Leaking the actual game is obviously theft. But how about a cutscene? Or a video of gameplay that includes said cutscene? Or even just the video of gameplay?

From a gamer's perspective, I'd say those sorts of leaks are completely meaningless. If I'm someone who cares about spoilers, I'm not going to watch them. If I don't care about spoilers, and/or enjoy watching videos of games before I play them, then I'm watching footage I was planning to watch anyway, just a little sooner.

I'm with this.

Now if it was like a "let's play" of an unreleased game, while that isn't the same as playing the game, I'd be pretty darn disgusted with whoever leaked it and I wouldn't watch it. Of course if the entire let's play clocked in at 1 hour and 18 minutes for a $60 game, I'd say whoever leaked it did us a favor and I wish they'd been there when Rage came out.

Leaking the actual game is obviously theft. But how about a cutscene? Or a video of gameplay that includes said cutscene? Or even just the video of gameplay?

From a gamer's perspective, I'd say those sorts of leaks are completely meaningless. If I'm someone who cares about spoilers, I'm not going to watch them. If I don't care about spoilers, and/or enjoy watching videos of games before I play them, then I'm watching footage I was planning to watch anyway, just a little sooner.

But if a character is revealed to have been a ghost/imaginary/a burrito all along, your second viewing is likely to be a different experience as you watch for clues and catch things you missed before you knew. There's almost two different films in these cases, and having them spoiled essentially robs you of one of those experiences.

In the case of actually leaking the actual music, you've actually taken the product. That's theft. You took something without paying for it.

I'll just add, I don't actually care about spoilers for movies or books or shows or whatever. I almost always enjoy a film more upon repeated viewings. In fact, I'm getting to the point where I almost prefer being spoiled. I've found that if I'm not, I spend a significant amount of time anticipating the "twist" or even just what's going to happen if it's not a movie with some weird twist (although I'm always anticipating one--that's just how popular movies are constructed now, it seems). It's a better experience of I already know that so I'm not focused on it and can instead be absorbed by what's actually happening versus what I think might happen.

Well, it depends on the leak. I find that, more often than not, the leak is truthful and the advertising is false. For that reason alone I'm glad we get leaks.

If devs were more honest about the products they were delivering, I'd be more understanding of the "please don't leak this" position.

This of course doesn't apply to every case, but the AAA videogame PR machine is a real peeve of mine. Leaks often give incorrect or incomplete information, but on average I trust leaks more than I trust what I hear about upcoming games from the devs and publishers.

Yeah. The only circumstance where I'm not into a leak is when it's a plot spoiler, and usually the leaker is pretty good about disclosing "spoilers ahead." Knowing a game I like will have 16 player pvp or 4 player co-op just builds hype or settles rumors more than it "ruins the surprise" for me. And the only time a leak lessons my hype for a new game is when it proves the advertising lied to us. Which happens waaaaay too often in gaming these days (thanks, pre-orders, for making pre-game marketing more important for sales than actual game content... seriously never pre-order).

Of course, there are also the rare "we've leaked an early version of the game" leaks. Those I count more as straight up theft than as information, and I in no way endorse that sort of leak.

And that's how I feel about any great piece of art or entertainment. Finding out that character x kills character y, or that this person is that person's father is ultimately meaningless to the experience, IMO. What matters is the look on person y's face when person x kills them, or the build of emotions that leads someone to tell someone else "I am your father". If those moments are powerfully told, they hit me exactly as strong after 100 viewings as they do on the very first viewing, because I'm not feeling my own reactions, I'm feeling things through the characters :)

I disagree.

I mean, putting aside the obvious subjectivity of the matter, I think learning it for the first time divorced of character y's face, and all the drama of the moment, can dampen the scene in future viewings; and things that had shock value originally and worked well for it can later not have as much of the effect, because the shock is gone; and that doesn't mean they necessarily were done poorly?

It varies, in short. This is less of a reason why leaks/spoilers are bad, of course, and more of a reason why some people just shouldn't look at them.

Yeah I'm sure a lot of this comes down to personality, as well as how our brains work when we're watching/reading stuff for the first time.

Personally, shock value doesn't really carry any value for me at all. I posted a link to an article a while back (can't remember if I posted it here or on twitter) about how some university conducted a study on a group of "viewers". They split the viewers into 2 groups and showed both groups the same movie. 1 group went into the movie totally "blind" (none of them had seen or heard anything about it before watching) while the other group were given a basic synopsis of the entire plot before watching. After each group watched the movie, they got everyone to rate it based on their personal enjoyment. The group that had the movie "spoiled" for them found it significantly more enjoyable.

The theory they came up with was basically that when we watch a movie "blind", a large portion of our mental capacity is tied up trying to remember names, faces, plot details... all this new information that the movie is throwing at us. Theoretically, the emotional side of our brain is less engaged, because we're too busy absorbing the "facts" of the story. But when we watch a story that we are already familiar with, our mental capacity is no longer working to absorb all that "surface level" info which gives us the mental space to connect with the characters in a more emotional, personal level. It allows us to "feel" things more.

Now I'm sure there are plenty of people who will say "that's not how it works for me", but it certainly describes my experiences. I'm also the guy who will meet someone for the first time, learn their name, and instantly forget it. It's not that I'm that forgetful (usually, lol), it's because my brain is too busy studying their face, listening to the tone of their voice, getting a read of their body language and expressions; all details I tend to miss if I'm instead focusing on remembering their name.

