sequels once he could afford them. Dido with music. This friend was able to experience new media that he didn't have money to buy but wanted to consume. Game companies should think about the value of the pirated copy to my friend; it may not be money in their pocket (now), but that player, in this instance my friend, will still enjoy the game, recommend it to friends, and in short, be a fan. A fan that may eventually buy.

What's your take? Is there really 1000 players who want to play but not buy for every one player that wants to play and will buy? Are gamers more willing to play free games than games that cost money, and if so should companies ignore this demographic?

The Article on Gamasutra