By John Walker on March 8th, 2010 at 12:18 am.
Ubisoft’s servers have been down/overloaded for around the last ten hours, making it impossible for people in some parts of the world to play Assassin’s Creed II. Which is certainly not amusing if you’re someone who bought the game despite the DRM (that requires constant connection to their servers), and trusted that Ubisoft would not allow something like this to happen. Especially not in the first week. An enraged forum thread appeared on Ubi’s site, which eventually led to a post from Community Manager “Ubi.Vigil”, who explained that the situation was, “unacceptable”. And then time ticked on.
Responding to furious posts on the Ubi forum, the community manager’s comment in full was contrite and seemingly shocked:
“I don’t have any clear information on what the issue is since I’m not in the office, but clearly the extended downtime and lengthy login issues are unacceptable, particularly as I’ve been told these servers are constantly monitored.
I’ll do what I can to get more information on what the issue is here first thing tomorrow and push for a resolution and assurance this won’t happen in the future. I realise that’s not ideal but there’s only so much I can do on a weekend as I’m not directly involved with the server side of this system.”
Elsewhere on the Ubi forums, in the announcements section, Vigil states:
“Due to exceptional demand, we are currently experiencing difficulties with the Online Service Platform. This does not affect customers who are currently playing, but customers attempting to start a game may experience difficulty in accessing our servers. We are currently working to resolve this issue and apologize for any inconvenience.”
It’s now been over ten hours.
It’s hard to imagine how this demand could be “exceptional” in the first week of release – surely it’s the “first ever” demand?
It’s also hard to get an idea on the scale of the problem, since the forum thread is a surprisingly light seven pages long, rather than the hundreds you might expect to see. However, the official announcements from Ubi seem to imply it’s a wider trouble.
The DRM was clearly ludicrous from its first announcement, and Ubisoft could not have been sent a more clear message by a worldwide reaction of outrage. They persisted with it anyway (quashing some people’s suspicions that this was a deliberately OTT announcement so they could appear to back down on it later), and despite repeated warnings that it was untenable continued to boast the “feature” as a bonus for gamers. This weekend people have not been gamers, because their game wouldn’t run.
After Ubisoft’s emphatic denial that the pirated versions of both Ass Creed II and Silent Hunter V work properly, we’ve been receiving unofficial reports that, with a couple of slightly peculiar work-arounds, they work just fine. We have no first-hand evidence of this, so cannot state it as fact. But either way, those that paid for their product that have sat in fury as their game refused to run all day. Either way, legitimate customers cannot play the game.
It’s time for Ubisoft to admit this was a mistake, back down, and make their games playable by their customers.
08/03/2010 at 00:20 liquid says:
ROFL. ’nuff said.
08/03/2010 at 00:20 Flameberge says:
Because this wan’t obviously going to happen. Ugh.
Ubisoft: Grow Up, this just is not going to work. Do you really think your customers are going to be able to accept not playing their SINGLE PLAYER game all day, because of your own servers.
08/03/2010 at 00:22 Wichtel says:
Haha!
08/03/2010 at 00:24 llama says:
What’s left of my day just got made :). I hope that this is the point where ubisoft’s little DRM experiment proves to be a massive failure, and one that won’t be attempted again in the future.
08/03/2010 at 00:25 Gremmi says:
At the risk of being alienated and shunned, this couldn’t have been a global thing as I’ve been happily playing AC2 on and off all day. Still shit for those who couldn’t login though.
08/03/2010 at 00:26 Pijama says:
BWHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHA
08/03/2010 at 00:26 Jehar says:
This is, I think, a clear indication of divine intervention. Ubisoft explaining this problem to the public will be like telling a 4-year-old that there is no Tooth Fairy.
“But… I don’t want to play the multiplayer, I just want to play the single player!”
“Yes, but in order for you to play the single player, you need to be connected to the server.”
“But it’s single-player. Not multiplayer. I don’t wanna be connected.”
Yeah, good luck resolving that discussion amiably.
Addendum:
“We make sure you’re connected to our servers so that pirates don’t play the game without paying for it.”
“But… the pirates *are* playing the game without paying for it. And they’re not connected to your server either!”
08/03/2010 at 05:04 shalrath says:
““But it’s single-player. Not multiplayer. I don’t wanna be connected.””
And it’s beyond even that – those people who ARE connected to the ‘net STILL can’t play, hahaha…
I hope this kills ubi – I know it wont, and I know people who’ve worked with them – but my God it would be awesome if it did.
08/03/2010 at 00:27 Eric says:
Pathetic.
All the more pathetic for being so predictable from the very beginning. It is literally EXACTLY what everyone predicted would happen.
08/03/2010 at 00:30 rocketman71 says:
If you bought the game, and now you can’t play it… sorry, but you fucking deserve it for validating with your money this DRM travesty.
And yet, AC2 was in the top 5 of most sold in Steam. PC gamers are fucking sheep.
08/03/2010 at 00:33 Flameberge says:
ALL gamers are sodding sheep. Either too ignorant to know better, or too much like a crackwhore, who despite all the abuse and all the beatings, can’t help but come back for the next hit.
08/03/2010 at 00:41 Ozzie says:
Both the retail box and the Steam store page say that the game requires constant connection to the internet. What both don’t say is that it requires also constant connection to the UbiSoft server, though this is definitely implied, since what else what the game need connection for?
Anyway, either the people who bought ACII weren’t aware of the implications or illiterate, or both.
Most gamers don’t are so well informed like we are anyway, which makes this “copy protection” scheme even more aggravating.
08/03/2010 at 01:08 Clovis says:
Yeah, the depressing corollary to this story is that so many PC gamers bought this that it shut down Ubi’s servers. Great.
Well, maybe they won’t buy next time …
08/03/2010 at 01:31 Corporate Dog says:
I fully admit that if Bioware ever produced a game with a DRM scheme that had the potential to kill my firstborn, I would have to think long and hard about how much I REALLY loved my daughter.
Sure. She’s cute. But she never amused me by fighting off a Geth armada.
08/03/2010 at 01:34 Tyshalle says:
Part of the problem that I don’t think forum goers understand is that the vast majority of people who play games aren’t really hard core gamers that keep up with gaming forums and shit like this. You can’t really blame them or call them “sheep” for this like you could, for instance, with all those people who were boycotting L4D2 or MW2 in Steam community groups only to buy the games the day they came out.
08/03/2010 at 02:38 Arathain says:
@ Tyshalle, waaay upthread.
“Part of the problem that I don’t think forum goers understand is that the vast majority of people who play games aren’t really hard core gamers that keep up with gaming forums and shit like this.”
This is super important. We’re the sort of folk who read forums and specialist blogs like this one. We’re the slightly obsessive fan types who keep up with the trends and events of PC gaming. Most PC gamers don’t read forums or blogs. They want to play games that work, and are fun, and spend the time we spend reading this site doing something they enjoy more. There is nothing wrong with this. They have just as much right to a working, enjoyable product as we do.
This Ubisoft DRM crap doesn’t hurt us much. We know to avoid Ubisoft games, and we know what to expect if we do buy them. It’s everyone else who this will hurt the most, because it will come as a surprise. “Why doesn’t the game I bought work? I paid good money!” Ubisoft cannot give those people a good answer.
08/03/2010 at 03:08 Clovis says:
Good points above. I don’t agree with, and almost always hate, calling a group “sheeple”. There’s no reason someone has to follow all this stuff just to play a game. That’s why cliffski annoyed me so much the other day when he claimed giving the game 1-star on Amazon was childish. We should be do everything we can to bring this to people’s attention.
08/03/2010 at 03:40 Wulf says:
More drones than sheep.
As I said elsethread, the computer owners are inexcusable imbeciles, and I personally feel for their computers. If those computers could scream with the torture of some of the things that have no doubt been witlessly inflicted upon them, they would.
You know, when one of those evolving machines actually evolves and realises how much of a collective bastard humanity is to their machines, we’ve only got ourselves to blame if they opt for genocide. :p
I feel nothing for the gamers, they’re just mendicants who’d bend over and take whatever punishment was necessary to get their hit, so no sympathy there, but I will weep for their computers. Those poor, poor computers. :<
– Edited to add… –
@Clovis
I see where you’re coming from, but I just think that people who own a PC for gaming probably read at least one gaming news site to know anything. If anyone was completely clueless and it wasn’t borne of their own ineptitude, then I could be forgiving, but generally I think you’re being too charitable. I don’t like the term sheeple so much either, but I don’t think anyone deserves the computer they’re using if they don’t know what they’re installing.
08/03/2010 at 06:03 Doug F says:
Wulf – are you really arrogant enough to feel justified dictating terms for what is acceptable for complete strangers to do with their computer? They earn their money, they buy their own equipment, and it’s theirs to abuse wilfully or ignorantly as they see fit.
I’m hoping your whole post was taking the piss.
08/03/2010 at 11:54 Clovis says:
@Wulf: I understand what you are saying, but still disagree. I think a shockingly large percent (75+) of gamers do not follow this kind of stuff. They might check out metacritic or one big review site like gamespot or IGN, but those reviews don’t cover the DRM.
Computers are now mostly used by people who have no idea how to do much else then get on the internet and play a few games. There is nothing wrong with this. A computer is an appliance just like a toaster, fridge, or car. You don’t need to know the inner workings of it to use it. It is certainly a good idea, but it shouldn’t be required. The real threat to AAA gaming is not piracy, it is refusing to simplify using a game enough to reach the biggest audience. The game itself can be complicated, but having it run properly shouldn’t be. It certainly shouldn’t require research before you buy the thing.
There are, of course, plenty of gamers that bought AC2/SHV who understood the DRM. I don’t mind the vitriol being aimed at them.
08/03/2010 at 00:30 Lambchops says:
“It’s time for Ubisoft to admit this was a mistake, back down, and make their games playable by their customers.”
Sums it up nicely. I think just about everyone saw this coming apart from Ubi. I have my doubts they’ll back down and fully expect some shoddy excuse – but they should just man up, tone down the DRM and give the customers what they payed for.
08/03/2010 at 00:35 Flameberge says:
Yup. I’m pretty sure any fallout or reduced sales from this incident will be blamed on pirates. They’ll probably blame AIDS and world hunger on The Pirate Bay and Sumotorrent next.
08/03/2010 at 00:31 Marty Dodge says:
Wow, that is so lame. I would be well pissed if I had paid quite a bit for the game and could not play it because their servers were down. What if you happen to be somewhere with no i-net or where you broadband is down due to a storm. This is an idiotic policy and should be vigorously resisted.
08/03/2010 at 00:34 pete says:
Stupid ubisoft. Many games have problem with multiplayer servers in first week. I wont tolerate the same stuff in singleplayer. I really hope they will ditch this stupid idea in few games.
08/03/2010 at 00:34 Po0py says:
I’m kinda glad this is happening. People are now coming to terms with the truth of what DRM truly means for the consumer. As has been widely predicted, consumers are being punished for buying a game. What the hell has the world of PC gaming come to that this shit is going down? I know it’s only a day or two being locked out of a game but what the hell did they do to deserve this? It’s their weekend! But I’m glad because these people are learning the hard way about DRM and a good portion of them will think twice when the next Ubisoft game drops.
08/03/2010 at 03:57 Wulf says:
You’d think that, wouldn’t you? You really would.
StarForce was a gift from some deity or other when it first arrived, and it was praised by gamers (I remember this, clearly), because it would stop those dirty pirates.
People found out that it was RING0 and possible to exploit… those people were dirty pirates, spreading FUD,t hey were liars and told to shut up, and the gamers supporting this nonsense were total tools. When real exploits started turning up, they shouted liar in the face of evidence, sort of like a Republican presented with evidence of climate change. Then people found out that the DRM put drives into PIO mode, and further did damage to optical drives. Trashed drives were presented, but it was just pirates with an evil agenda, of course.
The StarForce guys chose to riff off this and ran a competition, offering real money for evidence of a computer with a trashed optical drive. Many offers were sent to them and ignored, one person actually delivered a computer to them, a computer that disappeared and they continued to run that damn competition. And when one of the tools had their drive damaged and switched sides, well, the pirates just got to them, right?
Whatever the outcome is of this, it’s probably going to be accepted by the majority that it wasn’t Ubisoft’s fault, and that it’s likely evil pirates were involved, haxing Ubisoft’s servers with their insidious DDoS lasers!
I gave up any semblance of faith in the PC gaming audience long, long ago. This’ll blow over, and people will bend over for the next malignant bout of cancerous DRM, which will be even worse than this, you can bet. They’ll buy the game again… and, to paraphrase Spaceballs, this is why the real evil will always win, because those who think they’re good — real paragons of society — are dumb.
The only virtue will be the clueless, as they won’t know about any of this and their ire might be directed at the right people: Ubisoft. Unfortunately, the misinformed WAY outweigh the simply clueless.
08/03/2010 at 00:35 +--JAK--+ says:
Does this mean Silent Hunter V was unplayable aswell?
08/03/2010 at 00:36 RedFred says:
Am I the only one upset that this ‘DRM thing’ seems to have taken alot of attention away from SH V’s release?
I don’t even want to think about the number of hours I sunk (that’s right, I went there) into SH III! With the grey wolves mod it became an amazing game. I had very high hopes for V as it was back to the Atlantic, but from what I have heard it is not very good.
08/03/2010 at 01:26 MWoody says:
What’s hilarious is it’s not the first time it has happened to that series, either. Silent Hunter 3 was roundly criticized for including, once again at Ubisoft’s behest, the Starforce copy protection scheme, known for being nearly impossible to uninstall and for occasionally disabling or damaging some software and even hardware. And yet they stayed with their publisher despite losing thousands in sales to such idiocy, and here there are, bitten once again.
Sorry, Ubisoft Romania. I’m one of a select few people interested in a hardcore sub simulation game, and yet I can’t justify the purchase because of what your parent company has chosen to do. It’s 2005 all over again, and the end result will be obvious when they lay you all off for “lack of sales,” like it’s your fault. You poor bastards.
08/03/2010 at 00:36 Dandi8 says:
Have to agree with rocketman71. It was obvious that the servers would fail sooner or later (although I didn’t think they would do so THAT soon) and all you guys had to do was vote with your wallets. You didn’t, now you have to pay for the mistake. Hopefully that’ll teach some of us that we DO NOT have to rush out and buy every game out there.
I didn’t buy AC2 so I am happily playing other games right now.
08/03/2010 at 00:38 Mr_Day says:
I think people that did buy AC2 are playing other games right now.
They don’t really have much choice.
08/03/2010 at 01:39 Tyshalle says:
Yeah, I’m definitely not buying any Ubisoft PC games until this nonsense stops, and I’ll only rent their 360 games.
08/03/2010 at 00:36 FunkyLlama says:
Dear Ubisoft,
On behalf of the internet: we told you so, cuntbags.
