Battlefield 3 Loses $2,000,000 in Launch Day Sales to Pirates

A working Battlefield 3 crack is being distributed less than 24-hours after the game's official launch, with huge sales loses for Electronic Arts.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Titanz2125d ago

No matter what are gaming preferences may be - we must all unite as one cohesive unit, and abolish this know threat to one of our favorite past times.

Ducky2125d ago

... and how would we accomplish that?

gamingdroid2125d ago (Edited 2125d ago )

By supporting EA in online passes, nasty DRM and underhanded schemes. That will teach those bastard pirates! /s

egidem2125d ago

I'm proud to have purchased this amazing game rather than pirate it.

BattleAxe2125d ago (Edited 2125d ago )

I hate piracy, but lets face it, EA didn't lose $2 Million in sales because these losers never would have bought the game anyway.

wsoutlaw872124d ago

@BattleAxe even if only 50-25% of them would have bought it if they couldn't steal it for free thats still 1,000,000-500,000$.

The_Infected2124d ago

OnLive lol hey it's true:)

SH0CKW4VE2124d ago

To quote Gabe Newell of Valve

"The best way to combat piracy is actually to have no anti piracy measures"

Well I think that about sums it up, and how Can BF loose that much when its almost a strictly MP game?

I seriously doubt everyone was rushing out to buy it for the single player LOL which is I have to say very forgettable and generic.

Its just typical EA trying to justify online passes again with fake numbers, 2 million to piracy my arse, dont believe this garbage when everyone who buys it, buys it for the multiplayer.

Dont flatter yourselves EA, the SP is CRAP, you in no way deserve sales for that alone.

Cosmo8112124d ago

@egidem the are not mutually exclusive. Just because someone pirated it, doesn't mean they won't buy it. Just as pirates buy more music than non-pirates, I wouldn't be surprised if the same applied to gamers. A lot of people I know use piracy so they can see if it's actually worth buying. The economy makes money hard to come by and we have to be careful about where we spend it.

inveni02124d ago

You are 100% correct. I think 0-5% of people that pirate would actually buy the games they pirate if they had no other choice. The only types of software this may not be true for is productivity software. But for games? Most people won't buy 50 games a year, so they pick the ones they want the most, buy them and pirate the rest.

Coffin872124d ago (Edited 2124d ago )

The obvious problem of this article that most people fail to understand is that those "leechers" wouldn't necessarily have bought the game.

Fun Fact about pirates you might not know 1. A pretty high amount of people see it as a chance to try a game and then decide whether they buy it.
Fun Fact about pirates you might not know 2. For example if they like the art design, the overall graphics, if the game runs OK on their system etc.
Fun Fact about pirates you might not know 3. You can't play pirated BF3 online, so pretty much 80% of the experience isn't available to a pirate.
Fun Fact about pirates you might not know 4. He knows that and considers buying the game when he likes what he sees in single player.

This article just fails. It's obvious, basic psychology .. when something fails and you don't want to face the reality to come up with consequences, you have to blame someone.
You need a sworn enemy.

Capitalism makes the industry go to SHIT and pirates are the enemy to blame.
Happened before in history, you know. Many, many, many times.

SilentNegotiator2124d ago (Edited 2124d ago )

How did they lose $2M from people who never had the intention to buy it?

It's like the owner of an unsuccessful knick-knack shop claiming that he would have gotten THOUSANDS of dollars if not for the recent robbery. Sure, that might fly on the insurance claim forms, but disappoint dad is just going to shake his head when the son tries to make him believe that he would have made thousands on that junk.

Piracy is theft, I agree with that, but it's dishonest to claim that it would have been millions of dollars when the majority of these people wouldn't have bought it, should piracy not have been an option.

sikbeta2124d ago

inb4 "X publisher doesn't lose money cuz teh piratez don't buy da gamez anyway yo! -___-

SilentNegotiator2124d ago

You're absolutely not "inb4" and it's true.

No one is saying that it isn't theft, but saying that $2 million was lost is inaccurate. Many never would have purchased the game anyway and plenty also pirate to test the game out.

Megaton2124d ago

These kinds of claims are ridiculous. A certain percentage of those pirates will go on to buy the game. A certain percentage of those pirates never had any intention of buying the game. There's no cut-and-dry "we lost X money because the game was downloaded Y number of times".

lastdual2124d ago

The figure is probably BS, but even if it was true, that would mean $120+ million in sales and only $2 million in losses due to piracy.

It's never good to see piracy, but after all the bad press the Origin scandal cost them, EA should feel lucky that they didn't lose more.

evrfighter2124d ago

The people that want battlefield bought battlefield. I'm not sure if you console folk know this but if you pirate battlefield. All you get is the sp. Thats it. thats how it is with most online games. the pirates never planned on buying it to begin with.

What I'm saying is. It's pointless to pirate a battlefield game as it revolves around mp.

The_Nameless_One2124d ago

Now why do you think companies resort to online passes, nasty DRM and underhanded schemes. You know what? When you will be the CEO of a company who just lost $2,000,000 because people decided they don't want to pay for the product they want to own, we'll talk.

Again. Pirating hurts the developer more.

davekaos2124d ago


Did you even read the article? These figures ain't from EA, they're from some random blogger who noticed that pirate bay had x amount of leaches.
He then took the leechers and multiplied by the cost of the game.

He came up with the 2 mil or whatever it was. NOT EA

Get your facts straight sunshine

Dee_912124d ago (Edited 2124d ago )

whats the purpose of pirating a multiplayer based game.
EA Doesnt profit from Online pass ...
nor does any other developer who uses online pass.
PSN and XBOXLive does
EA didnt make online pass they introduced it to the public.
It was made for pirates and people who bootleg games so that they wont be able to get online but it sucks for renters and people who buy used.