And that's how I feel about any great piece of art or entertainment. Finding out that character x kills character y, or that this person is that person's father is ultimately meaningless to the experience, IMO. What matters is the look on person y's face when person x kills them, or the build of emotions that leads someone to tell someone else "I am your father". If those moments are powerfully told, they hit me exactly as strong after 100 viewings as they do on the very first viewing, because I'm not feeling my own reactions, I'm feeling things through the characters :)

I disagree.

I mean, putting aside the obvious subjectivity of the matter, I think learning it for the first time divorced of character y's face, and all the drama of the moment, can dampen the scene in future viewings; and things that had shock value originally and worked well for it can later not have as much of the effect, because the shock is gone; and that doesn't mean they necessarily were done poorly?

It varies, in short. This is less of a reason why leaks/spoilers are bad, of course, and more of a reason why some people just shouldn't look at them.

I was a visual arts major in high school, which means I spent a lot of time studying hundreds of paintings, including the Mona Lisa. I'd always appreciated the skill and technique that went into painting it, but even after years of studying art, I didn't quite get it. I just couldn't understand why this one painting was held up above so many other paintings that looked so similar as far as I could tell.

Then I saw it in person, and I got it. Not right away, though. The painting itself is actually a bit unassuming compared to some of the other massive works of art on display around it. When I first saw it, I thought "cool, there it is... looks exactly like the photos" and I moved along with a bit of a shrug. I slowly wandered around the room, looking at all the other art on display. Every time the Mona Lisa entered my field of view, something about it grabbed my attention. The old saying of "her eyes follow you wherever you go" is completely true, but that wasn't the most amazing thing about it. Every time I looked back at her, she looked different. I was sure that she was not only looking at me the entire time, but her expression kept changing. After about 10 minutes walking around the room, I could no longer focus on the other paintings around me. The Mona Lisa's presence is so strong and enigmatic that it makes her feel alive. I've never seen anything like it before or since.

That's the part that no photo in any textbook was ever able to capture; you can't just "look" at the Mona Lisa for a minute or two and really get it. You need to spend time around it, study it, let it fall into the background, see it up close, see it again from across the room, look away, look back, etc. I walked into the gallery knowing every inch of that painting, only to discover that I didn't really know it at all.

And that's how I feel about any great piece of art or entertainment. Finding out that character x kills character y, or that this person is that person's father is ultimately meaningless to the experience, IMO. What matters is the look on person y's face when person x kills them, or the build of emotions that leads someone to tell someone else "I am your father". If those moments are powerfully told, they hit me exactly as strong after 100 viewings as they do on the very first viewing, because I'm not feeling my own reactions, I'm feeling things through the characters :)

Well, it depends on the leak. I find that, more often than not, the leak is truthful and the advertising is false. For that reason alone I'm glad we get leaks.

If devs were more honest about the products they were delivering, I'd be more understanding of the "please don't leak this" position.

This of course doesn't apply to every case, but the AAA videogame PR machine is a real peeve of mine. Leaks often give incorrect or incomplete information, but on average I trust leaks more than I trust what I hear about upcoming games from the devs and publishers.

If devs were more honest about the products they were delivering, I'd be more understanding of the "please don't leak this" position.

That's probably the healthy attitude regarding leaks.

Most notably, the add-on was mistakenly listed on the Xbox marketplace early with a description of what Rise of Iron included.

That's a perfect example of the point I'm trying to make: the only info that leaked was stuff they were going to tell us anyway, a few days later. It has zero impact on the game itself or the way we'll experience, just throws a bit of a curve ball at Bungie's marketing plans. Not that I'm unsympathetic to the disappointment some Devs must feel whenever a leak happens. I just feel that leaks are not nearly as big of a deal as some people make them out to be.

Leaks are bad.

Games are art, and as an artist you're the one who determines when and how you're going to unveil the work to the public. This is because what you are working on might not be done, or in a state you are satisfied with.

Look at the original leaks for Destiny. It had a hugely negative impact upon the reception of the game. The official art book does not even have a lot of the leaked concept art, simply because it wasn't going to be in the game.

But we expected it to right up until they announced the four planets with one patrol space per.

The name leaked for Rise of iron, but what if it had been more?

And think of how much better the reception would have been (and how reasonable the expectations would have been) if Bungie had been more open and forthcoming during Destiny's development instead of just hyping it and then staying quiet until launch.

Why would that have been true?

Let's say, oh, the concept art with the giant frog in it. Let's say that in one world, that image leaks, and in the other, it is released early by Bungie because at some point that was part of the game, and then later, it wasn't.

How does that affect people who buy on launch day expecting giant frogs and don't get any?

If that image leaks, you have to explain it away later.

If that image is released, you have to explain it away later.

If nobody ever sees it, you don't need to do anything. That's what they want.

but the individual brush strokes are not individual pieces of art in a painting (nor does watching an artist paint detract from the final product).

In a masterpiece, the individual brush strokes CAN be pieces of art in a larger painting
Example: The Mona Lisa

Even so, does seeing 1 square inch of the Mona Lisa ruin the experience of seeing the entire painting? I don't think so myself :-/