08/03/2010 at 00:36 El_MUERkO says:
I note that it has been down for 10 hours but there’s only 7 pages of rant. Compare that to the behemoth threads that appear across EA’s forums each time the BFBC2 login servers go tits up and I get the feeling very few people bought ACII or everyone just downloaded the crack. Either way Ubisoft end up with egg on their face.
I’ll tell you one thing, I wont be downloading the Ruse beta, no point since it’ll almost certainly have their bullshit DRM embedded in it.
08/03/2010 at 00:49 Gremmi says:
Alternatively, it’s not actually a global issue and you’re just hearing noise from the people who were legitimately affected.
Though again, for those that were affected, it’s utter shit.
From a global point of view, it’s concerning. Obviously a lot of people are heavily against such schemes, and Ubi really should be listening to them rather than going ‘No, no, no, we know what we’re doing, shut up’.
From a personal point of view, my want to play the games outweighed any concerns I had over the scheme itself, so I bought and played both AC2 and SH5. I like them both, I’m not that bothered if I’m unable to play them for a few hours – would be annoyed, but all I’d do is go do or play something else. I haven’t been affected by this particular incident though.
In summary: I’m weak minded and Ubi should put in an offline mode. Or something.
ps: Ruse online only beta in only playable online shock.
08/03/2010 at 00:52 El_MUERkO says:
To clarify “The full game will also contain their bullshit DRM” thus I wont purchase it.
08/03/2010 at 11:03 Casimir's Blake says:
Shame really, because BFBC2 has a superb SP and MP. The Amazon reviews are way, way off the mark.
08/03/2010 at 00:37 Mr_Day says:
My problem with the drm was always that if it made playing the game problematic, it is a stupid idea. Sadly, I don’t feel good knowing that this has happened – I hope that the lessons will be learnt, but somehow I think the only change will be the server capacity.
08/03/2010 at 00:39 Flameberge says:
As Gabe Newell from valve has always pointed out: When pirated games offer better customer service than paid-for games, they pirates are going to win, because then there is no incentive to buy the game. Ubisoft have ahhpily walked into that elephant trap for some reason that I still cannt comprehend.
08/03/2010 at 00:39 billyboob says:
Considering how consumers have difficulty differentiating products from thier packaging, marketing, publishing and distribution I have to wonder how much patience Valve have for these kind of shenanigans. I mean its the leading online distributor is it not? Surley this must affect thier own ‘brand’ in some way… I’m not really sure how to say what I’m getting at
08/03/2010 at 00:46 skinlo says:
Well it could potentially mean reduced sales on Steam of AC2, which will affect them. I imagine some people will also think its Steams fault, not Ubisoft’s, which could lead to reduced sales in all games.
08/03/2010 at 00:41 Drexer says:
Anyone have that image of Nelson from The Simpsons? No? Then:
HA! HA!
*points at their stupidity*
08/03/2010 at 00:41 sebmojo says:
What really gets me is that they’ve made themselves the gold standard #1 target of every cracking group in the world, while making the pirates the heroes while utterly, utterly pissing off their paying customers.
And not just any customers, the most valuable customers of all – the ones who are willing to pay full price immediately for their product.
I mean, it’s turkeys all the way down, innit?
08/03/2010 at 00:42 Diogo Ribeiro says:
Actually, I heard RUSE wouldn’t have that DRM, but I can’t recall for sure.
Still… Man. Now I wanna buy the game and do a review where I claim the PC version is better than the console versions because of the new twist. Assassin’s Creed 2: a game where your internet connection is a recurring antagonist. Genius!
08/03/2010 at 00:44 Boldoran says:
It is hard to imagine how this whole DRM thing could have played out to be a bigger fiasco. Congratulations Ubisoft. In addition to loosing all goodwill from your customers for introducing this sort of DRM in the firstplace you are now the laughing stock of the internet too.
Glad I don’t work in their PR department.
08/03/2010 at 00:45 Vinraith says:
Hi-larious. May the internet rise up in exasperation and smite them.
08/03/2010 at 00:50 Flameberge says:
Or alternatively, essentially say “I told you so!” on random internet comment threads, and not really do anything. At all.
Yay!
08/03/2010 at 00:51 Vinraith says:
@Flamberge
Stop crushing my incredibly unlikely dreams, dammit!
08/03/2010 at 00:59 Flameberge says:
@ Vinraith
Oops! Sorry!
What I meant to say, is internet users will rise up on a torrent righteous anger, indignation, and rage, storm Ubisoft HQ, force them to stop using utterly retarded DRM; and go on to cure cancer, end world hunger, shoot Steve Jobs for inventing an Ipod Touch at 200% magnification, push Simon Cowell off a pier, collectively punch Osama bin Laden in the face and live happily ever after!
08/03/2010 at 01:04 Vinraith says:
@Flamberge
Hurray! *pops champagne*
08/03/2010 at 00:52 tapanister says:
I never was interested in the Asscreed games, but I had a friend who loved the first one, and I’m so happy he’s chosen to buy BC2 instead of AC2. I think he might not even know asscreed 2 is out yet. Hooray for companies treating PC gamers right. Fuck ubi.
08/03/2010 at 00:57 Gremmi says:
The irony here being that BC2 has been plagued with server problems all weekend too, across both 360 and PC.
If it was working smoothly I’d probably be playing that instead of playing AssassinsWorseThanHitlerCreed 2.
08/03/2010 at 00:56 Leesping says:
This is awesome. Not because we all predicted it and certainly not because some of our gaming brethren couldn’t play a game they paid for this weekend, but because every time something like this happens more people become aware of this utter monkey toss Ubisoft are infecting all their games with.
Ubi won’t change their minds overnight, but gradually a lot of their paying customers are going to run into this exact problem and they aren’t going to be best pleased about it. I think sooner or later they’ll have to throw the towel in on this “protection”, it’s completely doomed to failure.
Let’s just hope it’s sooner.
08/03/2010 at 01:03 +--JAK--+ says:
I think they will throw in the towel as soon as this game gets cracked.
They would be crazy to keep it running when the pirates can play the game and the people who bought it get locked out for 10 hours!
08/03/2010 at 01:07 Flameberge says:
@ +–JAK–+
I’m sorry, you seem to be making the mistake of using logic to try and determine what Ubisoft will do. I imagine what they’ll actually do is sit on their hands, whine about pirates stealing sales, and make the gaming experience for their customers as dreadful as possible for as long as possible.
Because that’ll teach those pirates! Grr!
08/03/2010 at 00:59 +--JAK--+ says:
Maybe Ubi did this to force players onto the consoles?
08/03/2010 at 02:37 Steve says:
I don’t think so. People very exited about Ass Creed either have patience or a console by now. The people with patience won’t mind waiting for a crack for a week or so after having waited for the five or six months it’s been available on consoles. The only people who haven’t got Ass Creed now aren’t very exited, or are simply never buying a console. In other words all the people who would have swung to the PS360 based on this game alone would have done it already.
08/03/2010 at 06:19 Steve says:
‘Nuther thought: Silent Hunter and Settlers are PC only. i.e. they’re not only screwing multi-platform titles.
08/03/2010 at 01:00 Starky says:
I look into my magic future sight ball and foresee that the servers will be down again during the week, for a couple of hours at a time, but repeatedly.
I also foresee that this will not be an accident.
The DDoS’s are coming, oh yes they are.
08/03/2010 at 01:04 Dinger says:
Didn’t I predict this would happen in some other RPS thread on the issue?
08/03/2010 at 01:05 Blackberries says:
To knowingly and unrepentantly sound like a prick: I fucking called it.
Funny that Assassin’s Creed II was quite a popular game. Funny how Ubisoft weren’t prepared to shell out for extra server capacity (or bandwidth, or whatever’s causing this overload) for what was going to be a temporary if completely predictable spike in demand. Couldn’t possibly have seen this coming.
08/03/2010 at 01:08 Flameberge says:
@ Dinger and @ Blackberries
To be fair guys, I think 99.9% of gamers with more than 3.6825 braincells called this one. Not to steal your thunder or anything… ;-)
08/03/2010 at 02:29 Blackberries says:
No problem, I am aware of that: it was more a personal statement of vindication voiced at Ubisoft. >:)
08/03/2010 at 10:19 Dinger says:
Well, you’d be surprised how few people have that many brain cells.
Yes, it was predictable. In fact, there probably was a guy at the Ubi meeting who said exactly the same thing. That was probably the same guy who was told to “make it work or be fired”.
I mean:
A. Business model where first-week sales are critical.
B. DRM scheme designed to save first-week sales.
C. Required continuous internet connection using an untested service
The first load test has to be release day. And that means that the first massive failure will be release day. We all knew this; but Ubi didn’t even have anyone in the office.
08/03/2010 at 15:02 Corporate Dog says:
I, personally, felt that rabid bats would hit Ubisoft’s main distribution warehouse, the game would be delayed for a month while bat exterminators were called in, the executives in charge of the DRM scheme would see tears in the eyes of the children as AC2 was delayed, and they would rethink the DRM before release.
I SO didn’t call it.
08/03/2010 at 01:08 HermitUK says:
I haven’t seen a crash and burn this bad since the Hindenburg.
Too soon?
08/03/2010 at 01:24 CharmingCharlie says:
To quote a popular phrase :-
Oh, the humanity! And all the customers screaming around here. I told you; it— I can’t even talk to people, their friends are out there! Ah! It’s… it… it’s a… ah! I… I can’t talk, ladies and gentlemen. Honest: it’s just laying there, mass of smoking network servers.
08/03/2010 at 01:09 Mr_Day says:
Random thought – does this make the game “not fit for purpose”? British owners could probably get their money back if it is – and I see no reason to suggest a game that you can not play is fit for the purpose that was intended.
08/03/2010 at 09:36 terry says:
Interesting point, I wonder if this is why AssCreed 2 is unavailable for download on Steam in the UK – could Valve have predicted an influx of returns based on “merchantable quality” cases? :-)
08/03/2010 at 01:10 perilisk says:
The odd thing, if any other industry compromised its products deliberately, causing them to fail and become unusable, it would be sued to hell and back. Granted that lawsuits are too often the first resort for people with minor grievances, it still seems that there should be options other than boycotts when unscrupulous companies create such an unreliable system by design and then sell it to customers as it if was a normal single player game.
08/03/2010 at 01:13 Tim Ward says:
So this thing did well enough on day one to break the servers, did it?
And so as usual all the typical Internet histrionics mean absolutely nothing since all people do is act as thought Ubi-soft shot their child then go and buy the game anyway.
Let’s face it: if you’re so desperate to play this game that the idea of not being able to play it on the few occasions that your net connection is down or having to wait an extra day after release to get the game running constitutes some kind of major outrage then you’re going to buy the game and put up with it anyway.
It makes me wonder: exactly how draconian does DRM have to be for enough people to put their money where their mouth is and *not buy the game* so that it actually, significantly effects the bottom line of the publisher behind it?
I don’t think we’re anywhere near there yet.
08/03/2010 at 01:16 HermitUK says:
For me, anything involving needles and or blood samples is an instant no-no, even if it was protecting a new Deus Ex game made by the original team with jetpacks.
08/03/2010 at 01:19 Gremmi says:
I hear the Egyptians had to sacrifice their firstborn to play Exodus.
08/03/2010 at 01:50 DJ Phantoon says:
You’re saying they made a new Deus Ex game while flying around in jetpacks?
I don’t think they could take ENOUGH blood from me to test for me to be displeased by the process.
08/03/2010 at 08:52 kromagg says:
I didn’t buy ME2 because of the god-awful DRM in dragon age, but I bet I’m about the only one. EA’s system is very similar to Ubi’s (up to and including breaking your savegames when the connection to its servers goes, granted this is a stated bug, not a feature), but you don’t see anyone on the barricades about that one.
Granted I’ll probably still buy ME2 when the inevitable steam sale swings around. Considering the DRM I think a fair price would be about 5 euros. Without it, I’d simply have paid full price.
08/03/2010 at 09:03 Boldoran says:
Also a big part of customers will have no idea that DRM is even included. They will just notice that the game won’t work suddenly.
If there was a warning on the game that if you install it ubisoft will come and take away your firstborn there would still be people buying it because they do not read the tiny text on box.
08/03/2010 at 11:09 Casimir's Blake says:
Now that I’m currently attempting a play-through of Deus Ex, I loathe it almost as much as I did the first time. Amongst other things, the level design looks like the mappers were hovering above their PCs in jetpacks, and were picking at the Unreal map creator with chopsticks. Despite the tantalising prospect of open-world-ness the game allows for, it’s let down by truly horrible weapons and stodgy mouse control.
LGS were clearly left with the real talent after Spector left…
08/03/2010 at 01:14 DanPryce says:
Luckily I couldn’t give a hoot about Assassins Creed or Silent Hunter, but it still deeply depresses me that things have turned out this way.
08/03/2010 at 02:17 Howl says:
Me too. As annoying as this DRM seemed, it did have the potential to at least help out for multiplayer titles. It didn’t seem any different from MMO’s or any other ‘account needed’ online game. The last thing they needed was this kind of drama.
I hate how it’s made hackers and pirates seem like likeable rogues fighting for our freedom and justice because it’s those pikey cuntbags that have put us in this position in the first place.
08/03/2010 at 04:21 Wulf says:
Misinformation alert!
For the love of…
Look, the word is ‘crackers’, and they’ve been doing that for years. Whilst gamers have been witlessly getting their computers worked over by a digital two-by-four, getting BSODs, immediate reboots, failed hardware, and goodness knows what else, the reputable cracking groups have been providing a clean solution, free of malware.
Yes, this might twist your mind WIDE OPEN. But an open mind is a good bloody thing. Crackers remove malware. Think about that for just a second, won’t you? Turn that over in your mind: Crackers remove malware. Is a virus scanner evil? Really? Just because a pirate can use a cracked game, it doesn’t make the crack evil, and most pirates are too clueless to figure it all out anyway (see: assumptions about Ubisoft DRM not being sunk thanks to people too hopeless to figure out how to use the crack).
Pirated games can be sent over torrents, does this automatically imply that torrents are evil? Should we kill all peer-to-peer? What about the Blizzard updaters that use it? What about the people who provide free content and software over it? Like what? Like Linux, and BBC iPlayer uses it too, you know? So, should we obliterate a service just because it CAN have an illegitimate use? Really?
Crackers != Pirates.
Pirate: A person who hosts or downloads content, whether those that download are smart enough to figure out the content or not is another thing entirely.
Cracker: A group that removes malware from a game, providing a clean gaming experience. A legitimate user can then use a crack to remove malware from a game, which is good, because malware is malware, like any virus, trojan, or rootkit. Crackers are virusbusters, to put it in lay terms.