ZombieNinjaPanda2124d ago

Lol @ This article.

How exactly do you lose 2 million dollars from something that you didn't actually lose any money from? Last I checked, No one broke into EA headquarters and physically stole any copies of BF3.

+ Show (17) more repliesLast reply 2124d ago
Ramses32125d ago

Agree. This makes me sad :(

NuclearDuke2124d ago

Why does this make you sad? These people were not potential customers. They never wished to purchase the game. Now, after seing how the game works with their pirated version, they might get hooked and purchase the game for Multiplayer.

Ramses32124d ago

Of course they were potential customers, they wanted battlefield and owned PC or console, therefore making them a potential customer.

vickers5002124d ago


Potential customers are customers that had every intention of purchasing the game before they knew about piracy, and then later decided not to purchase it and just download it.

The majority of these pirates never intended to purchase Battlefield 3, as the people that buy a Battlefield game for the single player are probably less than 5% of the people that actually buy the game. I'm betting a lot of these people are simply downloading it to test it on their rigs and see if they can run it good enough.

Ramses32124d ago

*Kneels down in defeat*
I give up.
You guys win.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2124d ago
kaveti66162125d ago (Edited 2125d ago )

This is such BS.

EA didn't lose 2 million dollars.

The fact of the matter is that most people who pirate games are NOT potential consumers.

They should not be included in the potential consumer category.

They didn't steal 2 million dollars because digital software doesn't cost money to produce.

Piracy doesn't result in the loss of revenue. People should accept by now that a certain percentage of the human population is not willing to pay for a product but can still obtain it.

The people who complain about it the most are ignorant of the facts and probably a little bitter that they pay for a product that other people have no moral qualms about pirating.

Edit: I meant it doesn't cost money to RE-produce.

I'm not denying that it's theft. I'm denying that EA can claim a specific monetary loss.

You're using ethics based around physical property to make a conclusion about a situation involving digital property.

Potential consumers are people who are both willing and able to purchase products.

If they're not able or willing, they shouldn't be counted as consumers.

Add to that the fact that pirating digital property is very different from stealing property developed using natural resources. When you steal a car from someone else, you're hurting a hierarchy of laborers, but when you pirate a digital property that you had no intention of purchasing, you're not hurting anybody.

And if you had no intention of purchasing, it means that the product either did not compel you to purchase it (it wasn't very good), or you didn't have the money to buy it (which means the developers wouldn't have gained anything anyway if you hadn't pirated it).

You believe in a third option. You believe that pirates are people who were initially willing and able to purchase a game but then decided to pirate it once they found out that they could pirate it.

I don't believe that many people fall within that category.

lifesanrpg2125d ago

sorry, but when you illegally take something for free that someone else has spent money on making that's stealing.

How can you say bf3 didnt cost money to produce? I'm pretty sure the salaries and advertising spent on BF3 cost quite a bit.

"People should accept by now that a certain percentage of the human population is not willing to pay for a product but can still obtain it." UMMM WHY? you are stealing other people's hard work. Just because people do it doesn't make it right.

Akiba962125d ago

Piracy is killing games whether you want to admit to it or not. Just fucking buy games like the rest of us.

ATi_Elite2125d ago (Edited 2125d ago )

Well said: as many narrow minded people do not fully understand how the WHOLE thing works.

For every person here that disagrees with you I'm sure they have gone over someones house and watched a Movie. The home owner bought the movie and they came over and watched it for free and never bought a movie ticket or bought the DVD.

Now are they Pirates? are they the scum of the universe? Are they killing the movie industry?

same goes for borrowing a video game that your friend bought and now your playing it for free. Does that make you a Pirate?

Game Rentals and Used Game sales along with mediocre crappy games are the only things hurting the Game industry which by the way makes $40 Billion dollars annually! I wish i was hurting like this!

It's up to Publishers to provide the content to those countries that pirate the most at a fair price. Unfortunately $60 is a months salary in some of those countries therefore it's impossible to manage so the pirating takes place.

bubbles+ to u sir well said....and I Do Not support Piracy!

LastDance2125d ago

"Add to that the fact that pirating digital property is very different from stealing "

So I guess Syphoning money from peoples bank accounts isnt REAAAAALLY stealing because its not physical?

"The fact of the matter is that most people who pirate games are NOT potential consumers."

Could you point me to where this has been proven as fact? Cheers bro.

I bet if a bunch of these non-buyers suddenly were unable to play their stolen game, legal purchases would be made

kaveti66162125d ago

Shut up, Akiba.

I don't pirate games. But I know that the publishers are full of crap.

As ATI_Elite pointed out, the difference between borrowing a game from a friend and piracy is so minute now that publishers are forcing DRM and passes down our throats and you guys are just bending over and taking it with a smile because you have an inflated sense of morality. You self-righteous people think that the publishers are being honest but they're not.

You want to know what the favorite movie line of a CEO is? "Give them nothing! But take from them... everything!"

That's what's happening here. EA is butthurt because they can't face the facts.

I've never heard Stephen King complain about people who rent his books out for free from the library.

kaveti66162125d ago (Edited 2125d ago )

"I bet if a bunch of these non-buyers suddenly were unable to play their stolen game, legal purchases would be made."

Yes, but until the day comes when pirates are UNABLE to pirate games, they will continue to do so. Meanwhile, the publishers will come up with more infuriating ways to PUNISH the people who ACTUALLY PURCHASE their games. So, as I see it, the consumers are blaming the pirates for the current situation they're in (DRM, online passes), rather than blaming the publishers who are so greedy that they can't stand losing a couple million dollars (while making hundreds of millions) that they have to come up with new, ineffective ways to try and secure their games.

You know what this world lacks? Critical thinking.