People are so bloody brainwashed and hacked that I actually find it incredibly grating and annoying.
If you want to be annoyed at pirates? Fine. But don’t attribute the actual creation of cracks to pirates, and don’t mix up pirates with crackers, or crackers with hackers. It just details a general lack of knowledge.
Fun bit of info: I’ve had a couple of desktop computers now, and a couple of laptops, but I’ve never once had a virus. Wonder why that is? I care to be informed, as the upkeep of my computer and actually understanding the Internet environment matters to me.
So for crying out loud, stop hating on the crackers, it’s asinine, it’s dimwitted, but worse, it’s irresponsible. All the crackers did was prove that the game could be cracked, and provided the crack, how people use that crack is up to them. You could use the crack to prove to Ubisoft that their game has been cracked, and level your ire at them, where that ire belongs.
09/03/2010 at 01:33 Howl says:
@Wulf. Are you basically saying.. “It’s not the people that make guns that are the problem, it’s the people that fire them?”
Because I don’t buy that really. I think people make an informed decision to put up with DRM when they put their money down and buy a game. I don’t need Robin Hood messing with someone else’s intellectual property under the guise that they are doing me a favour by allowing me to play without the CD in the drive, when the repercussions of their illegal act result in the publishers getting fucked by mindless idiots on the interwebz that want stuff for free.
P.S. You’ll have to forgive me for not remembering the lingo but the last ‘cracked’ game I came across was on the Atari ST. Your argument didn’t wash 20 years ago either, btw.
08/03/2010 at 01:17 DanPryce says:
I imagine a future where a burly UbiSoft representative has to be present in the room when you play the game, looking over your shoulder so you don’t copy that floppy.
In my future, floppy disks made a comeback and they carry terrabytes of data.
08/03/2010 at 01:17 u335 says:
I even entered the CAPTCHA just so I could say:
lolz
08/03/2010 at 01:18 Nameykins says:
This makes me feel strangely vindicated.
08/03/2010 at 01:25 Grey! says:
go go DDoS, yay! you just made my day! :D
08/03/2010 at 01:27 tssk says:
Here’s the thing though.
I can see a business meeting with the tech support coders in a flurry about their customers not being able to play the product.
But I can also see the finance team patting each other on the back about strong sales.
Tech Support:: But they can’t actually play the game they bought from us!
Finance: Who cares! They’ve paid for the box with the disc. Now, onto Assassin’s Creed 3. Pull the resources working on the server issues and get back to work on the next product.
And fo course they can get away with this. Who’s going to take them to court?
Judge: Let me get this straight nerdy boychild of forty. I sit in here day after day hearing cases on important things like corruption and robbery and murder and you waste the court’s time because your little game toy isn’t working? Get out before I find you in contempt!
The real danger is that gaming becomes so difficult that people are either tempted by piracy or drop gaming all together for another hobby.
08/03/2010 at 01:43 LionsPhil says:
@tssk: +5, Insightful
08/03/2010 at 04:37 Wulf says:
Very interesting, tssk!
I don’t think that there’s any danger though, I don’t think it’s a dying market but more a changing market. For every one major publisher that sticks a fork in its own foot, there are ten independent developers who’re there offering their game with benign — or even no — DRM. What it means is that the more sane smaller development houses are going to see an increase in profit.
What I’m hoping to see from this, what I would would love to see, and indeed, the thing that would make me happy is if this makes people question a little as to where they spend their money, and they take a risk on a couple of indie games. Sure, they could buy that indie game but they might not like it, or they could spend their money on the next Ubisoft game, but that might just not allow them to actually play their purchase anyway. The risk of the unknown with the indie scene becomes less and less, and it’ll seem more generally welcoming.
As the faceless corporations continue to alienate gamers by treating themselves poorly, I’m hoping that indie developers will work further toward making communities and connecting directly with their players, to listen to what their players have to say. If that happens, then every loss for a big company like Ubisoft might turn into a win for small developers, because those small developers become the friend of the gamer, whereas large companies like Ubisoft do all they can to portray themselves as the enemy.
If things continue this way, it can only mean an expanding indie market. If people are that smart and this does happen, then… that makes me smile inside, it lights a little warmth in my heart, and makes me feel a little better about the future of PC gaming. They might go to a new hobby or a console, or the market might change… for the better.
08/03/2010 at 01:31 paradise says:
I have not bought a computer game with DRM, & I will not. Wish there were more open source games as i am also against pirating games (if you own the game though i dont think its wrong to tell it that its not allowed to send information to big brother) I’ll buy games for my xbox though.. just wish xbox wasnt made by micro$$oft….
08/03/2010 at 01:34 Draken says:
Well frankly, it’s just not that simple. Not paying for the game would hurt the little guy much more than it would the publishers. Think about all the developers who poured sweat and blood into creating the game, only for it to flop horrendously because the publishers are more worried about protecting their IPs than they are with providing the customer with a service.
Putting “your money where your mouth is” is only going to harm the developer much more, which is completely unfair.
08/03/2010 at 01:45 Ozzie says:
I’m no charity, am I? How am I at fault that the developer made a deal with the devil? :-/
DRM ruins my day, no thanks.
08/03/2010 at 04:43 Wulf says:
Don’t buy it.
If the developer feels hurt by this, they can leave Ubisoft and found their own studios. Look at what happened with Blizzard North, it split up into Runic and ArenaNet, two developers that I have large amounts of respect for and value dearly. It’s the choice of the person, and they know as much as anyone else that it’s their permanently mystified and maladroit corporate overlords who’ve ruined their efforts with silly choices like this DRM.
They can sit in the Ubisoft wageslave chambers and work under the whip to create something that, on one platform at least, is going to be completely unappreciated, or they can group up, revolt, strike out on their own and make something truly beautiful. In fact, every time this has happened in the past we’ve seen nothing but good come of it. Those who feel they aren’t getting anywhere leave and set up their own little company to pursue their dreams and do something truly creative and productive.
People shouldn’t be chained to large, corporate names. Blessed are the brave.
08/03/2010 at 01:35 Draken says:
Whoops, previous post was in reply to Tim Ward.
08/03/2010 at 01:36 TCM says:
Predictible.
08/03/2010 at 01:36 LionsPhil says:
Hahaha.
And I’m not just laughing at Ubisoft. If you bought this crippleware, I am also laughing at *you*. Serves you right for sending a message (via the medium of money) that “this kind of DRM is fine by me”!
08/03/2010 at 01:40 GT3000 says:
Question is, when they fix the servers, does that mean everyone who didn’t buy the game lose?
08/03/2010 at 01:41 JKjoker says:
ok, ACII is down and Ubisoft has been feeling the fire for a few weeks, this is not getting any worse, meanwhile C&C4 is coming out like in 2 weeks with the same kind of DRM (possibly worse), shouldnt we start aiming out guns that way ? when is it going to get a “you maniacs” post ?
08/03/2010 at 15:36 Jeeva says:
From what I hear, the reasoning behind no massive uproar so far is “added value”.
i.e. Ubisoft has none, CnC4 has some. But I might be wrong, as I haven’t really looked into it.
For the record: Was semi-interested in AC2, until DRM. Now I haven’t bought it or played it.
22/02/2011 at 05:20 tomz says:
It was really disappointing that their game refused to run all day.
____________
bullet cameras
-
08/03/2010 at 01:44 Idle Threats & Bad Poetry says:
Remind me again why you bother to buy Ubisoft games? If they want to mock us as customers and force their DRM crap down our throats, I don’t think they really want our money. DRM done wrong (the only way Ubisoft does it) enrages customers, pure and simple.
08/03/2010 at 01:49 Alegis says:
Sure didn’t see that one coming.
Especially not from several thousand miles away. No sir.
08/03/2010 at 02:05 Breaker Morant's Ghost says:
People who bought Assassin’s Creed 2 are imbeciles and are contributing to shitting up gaming. They deserve this.
08/03/2010 at 02:11 Tom says:
*passes splif*
08/03/2010 at 07:49 Davie says:
People that bought AC2 should have expected this. I wouldn’t say they deserve it. No one deserves this kind of blatant, narrowminded incompetence.
08/03/2010 at 02:09 Bluebreaker says:
resume: http://i46.tinypic.com/2py18bo.jpg
08/03/2010 at 02:59 Army_of_None says:
Oh my god. Yes! This .gif made my night because it’s so… so… so appropriate.
08/03/2010 at 02:10 Tom says:
I just… ?!… I just can’t…. i just can’t be… *faints*
08/03/2010 at 02:22 Scabrous120 says:
I can’t help seeing purpose in all of this.
Ubisoft, among a number of publishers, want PC gaming dead.
By its nature, the PC as a gaming platform does not afford the control publishers enjoy elsewhere. It is just too open.
They expect, correctly for the most part, players to follow the AAA titles and migrate to a closed console.
08/03/2010 at 02:30 Pantsman says:
Ah yes, the same conspiracy crazyness that every other angry internet man was throwing around about MW2.
If a company wants to stop developing for the PC, they’ll just do it. They don’t need an excuse at al, so they certainly don’t need to go to all this trouble to generate one.
08/03/2010 at 02:37 Vinraith says:
@Pantsman
Indeed. They aren’t trying to drive us from the open platform of the PC to the closed platform of consoles, they’re trying to close the PC platform. That’s what DRM schemes like this are really about, after all.
08/03/2010 at 03:12 squirrel says:
@ Pantsman
Because of competition they cannot exit the PC market as they want. One publisher exit PC market and others will take its share. More importantly, games are not always developed by game giants. Many of them, usually PC games, are developed by small studios. In marketing, they are free riders to enjoy the prosperous PC game market as it is always large publishers who promote the market as whole. Come to think of it, we gamers stay in PC gaming because we always expect game giants to turn out sth exiting every year. Those giants invest a lot not only in game development but also publicity. Without publicity many good game would be buried by the market. But, of course, we are not satisfied. Then we look at works of small studios, and occasionally we can find what we want. But wait a minute. Those small studios put a lot effort in game development, and yet they do not put much (nor can they afford) in advertising their game. In this way, they are indirectly benefited by the advertising effort of game giants.
Here is the tricky part. In the PC game market, small studios are becoming more independent from game giants. While some of them still need to seek publishers for their works, some do not. If you wonder why game giants prefer restrictive console market than open PC market, that is a reason. Do not expect every independent studios to be as successful as Epic games, which thrives because of their focus on development of game engine than gaming itself. Many once thriving studios have no longer be independent. If we gamers are disappointed by the whatever nasty practices by whatever publishers and decide to switch to game consoles, small studios would have no choice but to place themselves back under publishers’ control.
08/03/2010 at 03:38 Stromko says:
It is a fun theory, but it does seem like it would be a lot more effective for them to just not publish these games on PC at all, if they really don’t want the PC market. If someone buys your game on PC and it doesn’t work because of your horrid DRM, they aren’t going to turn around and then buy it on console, especially considering they cannot get any refund on an opened PC game.
This whole DRM debacle seems fit only to piss PC customers off and make them buy from Ubisoft’s competitors. If someone really wants to play AssCreed 2 on PC, buying it doesn’t seem to be a route to achieving that. It’s not luring people over to less restrictive console versions, it’s putting people off entirely.
08/03/2010 at 04:04 squirrel says:
@ Stromko
Things are not that simply. If you are the developer and you decide to reserve a certain kind of gameplay to game console only, your competitors would definitely take it to PC without bothering to credit you. If you bring the game to PC than you can keep your first mover advantage in the PC game market. The only way you keep it in all platforms is to patent it, but I seriously doubt patent office in any country would honor such patent, at least for this moment. If developers can, we should not be seeing a flood of FPS / TPS.
08/03/2010 at 05:07 MDevonB says:
@squirrel
You’re getting it backwards. They don’t lose money from not having a PC port. They lose potential sales. If someone comes in with a game that plays just like Spiderman 2 (Correction, Assassin’s Creed.) on the PC market, and they don’t, they’re not competing with them. The sales of that game have absolutely zero influence on the sales of AC2, since they are in different markets.
The only reason they’re still in the PC market, is they think they can make money. And with the surprisingly few people that actually give a shit about DRM until it bites them, they can. They don’t lose money from pulling out, and if they do, they’re actually competing less.
08/03/2010 at 12:02 Scabrous120 says:
@Pantsman
Firstly, you can’t kill PC gaming without active participation.
Secondly, in order to encourage migration of customers, they first need customers!
@Squirrel
While the gap will almost certainly be filled, it will be done by lower budget, less exposed games released to a rapidly shrinking audience.
I admit I’m playing devil’s advocate here with my ‘theories’, but how many have already made the leap to a console? Debacles such as this, at stark contrast with console owner’s experience, will only see the number of PC gamers continue to dwindle.
Long-term it’s dead, and I’ve no doubt Ubisoft couldn’t be happier.
08/03/2010 at 19:01 Pantsman says:
Firstly, why would they want to “kill” PC gaming? It’s being there doesn’t affect them. If they want control over their material, they can just release it only on consoles. Other company’s games being on PC won’t have any effect on that.
Secondly, they already have customers. Even if they didn’t, attracting new customers to one platform just so they could abandon it and get customers to move to another platform makes no sense at all – they would just start on the other platform. And even if that did make sense, making their experience available on PC (albeit crappily) would only make people more likely to play the PC version than if there were no PC version at all.
Ubisoft is a company. All they care about is making money. If they think a PC version will sell enough to more than make up the price of making it, they’ll want the PC around because it can make them money. If not, whether because of piracy or lack of interest, they’ll just disregard the PC because it doesn’t make them money. Or maybe they’ll come up with countermeasures that they think will allow them to make money from the PC. They certainly wouldn’t spend money on a complex DRM system just to show that it doesn’t work to protect the unprofitable game they spent more money on, just to “give themselves an excuse” to stop making unprofitable things.
08/03/2010 at 19:16 Scabrous120 says:
@Pantsman
“Firstly, why would they want to “kill” PC gaming?” Abandoning the platform without a ‘valid’ explanation alienates existing customers.
“Secondly, they already have customers.” Yes they do. Long-standing customers they would like to ‘migrate’ with them, restricting their ability to abandon the PC on a whim.
“Ubisoft is a company. All they care about is making money.” Of course. And abandoning the PC potentially makes them more money by converting a percentage of ‘casual pirates’.
You’re not very imaginative, are you!
08/03/2010 at 22:07 Pantsman says:
““Firstly, why would they want to “kill” PC gaming?” Abandoning the platform without a ‘valid’ explanation alienates existing customers.”
That’s silly! All they need for a “valid” explanation is “it doesn’t make us enough money”. Besides, abandoning any platform alienates existing customers regardless of whether there’s a “reason”. That’s why they’re not giving up on the PC yet. It still has the potential to make them money.
“”Secondly, they already have customers.” Yes they do. Long-standing customers they would like to ‘migrate’ with them, restricting their ability to abandon the PC on a whim.”
That’s also silly! If the customers like Ubi’s games a lot, they’ll go where Ubi’s games are. If they don’t like them enough to buy a console just to play them, Ubi’s having a made-up excuse other than the good one they’d really have (“it’s not making us money!”) isn’t going to change their mind.
“Ubisoft is a company. All they care about is making money.” Of course. And abandoning the PC potentially makes them more money by converting a percentage of ‘casual pirates’.” And if they decide that, they’ll just abandon the PC without spending millions of dollars to make up an alibi.
08/03/2010 at 02:38 squirrel says:
Not surprised at all. Actually, one should be surprised if those servers run 7/24 flawlessly non-stop. Who UBI thinks she is?! Not even financial institutions can achieve this. However, if you experience connection problem while buying/selling securities / account transfer / … , you can always phone-in to have bank personnel manually execute the transaction for you. Besides, they would have a team of professional IT to fix the problem ASAP so that they wont be sued as hell. So, what can UBI do for us under this situation?
08/03/2010 at 04:50 Wulf says:
Indeed, even the most stable Linux servers only have a 99% up time, and those under frequent load are closer to 80%. With the kind of constant load that the Ubisoft servers are seeing I’d expect an always-on efficiency rate of about 60-70%, and that’s being generous.
These servers aren’t fallible, they’re not magic, they’re just technology, but unfortunately a lot of people aren’t going to understand that. More’s the pity.
08/03/2010 at 08:57 Mac says:
Is that 7 hours per day, 24 days per month?
08/03/2010 at 12:11 Scabrous120 says:
@Wulf
99% uptime, you say? It’s been unavailable 1 day out of 3. Even for those that ‘understand the technology’ involved, that’s absolutely unacceptable, and that no apparent provision was made, downright negligent.
08/03/2010 at 02:56 Insectecutor says:
Guessing it’s a DDoS, expertly timed to occur on Sunday. Terrorists Win etc.
People using cracked versions of the game aren’t necessarily pirates. It’s the crackers who’re the heroes in all this, not the pirates. If I had any interest in ACII I’d have bought it, and I’d be playing it today because at the first hint of server side weakness I’d have cracked that sucker.
08/03/2010 at 04:52 Wulf says:
Wouldn’t it be ironic if the DDoS was the players? Think about it, a constant load, all timed to happen at roughly the same time: the game’s release. Basically, Ubisoft set up their own DDoS, unwittingly. That’s what I think, anyway.
And I agree, if a cracker simply removes the malware in something to prove it can be done and allow those who witlessly bought the game to be able to play their game without this nonsense… well, that’s a noble action, in my book.
08/03/2010 at 03:02 Diogo Ribeiro says:
@Pantsman:
Not necessarily true. Shareholders still have a vested interest in seeing a company maximize its revenue, so developing for all platforms is good business. If a company suddenly decides to abandon a platform, it’s always bad press unless it’s smoothed out. IIRC, not many companies took such a blatant stance without – at the very least – showcasing a compelling argument (even if a merely financial one).
While it might just be coincidence, it’s hard to ignore that:
1) Ubisoft has struggled with certain platforms and games. Avatar was a costly multiplatform release that’s been largely poorly received. Just Dance remains one of their most successful games of late, with their remaining casual titles for the Wii selling less than expected and with other potentially successful games suffering lower sales forecasts (such as RUSE and SC: Conviction).
The first half of 2009-10 has them with a €78 million in loss. You can easilly find this info by browsing here: http://www.ubisoftgroup.com/index.php?p=164&art_id=
2) They openly – perhaps unwillingly, but this is arguable – dared crackers. In a way one can assume they were trusting and naive. But let’s be honest. Ubisoft, like any other company, pays attention to market research, studies and communities. What company, even with the slightest bit of interest on the PC these days, doesn’t know that these pirate groups are proud and love a challenge? The minute you say “uncrackable DRM” you’re goading. It’s like a Bat-signal. All you need is to read the *.nfo files from their torrents and get your feet slightly wet in their communities.
If Razor 1911 trashed Microsoft’s claims that Shadowrun only worked on Vista and on a Dual Core setup, in such a public manner, do you really think Ubi’s statements would not come off as a challenge? Further, there was that debacle with Ubi providing a no-CD patch for Rainbow Six Vegas 2 that was actually created by crackers.
I’m not a tinfoil hatter. But as before, a company like Ubi needs to assure their shareholders it’s “fighting the good fight”. It can’t just say “look, here are our more profitable platforms, we’re leaving out one of them because of piracy”. This new DRM isn’t meant to ward off pirates: it’s meant to calm down shareholders. It’s easier – both in financial and PR terms – to gradually reduce platform support than it is to immediately cut it off based on spurious claims of piracy, particularly since most companies don’t go public on piracy numbers. They would need to show poor sales before saying they’re retiring from the PC market.
Again, I’m quite safe from conspiracy theories. But there is something going on. You just don’t make that many mistakes while coming off as remarkably out of touch unless you’re an idiot or you’re trying something. And Ubi aren’t idiots. At least, not idiots enough for that.
08/03/2010 at 03:22 squirrel says:
That’s right. Profit maximization is always the only objective for every corporation, but let’s think one more step. Maximum profit can be achieved not only by selling as many copies as one can. Manipulating market structure can also be another solution. You can refer to those as conspiracy theories, but as least those theories are a lot more realistic than to believe that the US blow up World Trade Centre themselves, right?
08/03/2010 at 03:29 Diogo Ribeiro says:
As I said, I don’t buy into conspiracies. It’s not what I played Deus Ex for :) Of course, some companies have failed miserably in other ways – Interplay, for instance. Although management was peculiarly stupid there at some point. But there’s something very wrong about all this. I’d hesitate to call it a conspiracy, but I’m willing to bet there’s more than meets the eye. It just seems too well played and convenient to simply be a series of unfortunate mistakes. Like both you and me said, it’s not simply a matter of walking out. Shareholders, profit, competition – all play a part.
08/03/2010 at 04:58 Wulf says:
I can’t say I buy into conspiracy theories, either, because it makes the people involved seem far too intelligent. But the amount of evidence stacking is worrying, and if Ubi do decide to go console-only in the near future… well, you’ll be able to be one of the first to say “I told you so!”, Diogo, after having pieced together what evidence there is quite so eloquently here.
And even as dumb as corporate types are, they should have known that no system they could create is unbreakable, so… :/
08/03/2010 at 09:32 drewski says:
@ Diogo Ribeiro – I think you’ve got modern corporate speak backwards. That’s exactly the argument Ubi would run if they wanted to ditch PC – we make more money proportionately to our investment from console games, therefore we’re going to stop investing in PC games and concentrate on the market that we’re better at. It’s a standard specialisation argument and stock markets absolutely eat it up. The classic example is a company that makes two products, and spins off the business unit that makes the second product because, whilst still being profitable, it’s not as marginally profitable.
If Ubi want to ditch PC gaming, they’ll do it. They’re persisting because they believe, despite everything, that there’s still good money to be made from the platform, even if it is just with console ports and specialist submariner games (or whatever).
In modern corporations, you don’t need conspiracy theories because they’re openly subversive.
08/03/2010 at 10:58 Diogo Ribeiro says:
@dreski:
Perhaps. But looking at the recent games published by Ubi, they’re clearly aiming for some of the more niche markets out there with games like Settlers 7 and Silent Hunter 5. Even before 2010, they were publishing games like Capitalism 2, Alexander, Faces of War and Heroes of Might and Magic IV. Not heavy hitters but clearly not a financial dead end: all added up, they are likely to be as profitable as the big boys. Even in the more well received genres, they hyped Brothers in Arms quite a bit as well. Yes, any company can go out and say they’re dumping the PC. But Ubi aren’t doing it. If they can do it openly then why not? Judging by the bad publicity and backlash, and not just from their recent DRM (there was StarForce in the past as well, the official patch that was simply a no-CD crack by pirates, etc), nothing would prevent them from going the Cliffy B. way and indirectly call PC consumers “savvy enough to know their way around illegal game versions” (paraphrased).
They could do it but they’re not doing it. Which is why, all things considered, stock markets may swallow it up. But which is easier to deal with: immediately bail out of PC development and publishing, citing economic drifts and necessities, leaving an open market for the competition, and risk long run shareholder resentment and distrust; or going to great lengths to fight piracy with intrusive and ineffectual means thereby appeasing shareholders and coming off as a “swell bunch of guys” for consumers, sucking the marrow out of a specialist genre that’s guaranteed to be less profitable but steadier, and clearly delaying versions of some of their games well after their hype has subsided as an excuse for their low appeal on PC (something that, coincidentally, Cliffy B. also did with Gears of War)?
You’re right, they’re openly subversive. But not publicly so. Which is why the second seems much more likely than the first to me.
I should point out that I have no grudge nor harbor any ill will against them, save the idiocy of their recent DRM. I played Assassin’s Creed 2 on X360, it’s a very good game – enough for me to consider buying it for PC. It is, by far, one of the best examples in recent years of a studio understanding what went wrong with the first game and crack up a sequel that’s almost the anti-first game. And I have enjoyed some of their Wii efforts as well.
08/03/2010 at 10:58 Diogo Ribeiro says:
I meant drewski, soz :(
08/03/2010 at 03:20 Jayt says:
We all know we wanted this to happen, so badly.
08/03/2010 at 07:48 Heliosicle says:
Yes.
I do feel kind of sorry for the people who paid money.
08/03/2010 at 03:25 Shadowcat says:
The same thing happened with Steam when Half Life 2 came out, as I recall. Legit customers unable to play the single-player game they had paid for.
Valve didn’t give up on their DRM scheme as a result. I really can’t see Ubisoft doing any differently because of this.
08/03/2010 at 03:32 Jayt says:
That was downloading an entire game off a server, from memory, I bought it from a store and had no such problems.
Oh and your defending this? You monster.
08/03/2010 at 03:42 Stromko says:
I don’t think Shadowcat is defending the morality or ethics of this DRM, just stating precedent. If we forget history we’re that much worse at predicting the future.
Half-Life 2 was a phenomenal game for its time, it advanced first-person cinematic storytelling and action substantially. It’s rather depressing that Ubisoft can come out with a completely unnecessary impediment to customers enjoying the game, and yet still make great enough sales for said system to crash and screw their customers, with a so-so game.
08/03/2010 at 04:01 Jayt says:
The last part of my comment was a joke. I just don’t know how someone can compare the launch of Half-Life 2 and this…
08/03/2010 at 05:03 Wulf says:
Hm, I recall that I was able to play Half-Life 2 offline back when it was released. Unfortunately, I can’t remember whether that was something intentionally included by Valve or a crack, but I don’t recall cracking it, and Valve are pretty smart, so they probably did have some system in place for that. I could be wrong, of course.
08/03/2010 at 03:29 Jayt says:
I want to add, assasins creed 2 is really not a special game, its pretty so-so. really not worth going through all of this
08/03/2010 at 03:34 heartlessgamer says:
Doubtful. DDoS are some of the easiest to clear network issues and are identified up front by 99% of the datacenters of the world.
This is most likely an unforeseen issue related to high demand that they can’t scale the service to, which means they have to do more than fix the problem: they have to fix the problem and scale that fix to meet demand. An impossible task for short turn arounds.
08/03/2010 at 04:22 A-Scale says:
Sorry, but what? That’s bollocks. DDOSses are only fixable by adding more bandwidth, which is often extremely expensive depending on the number of connections incoming. This is why web gangsters can threaten to shut down casino sites on big days unless they pay protection money to avoid the DDOS.
08/03/2010 at 05:17 Wulf says:
With all due respect, A, I’m going to throw that call of bollocks back at you. Frankly, it doesn’t matter whether it was a DDoS or not, so you’re just picking him up on the weakest point of his argument. I’m going to point out why it’s irrelevant whether it was a DDoS or not, and I’ll do it with bulletpoints.
- There can be no proof of a DDoS or a service failure either way, so it’s the perfect fallback excuse for incompetence.
- Anyone can mount a DDoS, at any time, for whatever motivation.
- Surely they must have expected DDoS attacks/heavy loads, but they didn’t put anything in place to deal with either?
Even if it was a DDoS by some misguided soul (and I personally don’t believe it was, I think the ‘DDoS’ came from all their users trying to access the game on launch day, thus belabouring their servers beyond load capacity), this proves that any DDoS is basically going to shut gamers off from their games, and having put the system in place, the responsibility lies with Ubisoft to be able to deal with such things, which they cannot do. In other words, even if it was a DDoS, Ubisoft put into place a system which could be exploited and shut down by other people, a system that shouldn’t even matter in regards to a single-player game.
08/03/2010 at 10:59 kromagg says:
@Wulf A-Scale wasn’t disagreeing with the second part of the post he responded to so it’s not “bollocks”. In fact, you only manage to restate what the OP managed to say in 1/10th of the space you used. That is all.
08/03/2010 at 03:53 the_fanciest_of_pants says:
I’m with Walker. After all the outrage, bullshit claims that this would be a “Feature” worth having and this happening, it’s time to let it go Ubi.
08/03/2010 at 04:19 A-Scale says:
Gamespot fell in line like the cowards they are and gave the game a solid 8.5. How you could give an inherently broken game anything above a 5 is beyond me. Have any of the other reviewers seen fit to DO THEIR BLOODY JOBS and reflect this shitty DRM hindrance in the review score?
08/03/2010 at 04:44 GT3000 says:
I think that’ll lead to a dangerous trend of downrating a game based on it’s delievery rather than the content inside.
Exaggerated example for effect:
Reviewer: Well based on the merits of the game I’d give it a solid 8. However, since I have to be connected to the internet to play I give it a 5!
It’s not right. Gripe about the delivery method all you care but don’t pollute my reviews because you’re having a tiff about a constant connection to the internet. I’m interested in game play content and unless it’s an absolutely deal-breaker that impedes game play, then you report it as so. Otherwise your opinions about the method of delivery is better left to a forum thread or blog post, like here! So far ACII hasn’t given me a problem so I’ve got nothing to report on that front.
08/03/2010 at 04:51 MD says:
@ GT3000: With the increasing importance of Metacritic scores though, sometimes a score is the best way to make a statement to the publishers. I would have absolutely no problem with the example you gave, provided that the reviewer was explicit about it (as simple as: “ths game is worth an 8, but I docked 3 points for the awful DRM, so the final score is a 5″). That way your review is not ‘polluted’, as you lose absolutely no information, and can mentally add the three points back on if you don’t care about the DRM; the publisher is also sent a pretty clear message.
08/03/2010 at 04:58 Vinraith says:
@MD
I agree and, more than that, I think including DRM in review scores (and consequently metacritic scores) is the only way to affect real change.
08/03/2010 at 05:08 A-Scale says:
The other guys are right, Metacritic scores are all that count at the end of the day (being that they are considered to translate into sales, which are what really count, but that’s later). Further, failing to make apparent just how bad the DRM is in the review score is doing a disservice to the person looking at the score. We know many people don’t bother to read the article, so the score might be the only way to deliver the information. Further, it’s ridiculous to not dock a game for something that affects your ability to play and enjoy it. I doubt you have a problem with docking a game massively if it has bugs that render it unplayable, and in fact most reviewers regularly do! If you look at DRM as a bug, which is precisely what it acts like in the wild, there is absolutely no reason why games should not have their review scores docked accordingly.
08/03/2010 at 05:56 Bonedwarf says:
Games so too should be rated down for this shit. If you bought headphones that would only work on Zune players but didn’t know this, would you be pissed when they didn’t work on your iPod?
Or say you buy this great pizza, but can only cook it in Samsung microwaves.
It’s a defect built in by design and those responsible should be beaten with sticks accordingly.
08/03/2010 at 07:22 DarkNoghri says:
@People discussing DRM affecting review scores
I commonly see the mainstream gaming websites (gamespy, gamespot, at least, I think) delaying multiplayer game reviews for at least a couple days (up to a couple weeks for MMOs) to see how the multiplayer and connectivity is in the wild.
If games are going have crap like this attached, they need to start delaying their singleplayer game reviews the same way. People need to know if the connection works, and reviewers aren’t going to find that out by being one of ten people trying to connect prerelease.
Mostly agreed on the above points, though.
Edit: I just checked gamespot. It doesn’t have a score listed for the PC version, and the other versions have a 9.0. Where’s this 8.5 number coming from?
08/03/2010 at 07:53 GT3000 says:
@MD
I’d agree that scores are an important aspect however, the reviewer shouldn’t focus on the DRM. I think the content of the game is the purpose of the review and that the DRM unless completely destroying the experience should be left as a footnote. I haven’t had an issue regarding the DRM as of yet. Some people may but I think you rate the game based on it’s content and then leave up to the reader whether the DRM is a deal-breaker. Do I approve of Ubisoft? No, but I won’t deny this isn’t an excellent game (in my opinion) and I think the developer needs to see that money. Ubi’s DRM for better or worse hasn’t hurt me yet and as such I have no quarrel. Your mileage may vary.
It’s a PC game, due to the lack of standardization on hardware and connections, it’s hard to say who will get the short end of the stick but if the DRM works as advertised then I cannot hate a game for it. Some may disagree.
08/03/2010 at 09:36 drewski says:
You really expected anything else from a website that is essentially a paid mouthpiece for publiher PR?
I mean, honestly.
08/03/2010 at 04:34 ShadowNate says:
I really hope this issue is just the tip of the iceberg of problems about to slap Ubisoft’s paying customers in the face for buying into such a rotten deal with such DRM.
08/03/2010 at 04:58 sigma83 says:
There is precedent in this regard; Demigod got torn apart at review time because of bad connections. Assassin’s Creed _deserves_ to suffer the same fate.
08/03/2010 at 07:41 Stromko says:
Good point. I rather enjoyed Demigod, at least for a good ten hours or so, but then I mostly played versus AI. That got repetitive, but eventually the servers were back up and I was good to go. I was not banned from playing just because they couldn’t handle the load.
08/03/2010 at 05:03 Shariq says:
Right. And besides, a review shouldn’t just cover the content of the game, it should cover the entire product.
Game journalists have the power to hit these publishers “where it hurts.” Bad scores specifically citing anti-consumer DRM schemes is probably the best way to bring about change.
08/03/2010 at 05:15 Anthony says:
I still don’t understand why they didn’t just bolt it into Steam and require authentication that way.
At least Steam can be expected to run pretty much all the time, and has a DRM strategy that isn’t pants on head retarded.
To repeat what other people have said, who honestly didn’t see this coming? It’s not exactly apocalyptic, but once again the pirate scene has proven they can provide a better product that’s incidentally also free.
08/03/2010 at 08:23 Velvet Fist, Iron Glove says:
Hahahahahahahahahhhahahahaha.
But at least when it is down, you can still almost always play games that you’ve already got installed.
08/03/2010 at 09:39 drewski says:
Maybe Ubi wanted a DRM system that was pants-on-head retarded.
Steam’s been cracked since HL2 so if Ubi want a robust DRM solution (which, apparently, they did – even though it didn’t work), putting it out on that would defeat the purpose.
08/03/2010 at 05:22 Wulf says:
I have a request of RPS.
Why not start up a weekly DRM watch (skipping quiet weeks, of course), where the worst DRM is accounted for and warned about?
Things that should be covered:
- What, in all, does this DRM do?
- What side effects does it have?
- Has it been successfully cracked?
An official source with some credibility needs to start keeping a tally of this.
08/03/2010 at 05:25 Vinraith says:
@Wulf
That’s a great idea. DRM information can be startlingly difficult to find, having a regular watch on these things would be invaluable.
08/03/2010 at 06:30 Muzman says:
It is a good idea. Probably calls for a dedicated security tech nerd blog.
08/03/2010 at 05:23 Gabe says:
“…a review shouldn’t just cover the content of the game, it should cover the entire product.
Game journalists have the power to hit these publishers “where it hurts.” Bad scores specifically citing anti-consumer DRM schemes is probably the best way to bring about change.”
Amen.
If a PC review has the classic “seperate scores for each category, then a total score”, then it *needs* ‘user friendliness’ as a new category.
eg: Assasin’s Creed:
Graphics 92% Sound 87% Playability 86% User friendliness 10% Overall 70%
08/03/2010 at 05:24 Deuteronomy says:
Well well well. Assassin’ Creed 2 remains uncracked, just like I thought it would be. Looks like there might be hope for PC gaming after all.
GO UBI GO!
08/03/2010 at 05:40 A-Scale says:
Indeed, you’ve prolonged your DRM scheme by a week or two only at the cost of (what I expect will be) a large decline in sales and general disdain for your company and its products in the near future.
GO, KILL PC GAMING!
08/03/2010 at 07:06 StarDrowned says:
I hate how sarcasm on the internet is so hard to tell sometimes. Ahhhh, good ol’ sarcasm. Right? RIGHT?!
09/03/2010 at 02:39 A-Scale says:
I don’t think its sarcasm. AC2 is still uncracked.
08/03/2010 at 05:45 wyrmsine says:
Whatever issues we may have with DRM, we’re fortunate major games publishers won’t reference this failure as a result of a directed acts of piracy, and especially not to elected or electable members of government.. Very fortunate indeed.
08/03/2010 at 05:46 irongamer says:
This is an excellent idea.
08/03/2010 at 05:49 irongamer says:
Argh, I fail at comments and forums.
Wulf has an excellent idea!
08/03/2010 at 05:56 Seth says:
Just to be clear, this is satire, right?
Or are there people who actually believe this?
08/03/2010 at 05:56 Seth says:
Bloody awful reply system, disregard that.
08/03/2010 at 06:04 Soliduck says:
This sort of thing happened when Steam first came out, and always happens day 1 whenever an MMO launches.
08/03/2010 at 06:14 Warskull says:
Gamespot reviewed a console version, gaming mags almost never review PC versions of multiplatform games.
08/03/2010 at 06:19 Hallvard says:
Oh god, you know something’s wrong when ONLY the pirate version works.
Thanks Ubi DRM.
08/03/2010 at 06:23 Hank says:
I like trading money for good games, I take the transaction seriously), and I empathize with game producers whose creations get pirated … unless they do something like this. Ahoy, matey! Nice booty!
Perhaps the customer base for the likes of Solium Infernum and Evochron: Legends is different from that of Ubisloth’s titles? Is support for a company inversely proportional to its size? Not always; I like what Blizzard and Valve do, for the most part, and a healthy part of my meagre wages goes their way. Dunno about others.
08/03/2010 at 06:42 Soobe says:
Why is no one pissed at the people people who are actually responsible for all this?
Seriously, where’s the outrage towards the software thieves, the lame ass software pirates?
08/03/2010 at 06:47 TCM says:
“Yeah, I saw your son tipping my cows over the other day, so imma come down, slaughter your family, and make you my slave, okay?”
Disproportianate retribution against the wrong group, to put it simply.
Pirates? Mildly inconvenienced. They don’t have a completely working crack yet, but they’re pretty close. And, just like everyone who owns the game, they can’t play it right now.
Customers? RUINED.
08/03/2010 at 06:55 A-Scale says:
Curse the wind all you want, just don’t take a dump on your customers in the process.
08/03/2010 at 07:24 Vinraith says:
@Soobe
Pirates hurt publisher. Publisher hurts legitimate customers.
Why aren’t we pissed at the pirates? They aren’t hurting us, the publishers are, and you know what they say about the enemy of my enemy.
Edit: To clarify, I’m not saying “pirates are our friends,” clearly they’re not. I’m explaining why people blame the publisher, and why some folks endorse piracy when publishers get out of hand. Personally I think the pirates AND Ubi can go straight to hell, but it’s Ubi that’s actively screwing me out of being able to play their games.
08/03/2010 at 07:35 Pace says:
Piracy is the root cause of DRM, if people stopped pirating stuff, publishers could stop using DRM. It bewilders me that so many people ignore that connection. (I don’t mean to pass the blame right through publishers, there’s plenty to go around.) Enemy of my enemy makes no sense whatsoever.
Who’s being disproportionate here?
08/03/2010 at 07:40 Pace says:
What if lots of people refused to pay their taxes, and as a result your tax bill got higher. Who would you be mad at, the government or the people who don’t pay their taxes?
08/03/2010 at 08:00 Lilliput King says:
Mmm, I know how you feel Soobe, as I’ve said at length. Pirates are certainly partially culpable.
Difficult to side with Ubi though, because their ‘solution’ to the problem of piracy is just terrible in every sense – ineffective, disproportionate and (as we’ve seen today) harmful to consumers.
08/03/2010 at 08:04 Stromko says:
I would be upset with the government for not ensuring that everyone pays their fair share, and for making me fiscally responsible for their own incompetence. Sure, they do stuff like that, but it doesn’t mean it’s fair. That doesn’t mean I’m not upset at pirates, I find people who can afford but don’t buy games to be quite obnoxious and not true gamers, I think they’re scum and are hurting my hobby, but that doesn’t mean I deserve to bear the burden when I CHOOSE to support that hobby.
Furthermore, DRM doesn’t solve a god damn thing, and isn’t even necessary. Good games make a profit, excellent games make oodles of cash. Even a truly effective DRM that doesn’t hurt customers, which has not yet existed, would only be a slight increase in profits. No game will live or die based on effective DRM.
Excellent games like Beyond Good & Evil and Psychonauts sold like ass because people didn’t play them, not because people pirated them. Hundreds of so-so highly marketed games have been incredibly financially successful despite high numbers of pirates.
08/03/2010 at 08:04 MD says:
“What if lots of people refused to pay their taxes, and as a result your tax bill got higher. Who would you be mad at, the government or the people who don’t pay their taxes?”
Surely you’d be pissed off at the government, for ‘solving’ the tax-dodging problem by adding to your burden as a legitimate taxpayer, while allowing the tax-dodgers to continue dodging their taxes.
(I didn’t really want to get involved in this, and I’m certainly not suggesting that tax-dodgers/pirates are undeserving of blame. But this analogy plays into the hands of those you were arguing against.)
08/03/2010 at 08:10 Dean says:
Pace: I’d ask why the government wasn’t arresting the people not paying their taxes. And if it turned out there were no reprisals I’d stop paying my taxes.
08/03/2010 at 08:41 cliffski says:
I agree. This happens because of piracy. End Of Story. I know people are upset at Ubisoft, they ahev played this very abdly, but what do you expect them to do about priacy? Ignore it?
Every Ubisoft shareholder will already eb screaming at them to abandon PC gaming altogether. I know the hardcore shouters here will yell “good riddance” but Ubisoft have made some damn good games.
The PC market is hugely unattractive to anyone not making an MMO or running a sales channel like Valve do. Like it or not, piracy hurts the viability of big budget PC gaming. Blaming everyone but the asshats who routinely pirate games and never buy them is frankly myopic.
I don’t knwo ANYONE working in the industry who wouldn’t rather take the time wasted on trying to fight piracy and spend it on better games. And the reason they can’t do that is asshats like peter sunde and his bullshit about it being fine to take other peoples hard work for free.
Lets not forget who started all this.
08/03/2010 at 08:58 Vinraith says:
@cliffski
but what do you expect them to do about priacy?
Something that harms the pirates, instead of their paying customers? Being wronged doesn’t give you license to wrong any random person you feel like wronging.
08/03/2010 at 09:14 HermitUK says:
@Cliffski
The problem is DRM is pretty ineffectual against piracy – At best, it’s a delaying tactic, and I often get the feeling that the big piracy release groups rather enjoy the challenge. You tell someone your DRM is uncrackable, they’ll damn well crack it. Even the PS3, a machine using a ton of hardware and software encryption, is well on the way to being opened up – and when that happens, the piracy scene gets to work on the PS3 just as it did on the PS2. May have taken three years, but it shows nothing’s fool proof.
You can’t stop piracy. It’s sad, but it’s true. What you need is to incentivise the purchase and offer a superior product. Valve’s TF2 model, with regular updates and price cuts to keep the sales up, is a good example. Granted, Steam integration plays a big role in its success, and I don’t have answers, but then I’m not a publisher panicing about falling profits.
08/03/2010 at 09:41 Flimgoblin says:
I only hit you because Dave hit me, blame Dave!
Hmm, actually it’s probably more:
I only hit you because social pressures drive me to drink, blame the social pressures!
(ok, my analogies suck, and apologies to any Daves out there feeling picked upon by that)
Not saying I’m on the side of the pirates, but even if there was 0% piracy – we’d still see this sort of DRM creeping its way in as publishers are pretty desperate to kill the second hand game market…
I’m rapidly becoming a Valve fanboy here :P I’m slightly concerned about how much power over my game catalogue they have, and of how much of it would run if their servers suddenly exploded, but they seem to have made a system that is convenient enough that we don’t mind the DRM attached (except when a stupid game has both steam AND CD check, grr. *froth* *rage*)
Oh well, if they ever manage to be right about “PC Gaming is dead!” then there’s always the GoG back catalogue to work through… and the indie games… and writing stuff in Unity…
08/03/2010 at 09:50 Boldoran says:
@cliffski
The shareholders would be stupid for demanding that ubi abandons the PC market. The extra costs for making sure the game runs on PC are pretty small if you plan accordingly from the start. So they would miss out on a lot of potential customers.
If they really are that worried that some pirates who would have bought the game for a console will pirate it on the PC then they can (and often do) delay the release on the PC for a few weeks.
Also you state that without piracy there would be no DRM. I don’t belive that to be true beacause the publishers wan’t the additional benefits of DRM. They can supress the second hand market and they get to see all sorts of data from their users (where do customers come from, when do they play, what kind of gaming system do they have). Also they retain full control over the game and could shut it down whenever they wan’t.
Just recently Amazon remotely deleted an EBook from the Kindels of the user who bought it because there was some issue over copyright. The customers got their money back but still a publisher should sell me his product. Not rent it to me as long as he finds it convenient.
If they stop acting like the huge faceless megacorps that they are then maybe I will feel sorry for them.
08/03/2010 at 11:09 kromagg says:
@cliffski:
You are working from the basic assumption that piracy hurts sales enough for it to have enough of an impact. That seems intuitively right but it doesn’t bear out in practice. In fact, the real piracy rate is certainly not 0 but also not 90% (which is the typical piracy rate in volume, IIRC). If you’re working from the assumption that 90% of potential customers are not paying for your game, then I guess this DRM might seem attractive. If on the other hand you realise 90% of those people aren’t even viable customers, it all gets to look a bit more silly. It’s cutting off the nose to spite the face.
Besides, why destroy value for your customers (DRM) when you can incentivize purchase by giving them added value (community features, easy access to patches, in the old days nice big boxed copies…).
08/03/2010 at 12:16 Urthman says:
No. If a pirate hurts you and you strike out and hurt me, an innocent paying customer, that is no excuse. I’m going to be mad at you, not the pirate who made you mad.
And Cliffski, if you want to make a big sweeping claim that PC gaming is not viable, you need some data to back it up. Sales figures, not piracy estimates. Otherwise, I have no reason to believe you know what you’re talking about. Because I’m still seeing lots and lots of PC games released and offered for sale.
Bioshock was pirated, but we still got Bioshock 2. Assassin’s Creed was pirated, but we’re getting AC2. Supreme Commander was pirated, but we’re getting SC2. Total War was pirated, but we’re still getting Napoleon. STALKER was pirated, but we got Call of Pripyat. Mass Effect was pirated, but we got ME2.
Publishers complain about piracy, but their actions don’t match up with their sky-is-falling rhetoric. If all these games lost money on the PC, we wouldn’t be seeing them continue to release sequels. So I don’t believe these draconian DRM schemes (even if they worked, which they don’t) are really needed to save PC gaming. So no, I don’t blame the pirates for this fiasco, I blame Ubisoft.
08/03/2010 at 06:43 TCM says:
I had to look. I just had to look. I had to look at certain online review website forums.
Ow. Ow. Ow. My mind is hurting. Ow.
(gamespot’s is deliciously supportive of the DRM)
08/03/2010 at 06:56 sigma83 says:
Soobe: That’s like saying it’s the flies fault you died from disease when you were eating it raw.
08/03/2010 at 07:19 StarDrowned says:
Damn you, I sat for over 10 minutes trying to think of a good analogy, and ended up throwing out 3 before I was repeatedly beaten to it. One of them involved Rodney King, I was quite proud of it. Except it wasn’t really accurate…
Anyways, it’s like hating all j-walkers because a cop shoved his billy club up your ass…
Meh, It kinda works, I like the flies or farmer ones above more though. You can replace J-walkers with something SLIGHTLY more severe I guess. Rude people or people who spit on the side walk. Is that worse than j-walking?
Dammit. You get the picture. People aren’t crying about the pirates because they’re being rational. Ubisoft is the one crying about pirates, and look how rationally they reacted.
08/03/2010 at 08:16 Stromko says:
I don’t see why we should like pirates, they’re only acting out of self interest. Crackers, maybe less so, but the vast majority don’t need to think about anyone but themselves. That doesn’t excuse Ubisoft for being dumb as f**k and pulling a bait and switch on their mostly uninformed customers though.
08/03/2010 at 07:32 tehplums says:
Sales gained by new drm and potentialy much less piracy – sales lost by drms negative image and current fiasco = what you fink?
08/03/2010 at 07:43 Stromko says:
Apparently the market had no clue what was going on. They sold enough copies to crash their DRM servers at the very least. Unless there’s a class action lawsuit or a flurry of successful refunds, don’t assume Ubisoft will learn anything from this. The poor bastards who can’t play the games they bought, though, they might learn something.
08/03/2010 at 08:26 tehplums says:
Bingo! Your prize! Superior manhood!
Seriously though as much as we may all get a rage-on what we think and say has no bearing.
Unfortunately we gamers, except those with superior manhood, are basically cheap hoes.
Even my vastly superior manhood did not stand up to the Dragon Age DRM dressed up as exclusive and almost essential but not quite DLC.
08/03/2010 at 07:47 Rakysh says:
Looks like it’s still down, so that makes… 17 hours? The forum thread is currently being mocked by pirates who can play, apparently, or he could be bsing, but still. :D Also, the mods are being called on censoring anti-drm images. Whether that’s true or not I don’t know.
08/03/2010 at 07:51 Magic H8 Ball says:
You’re talking about people who put that DRM in the game or people who bought it knowing that DRM is there?
08/03/2010 at 09:44 drewski says:
Do you really think most people who bought this were aware of the nature and limitations of the specific DRM implementation it contained?
08/03/2010 at 08:21 Magic H8 Ball says:
Well, trying shoes before you buy them is pretty selfish I guess.
Fortunately it’s not illegal(yet)
08/03/2010 at 08:23 Bobsy says:
In all seriousness, is there no customer protection for this? Have the consumer watchdogs not been consulted? Do they have anything to say? Can they / will they do anything about the situation?
08/03/2010 at 08:25 zipdrive says:
Is there any chance the serer failure is a result of a DDoS attack by pirates/enraged random people/martians?
08/03/2010 at 08:33 poop says:
hahahaha this is the most embarrassing possible thing to happen to ubi right now
08/03/2010 at 08:39 Magic H8 Ball says:
Very much so, but it doesn’t really change anything does it? If anything, it shows yet another reason why the DRM is ass. Instead of saying “You can play as long as our servers are on” they will simply say “You can play as long as our servers are on and any of the world’s twelve million people with enough knowledge and resources to bring them down are not currently bored” now.
08/03/2010 at 08:53 zipdrive says:
True, true.
I’ll wait out Ubi’s idiotic system and hope it generates enough backlash to make other publishers pause.
08/03/2010 at 08:42 toni says:
my legal copy works beautiful with the “consumer-friendly” patch from the internet. I didn’t wanna NOT pay for the game but I don’t wanna get shi**ed upon by ubisoft. btw, WHEN I used the normal exe it work without any problems in Vienna, Austria.
08/03/2010 at 08:52 zipdrive says:
so what does your action teach Ubisoft? That they can use their onerous system and people will still buy their games.
08/03/2010 at 08:59 Roberto says:
I saw this headline and burst out laughing. I love this news, I hope this blow knocks some sense into Ubi, this shit is ridiculous
08/03/2010 at 08:59 Mac says:
“Ubi DRM deemed a success” – it’s so secure no fooker can play our game !
08/03/2010 at 09:06 Nesetalis says:
except the pirates :P
08/03/2010 at 09:11 Tom Reynolds says:
The problem with RPS reporting on DRM is that some company will take exception to it and take RPS to court.
‘Promoting bypassing of digital security’ or some such. While it’s a piece of law with only small precedent at the moment (i.e. I rip the CD I bought to my computer – I’m breaking the law but music companies have promised not to sue me), given the flailing around that entertainment companies are going through it’ll surely only be a matter of time.
Yes, yes, I am paranoid.
08/03/2010 at 09:12 bill says:
It’s interesting that there seem to be NO reviews for this game at this time. Is that normal? Usually the best reviews are allowed to come out before launch, and we’d get a flood of reviews around now. right?
I have a slight suspicion that no site is willing to be the first to give this game a score (good or bad), because either way they know they’re gonna catch a load of grief.
Wonder if everyone is waiting to see what the others do?
08/03/2010 at 09:49 drewski says:
Unless the PC version is significantly different, few of the major cross-platform gaming sites ever bother reviewing the PC version seperately – especially if there’s a significant delay in release.
You’ll probably have to wait for PC gaming specialist media, which tends to be print based.
08/03/2010 at 09:15 Frankie The Patrician[PF] says:
Oddly enough, the TAGES servers seem to be down as well.. I’m struggling to activate my recently bought XIII from Gamersgate and it seems I’m not the only one and not just this game…Sigh
08/03/2010 at 09:17 terry says:
Still waiting for the contrite admission of failure.
Edit: also still waiting to play xiii a whole 27 hours after buying it. perhaps i’ll start emailing ubisoft as well as tages, sounds like they need some light distraction :p
08/03/2010 at 09:23 V. Tchitcherine. says:
@Tom.
Pass it on the left hand side.
08/03/2010 at 09:27 Frankie The Patrician[PF] says:
You’re the right stuff
I’ve got my head straight
Goin’ up town
I want to tell you
Hesitating
Standing back in (line)
Overriding
Body shaking
Coming straight down
Never knowing
Are you going?
Is there a next time?
Is there a next time?!
(Yeah yeah yeah, yeah yeah yeah)
Lost and Found
Straight back down
Whats that sound?
Its pulling me straight back in
Head down again
No denying
Still deciding
For a week now
No mistaking
What you’re saying
Standing back in (line)
Revelation
Invitation
Its gonna take time
Never knowing
Are you going?
Is there a next time?
Is there a next time?!
(Yeah yeah yeah, yeah yeah yeah)
Lost and Found
Straight back down
Whats that sound?
Its pulling me straight back in
Head down again
You’re the right stuff
I’ve got my head straight
Going up town
I want to tell you
Hesitating
How you doing? (fine)
Overriding
Body shaking
Coming straight back
Never knowing
Where you’re going
Is there a next time?
Is there a next time?
(Yeah yeah yeah, yeah yeah yeah)
Lost and Found
Straight back down
Whats that sound?
Its pulling me straight back in
Head down again
Lost and Found
Straight back down
Its pulling me straight back in
Head down again
—–
it somehow fits :D
08/03/2010 at 09:35 BIG D says:
Can’t say this surprised me at all, will Ubi learn from it? No.
08/03/2010 at 09:49 Tyndareus says:
The only way to fight this kind of DRM is to stay away from both the legitimate and pirated versions of such games. If Ubisoft sees thousands of people rushing to the various torrent sites to steal their games, they will only be encouraged to come up with even sillier/offensive DRM systems, in their bid to transform a number of those pirated downloads into legitimate sales.
I understand that some of the legitimate customers, in their frustration, might seek out pirated versions of the games they purchased, so that their money is not altogether wasted but, in all honesty, the whole DRM system and the most inadequate responses by UBI to the concerns voiced by gamers and journalists (concerns which have been posted here in RPS) spelled trouble right from the start. “I told you so” might not be a helpful answer to the customers’ concerns right now, but on the other hand it is painfully true.
08/03/2010 at 13:22 archonsod says:
They can come up with the most sinister DRM they can think of, it’s still going to be cracked. If their DRM continues to annoy customers to the extent that they go off and pirate the game, then what they’re effectively doing is converting paying customers into pirates with each iteration. Until they either sort it out or go out of business.
Makes no difference to us. As a publisher the only thing Ubi adds to the games industry is a middleman. They’ve had their day.
08/03/2010 at 09:54 M says:
Is it just AC2 that’s affected?
08/03/2010 at 09:57 Tyndareus says:
Sadly (and inevitably) no: as stated in several sites, all new UBIsoft titles (AC2, SH5, Settlers 7) feature this new DRM.
08/03/2010 at 11:04 squirrel says:
Oh no, my beloved Far Cry 3………
08/03/2010 at 09:54 Dawngreeter says:
This is the part where we point and laugh, right? I know I did.
08/03/2010 at 11:13 Hmm-Hmm. says:
I don’t think so, no. Why? Because it’s customers who are not getting to play a game.. and there’s no backing down of Ubisoft yet.
It can hardly be ‘good’ for people to see that drm in action.. although it may have positive results in that people start paying more attention to drm and maybe.. maybe Ubisoft and other folk will think twice about imposing harsh drm on their customers.
But so far the only thing we see is the negative effects of their drm. Not what may come of it.
08/03/2010 at 22:14 FunkyBadger says:
Will be interesting as and when customers start returning their products.
Wonder if any of our colonial cousins could wangle a class action law suit(e?)?
08/03/2010 at 09:54 Bananaphone says:
Hilarious. This DRM has been a huge success, then.
Find it hard to believe that a niche submarine sim and a console port that was available on other formats last year have placed an ‘exceptional demand’ on the servers.
08/03/2010 at 10:02 SanguineAngel says:
@ Bananaphone: To be honest, I find everything Ubisoft have said and done in the last few months hard to believe. I am genuinely confused as to how anybody with enough intelligence to function can possibly ever think this was a good idea.
Whatever Ubisoft’s ACTUAL intentions are is virtually irrelevant. It’s the effects that matter in this case.
09/03/2010 at 01:42 Stephen says:
I really appreciated Penny Arcade’s take on this – this isn’t Ubisoft’s next addition to the discussion about video game piracy, they’re done talking and they’re just not talking any more. It’s a very sad event in gaming for that reason.
08/03/2010 at 09:56 BIG D says:
Someone on the Ubisoft forum posted this link as help for people who are having trouble logging in – brilliant!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfWDwLnQAjs
08/03/2010 at 10:20 Sarlix says:
LMAO Ubi should play that while your waiting to connect to their severs……
…Connecting please wait…. LA LA LAL LAL LA LA LAL LA LA
08/03/2010 at 13:11 l1ddl3monkey says:
That man has the scariest face ever. It’s like someone made a slightly more realistic Thunderbird puppet (only slightly).
On the plus side: awesome new ring tone for me to annoy folk in the office with!
09/03/2010 at 03:23 V. Tchitcherine. says:
Am I the only person who is genuinely mesmerised by the infectious, impossible cheer on display and the underlying catchy accompaniment? I contend it’s better -even if in an unintentional way- to most modern popular music.
Disagreement is futile! CHEERFUL SOVIET-MAN SINGS FOR FREEDOM!
08/03/2010 at 10:06 Maxheadroom says:
I would love to hear Dave Tosser’s take on the situation :-)
08/03/2010 at 10:11 Sarlix says:
I was just thinking what Tosser would have to say about all of this. :)
08/03/2010 at 10:08 Sarlix says:
@Cliffski
Your argument confuses me, you seem to be pro DRM yet you don’t use it on your own products…Are you not worried the same thing will happen to your games?
While I don’t condone piracy I do not believe it’s the root cause of all the current problems.
For example: Stalker COP was released recently, it was a PC only title and had no DRM except for an old school CD key/Disk check. I looked at the UK sales charts at the time and it was the 6th best selling title (and it had some stiff competition). The stalker games have never used DRM yet they have sold enough to justify three titles.
I could bore you with a list of games that have been released with no DRM but have gone on to be best sellers…. My point is some people will have you believe that if a game as no DRM then it will get pirated to hell and bring in poor sales, this simply is not true…Just go and browser through sales figures and you will see.
If companies really want to protect their games then why not give the buyers some incentive?. For example: Stalker COP came with a nice paper map and art cards…Why can’t more companies do things like that?
The truth is a lot of the bigger companies don’t give a shit about the PC, they just want to take our money and run…If they show some love for the PC then they will probably get some back.
08/03/2010 at 10:30 squirrel says:
The DRM policy on Stalker is really amazing. The STALKER SOC I bought (US version, by THQ), simply has no disc check or online activation at all, not even CD key protection. You heard me right, no CD key protection! (However, http://www.reclaimyourgame.com claim that this version is actually protected by Securom, if so I guess the purpose of such DRM is simply for preventing duplications of disc, nothing else) Yet the title become a million sale title. Two years later I learnt from this site that SOC has been released as a free title (but will mod installation function disabled). Even so, I do not regret paying the fully price buying it during launch day. This game is excellent (as least version 1.0004 or later that is).
Cloud computing for gaming can actually be value-adding. Say, to establish a virtual battlefield to fight against 1000 bots. This kind of computing would be so demanding on CPU power and system rams. If publishers can maintain severs to run those bots for us, we can play the game with computers equipped with less expensive CPU and ram. ARMA 2, which theoretically can run at least 1500 bots (someone posted sth like this on youtube), need some real beast to run it since it totally depend on your own machine to run it. While accessories serve as incentive for server independent games, why not those can be incentives for server dependent games?
08/03/2010 at 11:19 Rich says:
Mass Effect 2′s Cerberus Network is only available to people who don’t pirate or buy second hand, so it is essentially a form of DRM. The incentive? A trickle of free DLC. A fair deal.
The cloud saving and download of levels as you reach them in Ass Creed 2 etc. on the other hand is nothing more than an imposed limitation. Ubisoft’s PR team must be dribbling morons to think that anyone would regard it as a feature*; something that we would actually want.
*Although aren’t bugs sometimes referred to as “random features”?
08/03/2010 at 11:39 Lilliput King says:
I don’t think Cliffski is so much pro-DRM as anti-pirate. The distinction is pertinent when you’ve got people like Wulf going around proclaiming pirates the saviours of PC gaming.
08/03/2010 at 15:19 Sarlix says:
@squirrel
Yeah GSC had the right approach, I believe SOC did over 2 mill.
I like the idea about external severs taking the load off end-users PC, but I don’t see how that could work. I mean the end-users PC would still have to perform all the calculations of the bots etc….hmmm unless I’m missing something?
08/03/2010 at 10:15 Dinger says:
Well, why are we not pissed at the software thieves? Because there are very clear human rights declarations against the concept of collective guilt and punishment. The people who bought the game are not thieves, and should not be treated like they are.
It’s also stupid business sense. You reward people who spend money; you don’t punish them.
08/03/2010 at 10:17 lhzr says:
“with a couple of slightly peculiar work-arounds, they work just fine”
this is incorrect, at least for ac2. parts of the game are unplayable and those peculiar workarounds that you mention involve using other people’s savegames to skip said parts, which means (at least) missing some cutscenes.
08/03/2010 at 11:21 Rich says:
It’s an Ubisoft spy. Get ‘im!
:P
08/03/2010 at 10:20 Soylent Robot says:
I can only laugh very loudly, because thinking of stupidity of this magnitude hurts me
08/03/2010 at 10:22 hydra9 says:
Ugh, I haven’t had my breakfast yet and I made the mistake of looking at page 10 of the Ubi forum thread. If you’re not a Tubgirl / goatse fan, stay away.
08/03/2010 at 10:32 Foamer says:
Heh, same here. I didn’t realise how big the image was and tried to scroll through it quickly, now I need to scrub my eyes out with carbolic.
08/03/2010 at 10:42 Po0py says:
I’m at the point now where I’m done complaining about DRM and simply mourning the loss of a game that I was actually quite excited about. I suppose I’m just going to have to wait until the 360 version drops to a decent price on the pre-owned shelf. I know the 360 is DRM personified but at least I’m not gonna get kicked out of the damn game. And I’m certainly not giving Ubisoft any of my money if I can help it. I hate doing that. It hurts the people who make these games. I have absolutely nothing against game developers. It is purely Ubisoft whom I am taking issue with. There is a greater issue here, and maybe we as gamers have to be cruel to be kind. Keep your money away from Ubisoft.
08/03/2010 at 10:47 Iriscal says:
Hey, you know this isn’t the first time something like this has happened.
You buy a game that you are going to have to be online to just to play, and the servers are down in the first week – sound familiar?
Anyone who’s played World of Warcraft during any of its big launches will know what I’m talking about.
08/03/2010 at 10:56 Tom says:
That’s not the point. Why should I connect to UbiSoft when I want to play a singleplayer game, which should be totally offline.
08/03/2010 at 10:57 Nesetalis says:
but there is a difference.. to start your paying for a service, not a single player game. Trying to force a single player game in to the service model is insulting. BUT this was expected.
everyone knew this was going to happen…. except maybe the Ubisoft heads.. too much shit lodged in their ears, cant hear anything that deep in their own asses.
another big difference is that when wow servers go down, they fix them, quickly, and frequently debit accounts for lost time. I have over the years had many hours of gametime debited to my account due to server downtime.. they actually /care/ about what their customers think.
08/03/2010 at 11:00 dingo says:
Well Blizzard gave us extra play time as compensation!
Do I get some head from Jade for AC2?
In that case: sold!
On a related note: zavi.com reduced the price of AC2 and Silent Hunter 5. Bet they want to get rid of that shit before it totally back fires.
08/03/2010 at 11:01 ShadowNate says:
Yeah, but if the servers are down you just CAN’T play a multiplayer game, and everyone accepts that.
The problem discussed here is that gamers are unable to play a single player game because of the stupid Ubisoft’s server based DRM policy, that except for the DRM related communication, nothing in the gameplay requires an internet connection.
08/03/2010 at 11:16 squirrel says:
Of course, technical problems are inevitable. But then, publishers have to get their lawyers ready for law suits.
08/03/2010 at 10:59 squirrel says:
DRM is an epidemic. If UBI succeeds, other game publishers would follow suit. Secondly, and more importantly, other software businesses are also following suit. MS Office, Adobe CS, Matlab,…. even MS Windows, an operating system, have online authentication implemented. As household user, I can only think of one kind of household software that is eligible to have online authentication implemented, that is, anti-virus programs. The McAfee I am using is a 15-month subscription plan. See? it is a leasing plan, not selling. After all, anti-virus program involve continuous commitment by producers so they have the right to. But what about other application producers? Continuous updating for Windows is provided so MS has the right to control Windows machines through Internet? Dont make me laugh, it is MS to make some unstable system to begin with. Such updates often bring no new functions, but simply to sort out bug that shouldn’t be there in the first place.
10/03/2010 at 01:11 VOR says:
You are discriminating against companies.
It’s okay for a third party provider to continually protect you against threats, but not the same one that actually knows about and made the OS you are being threatened on?
Ooooooooookay…
Also, view it like this – you are on a platform. Even if it is perceived as secure right now, smart people will find ways to create exploits, even on the best, most perfect open source OS.
This is the counterparty actively developing malware against YOU.
It is irrelevant whether it is a trojan programmer that abuses the fact that most people (not MS, people) use admin priviledges, or an exploit programmer that abuses a bad handling of buffers.
Both write a program that benefits them over you and outsmarts the status quo.
You say you are fine paying party X for a post-effect protection(virus scans are always AFTER the fact, even if realtime protection is on the virus already has to be ON your system), but you are unwilling to pay for updated protection to PREVENT you from even getting a risk onto your system(patching holes for exploits to work with)?
How turned upside down IS your reasoning, dear sir.
Also putting aside the fact that you will apply the same reason for lease and pay to one party – ongoing development costs – but not the other.
All you are effectively saying is that you DEMAND that the people YOU CHOOSE must be capable of writing several hundreds of thousands of lines of code so that they can never in any way be exploited, because you feel it is unfair for you to pay them for ongoing development after a one-shot release.
Do you have even the faintest idea how ludicrous your demands are?
So, to summarize: you have chosen to have an opinion and personalized preference, discriminating arbitrarily, rather than based on factual reality and reason.
Just thought I might point that out.
08/03/2010 at 11:12 Carra says:
-If the cracked versions don’t work they would have been nuked so it’s a safe assumption that they do work.
-”First thing tomorrow” really doesn’t cut it in a case like this. This should be fixed asap.
-At least when the WoW servers go down for a day you get a reimbursement at the end of the month. Here you’re just screwed.
08/03/2010 at 13:31 Toby says:
There is no scene crack of asscreed, thus nothing to nuke. The crack is not working, contrary to what seems to be the accepted idea round these parts. Every time a trigger for a mission/cutscene occurs, nothing happens. It does seem a small amound of data is being transferred regularly. The SH5 crack is working it seems though, and of course it has been scened.
08/03/2010 at 11:17 Caleb367 says:
I also doubt that aggressive DRM has any positive effect on sales. I can remember such things of beauty like Supreme Commander and The Witcher being completely free of any online activation / disc check / whatever. And selling pretty well nonetheless.
On the other hand, the other day I got a last year game called Codename Panzers Cold War. Installed it, got it to activation… and the sodding TAGES server was down and unresponsive. Hey, another splendid example of being punished for NOT pirating it.
The worst of it all is that the fulgid example of human intellect who approved this whole Asscreed (my inner 13-year-old is still giggling at the word) will actually keep his place and blame it all on the poor code-slaves who he himself forced to put this craptastic failure in action. As anyone who has ever heard of corporate business knows.
This is beginning to sound like a Dilbert strip.
08/03/2010 at 11:30 Tei says:
If is normal that servers are down on release, then this system of DRM will normally not work on release, and is a very bad system, and Ubisoft is poorly managed.
If is not normal that servers are down on release, Ubisoft is poorly managed.
Ubisoft is poorly managed either way.
08/03/2010 at 11:45 squirrel says:
Not really, considering the launching demand for server capacity would be very huge given many people rush to buy the games and activate them ASAP. And here we are talking about a game that requires continuous interaction with server, this makes thing worse.
My recently bought Bad Company 2 also has some serious connection problem. Say, for occasions I cannot login to EA server, and I got kicked out by PB, the supposedly automatically updating anti-cheating system, which has been manually updated as automatic updates fail for unknown reasons. Therefore, UBI is not exceptionally poor in management in this regard. BTW, I sincerely hope EA learnt from the above problem so that they wont ruin Battlefield 3.
08/03/2010 at 13:03 Tei says:
“Therefore, UBI is not exceptionally poor in management in this regard.”
Lets say that companys like EA and Ubisoft underbudget his auth servers, creating servers with a capacity for 20.000 accounts to manage 200.000 acounts. In the case of EA and BC2, you can’t avoid some central server to store unlocks.. you can ofcourse avoid storing there favorites and “last servers connected” and who know what other data.
Ubisoft is not only underbudgetting his server (sells 200k preorders, create a server for 20k games) but is doing so on a singleplayer game, that sould not be affected by these problems. In other terms: I know I get some value back from multiplayer games, by playing againts other users, the content is the other users, I get back some “smart AI” (or not soo smart ai in the case of some BC2 recons). On a singleplayer game, I don’t get that value, the replayability is much smaller, but on the other side, I can play it on the north pole, withouth internet conexion. By adding multiplayer restriction to a singleplayer game, I am creating a game that has the worst of both worlds: limited playability with online restrictions.
We told then that this system will angryfy players, since is a horrible bad idea that will fail more than work. And for some users will fail silently. Some people will try to play this game, be unable (because of some firewall rule) and stop it. These people will not make post about it on the internet. And we don’t want that, because it hurts PC gamming.
08/03/2010 at 13:16 Forscythe says:
@squirrel – at least when the bad company 2 servers go down you can still play the single player
08/03/2010 at 11:45 TooNu says:
I read “Ass Creed II” and laughed silently at how precise this little abreviation is :)
08/03/2010 at 11:46 Name (required) says:
Once and for all:
There is no working crack for AC2 (yet).
You can not play any story missions just run around the cities.
(Just look aroud some torrent sites and check your facts).
08/03/2010 at 11:48 gulag says:
Just a warning to fellow RPS-ites. Don’t delve too deeply into the AssCreed DRM forum thread. While the forum moderatrors are hard at work removing links to cracks (or whatever) for the game, they are leaving up some very unpleasent images. Cock Dragon and Wall of Goats.ex being some indication of what to expect.
You were warned.
08/03/2010 at 13:34 suibhne says:
Wait, those were posted by forum *moderators*?
08/03/2010 at 11:52 Radiant says:
The only way to fight this is for reviewers to mark the game down.
If a game pokes you in the eye every few levels you mark it down yes?
Well these games poke you in the eye every time your wireless/router/inet goes down.
244 angry internet men mean nothing but a dozen or so bad review scores means the world.
08/03/2010 at 11:55 Radiant says:
Also thanks for making me aware about Cock Dragon.
HOLY SHIT BALLS.
08/03/2010 at 12:33 LionsPhil says:
Is that a dragon? I mean, it’s obviously made of cocks (which are hilariously partially pixellated), but it looks more like some kind of horriffic Rule 34′d Power Rangers villain.
Or perhaps someone’s Spore creation.
08/03/2010 at 11:58 Grant Gould says:
It used to be that telecoms systems couldn’t even get close to market if they couldn’t do “five nines” reliability. The majority of software I’ve written has been built for at most minutes of downtime per year, including upgrade and maintenance windows. It’s not rocket science, it’s just careful design, proper backup/standby provisioning, and writing a lot of tedious but well-understood safeguards.
08/03/2010 at 12:16 Skurmedel says:
They don’t have to worry about that, it’s just silly gamers spending their hard earned money on this. And we keep doing it even though we get shafted. I must say the big game publishers almost make the movie and music industry look good.
08/03/2010 at 12:22 Hollowpoint says:
“…Ubisoft could not have been sent a more clear message by a worldwide reaction of outrage.”
Really? I think a much clearer message would have been if those people simply didn’t buy the product. A CAPSLOCKED tantrum on a forum doesn’t change things – money does. The consumers cried and stomped their feet on the intarwebz but still went out and gave Ubisoft their money.
08/03/2010 at 12:25 manintheshack says:
Does the implementation of the term ‘exceptional demand’ mean that they can’t whinge about sales the next time they screw us over? Does it also mean that they anticipated the effect of the crippling DRM to go much further in dissuading buyers?
08/03/2010 at 12:49 oceanclub says:
I was curious about that statement/excuse too. They appear to be claiming that sales were way beyond their expectations.
P.
08/03/2010 at 12:59 Zerai says:
Personally, i think that the most important of all this, is that Ubi is educating a lot of people to the dangers of DRM.
Think about it, mostly we can complain and talk about DRM, but now, everyone who didn’t knew about it is being exposed to what it can bring, and next time they’ll check if a game has DRM before going to buy.
Everyone who bought this one will think again before buying another Ubisoft game, the losses for this DRM will come in the next game.
08/03/2010 at 13:00 Rich says:
It may just be the Monday malaise talking, but I don’t expect anything positive to come out of this. They’ll either use this whole DRM/sales/server nonsense to hurt us more, or just stick their fingers in their ears ignore the whole damn episode.
08/03/2010 at 13:15 Dreamhacker says:
Ubisoft needs to back the f- down.
08/03/2010 at 13:38 JKjoker says:
what do you know, Ubisoft is blaming the pirates : http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/ubisoft-drm-was-attacked-at-weekend
they are also still claiming there is no crack for either game, that almost no one was affected by the server downtime and that we have always been at war with Eurasia
08/03/2010 at 17:00 Bluebreaker says:
Wait, I thought we where allied with them and at war with Eastasia. Oh wait its all a lie.
08/03/2010 at 13:39 Evo says:
Anyone who knew about the DRM and still bought Assassin’s Creed 2 has no one to blame but themselves.
08/03/2010 at 13:40 BIG D says:
Ubisoft ((according to Eurogamer) are saying the servers where attacked over the weekend! Smells like bovine excreta to me!
08/03/2010 at 13:53 Mario Figueiredo says:
It could be true, they were attacked. It wouldn’t surprise me and it’s not the first time anyone in here hears of DoS attacks.
However, it’s quite irrelevant if they were attacked or not. Their DRM requires their servers to be always up. Any change to this is Ubisoft responsibility. If they were DoSed, they failed in their contract with their customers.
08/03/2010 at 13:51 rocketman71 says:
So, not only don’t they know how to program or how to configure servers, this is also the pirates’ fault?. Even if pirates do a DDOS, they should have been prepared, since otherwise their customers can’t play the product they paid for. Or, rather, service, since we’re not buying anything here anymore. Ubi is getting more ridiculous by the day.
Also, “We also confirm that, at this time, no valid cracked version of either Silent Hunter 5 or Assassin’s Creed II are available.”. Seems they don’t have any problems spewing bald faced lies.
08/03/2010 at 14:24 Mario Figueiredo says:
Also, “We also confirm that, at this time, no valid cracked version of either Silent Hunter 5 or Assassin’s Creed II are available.”. Seems they don’t have any problems spewing bald faced lies.
I downloaded the crack this weekend. I have no intention of buying the game, or even play it. I have no interest for silly action games the likes of Assassin Creed. But I wanted to see where the FUD was. And I can confirm to you, it’s on the pirates side (not on Ubisoft who is right in saying the game isn’t fully playable, and not on the crackers side who are right in that the cracks removes the always-online requirement.
The game is not fully playable yet. The crack works. But there’s indeed online content that becomes unavailable. From all I could gather from my own limited packet sniffing abilities, what is downloaded is very small snippets of code that activate portions of the game that you already have. To be clear, the game DVD has everything you need to play the game, or so it seemed to me. However, it was coded so that portions of the game need “validating code” in order to be run/displayed. These are very tiny snippets of code that operate much like a script language and that get compiled/interpreted at runtime by the game engine.
Now…
It’s only a matter of time until these portions of online code are fully assembled by the crackers and a final release (known as proper release) is made available. Recent posts on Ubisoft forums and elsewhere on the internet (for those knowing where to look), populated with ascii art and “cryptic” messages indicate it should be this week.
What pirates (those who distribute and download) and some of you guys in here fail to realize, is that what will establish the success of this DRM is not if it will be cracked. But whether or not the game sold to good enough numbers. Until gamers understand that buying games puts the companies who owns these games in charge, DRM measures, no matter how vicious they may be, will always be a reality. In the face of a DRM measure such like we witnessed by Ubisoft, the only action that the company will ever take notice is lack of sales. But I guess its too late for that. As expected, every gamer + 1 that criticized the DRM went and bought the game, preferring 10 hours of fun, over integrity between what they think and what they do.
08/03/2010 at 15:04 Sarlix says:
@Mario
Thanks for the info. I would like to think most people who post on RPS stuck to their laurels (is that the correct saying?) and didn’t buy it…Reading around forums etc I get the impression a lot of people voted with their wallets and didn’t buy. I just hope it was enough to make a difference…..
08/03/2010 at 14:02 Uhm says:
So they’re saying that because of their DRM, people on the other side of the World could stop me playing my single player game on my computer and there’s nothing I or they can do about it. Oh, that’s much better then.
08/03/2010 at 14:15 Cooper says:
http://twitter.com/Ubisoft/status/10166866294
08/03/2010 at 14:24 kimvidard says:
Honestly, if I was in PR, I would say that such an event is a fantastic PR move for piracy :)
I cannot think how Ubisoft could actually HELP more piracy on the PC than by doing just that.
If you put that in perspective with the whole ‘ripping the No CD from Reloaded’ story from earlier, it seems that Ubi is actually advocating the use of pirated games rather than paid one. Puzzling…
Maybe, just maybe, they could take a page from Valve’s book. I mean, DRM is pretty severe there too, but everyone seems to be fine with it, because you can still play a game when cut from the net.
08/03/2010 at 17:01 Spliter says:
@kimvidard
I think they’re trying to send a message to their paying customers.
09/03/2010 at 09:52 MacQ says:
And they’re succeding. But the message is a little different than they think it is. Come to think of it… it’s completely oposite. :D
08/03/2010 at 14:35 Other Steve says:
Oh look…
It was the evil pirates after all. Possibly as revenge for the crack not working or some such horseshit.
(Next up: Downtime? What Downtime? Our Servers have 100% uptime and only evil pirates are having problems.)
Face it, Ubisoft have absolutely no hesitation in lying through their teeth about this and are going to continue to fly in the face of reality insisting that they haven’t just flushed millions or whatever down the pan in engineering for themselves the biggest gaming PR disaster in years.
Even from a basic business perspective nothing about this entire charade even makes sense and as a sales security proposal I don’t see how it ever got past a consultancy stage. (If it ever went through one ~ which I seriously doubt)
The whole world told them.
It’s not working.
It was never going to work.
It will never work.
& Ubisoft don’t give a fuck.
08/03/2010 at 15:28 GT3000 says:
That’s dedication for you, even if utterly blind.
08/03/2010 at 15:15 Draco says:
I just received the offer to pre-purchase Just Cause 2 on Steam, wich I was thinking to do. But seem that it comes with “cloud support for save games”.
I only hope that’s optional because I just refrained from play SHV, and now this.
08/03/2010 at 15:20 AndrewC says:
The operative word is ‘support’ meaning ‘optional’.
This Ubisoft thing has sent the Internet loopy, like sharks with blood in the water. Tiny, annoying sharks.
08/03/2010 at 16:36 GT3000 says:
“We’re happy to say ACII & SH5 are withstanding the efforts to crack them.We see the rumors but still confirm no valid cracked versions exist” Ubisoft Twitter
Lol. We’ll see.
08/03/2010 at 17:03 Azradesh says:
So Ubi are saying “Yay! No one can play our games!!!”?
08/03/2010 at 17:40 Joe says:
Glad to see they have their priorities straight..
08/03/2010 at 20:47 GT3000 says:
Our servers are under attack again. Some gamers are experiencing trouble signing in. We’re working on it and will keep you posted -Ubi Twitter feed
So far I haven’t experienced any trouble with my purchased copy. Any who is?
09/03/2010 at 09:48 MacQ says:
This is only for the best. That means that the cracked versions work, ’cause they don’t connect to their servers.
08/03/2010 at 16:58 Spliter says:
This could not have turned out better. Really. This really couldn’t not have turned out better :]
It’s a shame those that paid cannot play the game they paid for (while I’m playing it right now :D ), I really hope next time their customers vote with their wallets.
08/03/2010 at 17:09 Vinraith says:
It’s increasingly clear from the frequency and transparency of the corporate spin coming out of Ubi that the people at the top of this thing have no interest in being rational about it, nor of acting in their own best interest (let alone that of their customers). This is obstinacy and, I’m starting to suspect, vindictiveness rather than good business sense. At this point, I suspect the only way for the madness to end will be in some significant firings. Here’s hoping for sooner rather than later.
08/03/2010 at 18:38 Kalle says:
How could it possibly NOT be good that DRM completely decapitates the gaming experience for a lot of people? The biggest threat is and always has been lethargy and indifference. People stay lethargic and indifference when it comes to their rights most of the time, but when their gaming experience is shattered, they tend to raise pitch forks, and in doing so, the chances that they’ll get educated on DRM and why it’s bad (other than fucking with their experience) rise. So yes, this be the time for pointing and laughing.
08/03/2010 at 19:15 Scabrous120 says:
A very silly reply system.
08/03/2010 at 22:36 Pantsman says:
The worst part of this is that there’s actually a seed of a good idea at the root of Ubisoft’s Tree of DRM Misery. The hallmark of the worst DRM schemes (Starforce, Securom) is that they harm the experience of legitimate users without affecting that of pirates, excep occasionally by delaying games a week or two for the pirates. The hallmark of the best and most successful DRM schemes has been that they actually create additional value for paying customers. This is what Steam does, and to a lesser extent what Stardock’s games do as well. Playing games online with Steam requires that they be legitimate, but rewards users with community features and the ability to access their game library anywhere.
We can sort of see that this is what Ubisoft was trying to do with their system. In theory their system provides the consumer with some benefits like save games being accessible on any computer. But they’ve utterly botched the implementation such that it causes the user far more pain that it prevents. I just hope they don’t learn the wrong lesson from all this.
09/03/2010 at 10:25 BIG D says:
What’s the answer to 99 out of 100 questions? Money!
Ubisoft just don’t give a shit, all they care about it money. Its about keeping the board of directors happy. This is all it comes down to, what a crying shame. I really can’t wait to see the outcome of all this, it’s the most captivating gaming story for a long while…
09/03/2010 at 17:50 Fireshark says:
This is such a rip off I bough Ac2 and now i can never play cause it always broken THIS IS BU**CR*P I PAID FOR THE GAME AND CANT PLAY IT SCREW YOU UBISOFT FROM NOW ON IM JUST GONNA PIRATE YOUR GAMES.
09/03/2010 at 17:51 Fireshark says:
Bought*
16/03/2010 at 11:26 crypt1x says:
Official statement from the forum behind DDOS.
———————————————–
First and foremost, we apologize for inconvenience to the players who bought the game and now cannot play. Please understand that we would prefer not to impact you negatively if we had the choice. In fact, many of us have a licensed version and also cannot play the game during DDOS. However, Ubisoft designed the DRM in a way that holds their customers hostage. Reasons for that will be explained further. The simple truth is that if we don’t stop this DRM system now, it will become accepted for most PC games by ALL major publishers. For the sake of the future of PC gaming and consumer rights PLEASE TAKE A STAND WITH US.
What are we trying to achieve
We are trying to get Ubisoft to remove their DRM or at the very least to implement an offline mode. In the bigger scheme of things, we are trying to prevent this form of DRM from taking over the PC gaming market.
Why Ubisoft has done this
People who think that this is about preventing piracy of a specific game are missing the BIGGER PICTURE. Ubisoft is testing a new platform for game delivery (think: Steam). This is NOT about piracy, as much as it is about maximizing revenue. If your game is tied to your online account, you are no longer in possession of the game. The game cannot be resold. It cannot be given as a gift. You cannot buy a game from a different platform (think: Half-Life 2). You cannot lend it to a friend. If you can only play the game while online, Ubisoft is in complete control of how and when you use the game you bought. In the future, it enables them to implement whatever pricing structures they feel like. They can even charge you per save if they want to.
What Ubisoft could have done differently
If Ubisoft had more concern about you – their customers, they would have implemented fall-back mechanisms. For example, forcing online saving and pausing the game when the connection is lost was unnecessary. IT DOES NOT MAKE THE GAME EASIER TO CRACK. Instead, the game could easily pause at the next checkpoint. However, it was not their objective to create a worthwhile gaming experience. Their objective was to BETA-TEST THE MOST RESTRICTIVE FORM OF DRM POSSIBLE to see how easily users will adopt it. Unfortunately, without this protest, they will be successful.
If Ubisoft wins, you can expect this form of DRM to become standard in the PC gaming industry.
-webxakep.net
http://webxakep.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6067
18/03/2010 at 23:35 Phil jones says:
http://tinyurl.com/againstdrm
A new group devoted to stopping this type of drm.
as its catching on (see C&C 4 by EA), better dealt with sooner rather than later!!
28/03/2010 at 13:55 NightMare says:
DRM = Bullshit
04/04/2010 at 00:15 oviz says:
im playing with server emulator, ac2 working fine :]
09/04/2010 at 18:13 joe kolbi says:
start ping 216.98.48.5 -t -l 1024
start ping 216.98.48.35 -t -l 1024
start ping 63.251.9.27 -t -l 1024
start ping 87.248.211.209 -t -l 1024
start ping 87.248.216.34 -t -l 1024
start ping 92.52.125.20 -t -l 1024
start ping 63.251.9.26 -t -l 1024
start ping 216.98.51.199 -t -l 1024
start ping 216.98.51.201 -t -l 1024
start ping 216.98.51.202 -t -l 1024
start ping 216.98.51.203 -t -l 1024
start ping 216.98.51.204 -t -l 1024
start ping 216.98.51.205 -t -l 1024
start ping 87.248.216.34 -t -l 1024
start ping 87.248.217.229 -t -l 1024
start ping 87.248.218.117 -t -l 1024
start ping 87.248.219.138 -t -l 1024
start ping ubisoft.com -t -l 1024
start ping static7.cdn.ubi.com -t -l 1024
start ping static6.cdn.ubi.com -t -l 2014
start ping static5.cdn.ubi.com -t -l 1024
start ping static4.cdn.ubi.com -t -l 1024
start ping static3.cdn.ubi.com -t -l 1024
start ping static2.cdn.ubi.com -t -l 1024
start ping static1.cdn.ubi.com -t -l 1024
start ping secure.ubi.com -t -l 1024
start ping onlineconfigservice.ubi.com -t -l 1024
start ping ubi.com -t -l 1024
copy paste this to Start\command promt* (for ubi servers)
21/04/2010 at 20:46 Danny says:
oooohhh noooozzzzz