PDA

View Full Version : The relation between Ubisoft, pirates and customers explained



ZIGS
29-10-2011, 06:07 PM
http://i49.tinypic.com/35au813.jpg

That is all

Althea
29-10-2011, 06:10 PM
Disagree. Despite the always-on portion sometimes being a bit restrictive and annoying at times, it's quite fair in other aspects. You don't need the disc in, you don't get other DRM like SecuROM (I believe) and you get unlimited installs.

At least you don't have to have six thousand accounts, the disc in the drive and/or unnecessary software running consistently.

Unaco
29-10-2011, 06:19 PM
So... What you're saying is Pirates are tricking UBISOFT into thinking the Customers are being bad to UBISOFT, and then UBI are retaliating against Customers. So, essentially, it's the Pirate's fault.

F*cking Pirates.

Althea
29-10-2011, 06:22 PM
So... What you're saying is Pirates are tricking UBISOFT into thinking the Customers are being bad to UBISOFT, and then UBI are retaliating against Customers. So, essentially, it's the Pirate's fault.

F*cking Pirates.
... I see what you did there, and I commend you. Have +1 to your Prestige level.

sinister agent
29-10-2011, 07:06 PM
Are you saying Ubisoft dress like twats?

That's probably libel.

NecroKnight
29-10-2011, 07:12 PM
There will always be piracy, you shouldn't make things complicated with draconic bullshit DRM's for your legal customers because of that.

vinraith
29-10-2011, 07:17 PM
and you get unlimited installs.


...until they turn off the servers in a couple of years.

cowthief skank
29-10-2011, 07:28 PM
you get unlimited installs

When did this become something to commend a publisher for?

Althea
29-10-2011, 07:49 PM
When did this become something to commend a publisher for?
In a day of activation limits, SecuROM et all, I think a major publisher not limiting installs/activations is a good thing.

Drake Sigar
29-10-2011, 08:02 PM
If the game actually plays, then they've still got one up on EA.

Spider Jerusalem
29-10-2011, 08:09 PM
the best drm is to have your games be shit, which ubisoft does quite well.

Althea
29-10-2011, 08:54 PM
the best drm is to have your games be shit, which ubisoft does quite well.
Actually, I would say Ubisoft's output is consistently of a better quality than EA and possibly 2K.

vinraith
29-10-2011, 09:14 PM
The graphic does nicely summarize Ubi's overt, pointless hostility to their own paying customers. Well played, ZIGS. The part that's missing, however, is the customer getting up and kicking Ubi in the balls for their trouble. Ubisoft PC sales are down 90% since all this nonsense started, and I can't think of a publisher that deserves it more.

Rob Zacny wrote a beautiful piece on the subject here:

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/10/07/opinion-ubisoft-piracy-and-the-death-of-reason/


In terms of actual sales, however, the results seem decidedly mixed. Michael Pachter told Eurogamer that Ubisoft’s “PC game sales are down 90% without a corresponding lift in console sales.”

Althea
29-10-2011, 09:23 PM
The graphic does nicely summarize Ubi's overt, pointless hostility to their own paying customers. Well played, ZIGS. The part that's missing, however, is the customer getting up and kicking Ubi in the balls for their trouble. Ubisoft PC sales are down 90% since all this nonsense started, and I can't think of a publisher that deserves it more.

Rob Zacny wrote a beautiful piece on the subject here:

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/10/07/opinion-ubisoft-piracy-and-the-death-of-reason/
Until Ubisoft confirm those figures, I'm calling BS. Michael Pachter is rather notorious for being a bit... shit with numbers.

If PC game sales are down, explain this:
Might & Magic: Clash of Heroes PC port.
Might & Magic Heroes VI + Collector's Edition + Merchandise
The Settlers 7 + DLC + GotY Edition + Collector's Edition + Merchandise
Anno 2070 + Collector's Edition
Assassin's Creed: Whatever the next one is + Special Edition + Collector's Edition (Did I get that right?)
Driver: Whatsit + Collector's Edition (Right?)
Tintin
And so forth.

If the PC was doing that bad, chances are Ubisoft would likely cut its losses and drop the PC as a platform. But they haven't, and they clearly have no signs of stopping with high quality PC exclusive titles.

vinraith
29-10-2011, 09:29 PM
I'd like to think that the absence of an always-online requirement on several major upcoming titles (Assassin's Creed Revelation and Anno 2070, in particular) might be an indicator that they've finally learned their lesson. I'm probably being much too optimistic, however, seeing as we've been down this road before.

Nalano
29-10-2011, 09:31 PM
I'm probably being much too optimistic, however, seeing as we've been down this road before.

Yes, we have. And it was called Driver: San Francisco.


In a day of activation limits, SecuROM et all, I think a major publisher not limiting installs/activations is a good thing.

That's quite a low bar you've set.

vinraith
29-10-2011, 09:32 PM
Yes, we have. And it was called Driver: San Francisco.

Yup. That one didn't sting for me, personally, since I couldn't care less about the franchise. Nevertheless, it's pretty clear that Ubi's piratephobia overrides every other motivating factor, including an interest in driving sales or (*snort*) treating their customers decently. I just hope they don't pull a "From Dust" on the two titles I mentioned, I'd really hate to have to pass on those.

Althea
29-10-2011, 09:35 PM
That's quite a low bar you've set.
A positive thing is a positive thing, regardless of how big or small it is.

vinraith
29-10-2011, 09:36 PM
That's quite a low bar you've set.

I like Ubisoft games because they don't put anthrax in their retail copies.

Yet.

Shit, I shouldn't be giving them ideas.

sinister agent
29-10-2011, 09:38 PM
A positive thing is a positive thing, regardless of how big or small it is.

That's not positive, though. It's just less negative. Pointlessly inconveniencing someone slightly less than you used to doesn't mean you're doing a good thing.

Nalano
29-10-2011, 09:41 PM
A positive thing is a positive thing, regardless of how big or small it is.

The fact that I'm not stalking your home right now with the intent of beating you within an inch of your life is not a positive thing.

IT'S WHAT'S EXPECTED.

Althea
29-10-2011, 09:45 PM
IT'S WHAT'S EXPECTED.
Yeah, and I expect games to work, for companies to support them with more than one patch and to generally do right by their customers, but how many do? Just because you expect something, it doesn't mean you'll get it. When you do get what you expect, how is that anything but positive?

I'll be honest. I'd take UPlay & Always-On over Steamworks and/or SecuROM any day.

Drake Sigar
29-10-2011, 09:50 PM
That's not positive, though. It's just less negative. Pointlessly inconveniencing someone slightly less than you used to doesn't mean you're doing a good thing.
It sort of does when that practice has become the norm. Anthrax and punches (or the more widely feared anthrax punches) are clearly not acceptable in our society.

Oh, err, I mean, down with Ubisoft! *grabs pitchfork*

Nalano
29-10-2011, 09:58 PM
Yeah, and I expect games to work, for companies to support them with more than one patch and to generally do right by their customers, but how many do? Just because you expect something, it doesn't mean you'll get it. When you do get what you expect, how is that anything but positive?

I'll be honest. I'd take UPlay & Always-On over Steamworks and/or SecuROM any day.

Are you aware that this is exactly what they've been doing for the last few years? Winnowing away your expectations to the point where they could box dogshit and charge sixty bucks for it?

We're supposed to like capitalism because it's supposed to give us the highest quality product possible at the lowest price possible. What we have now works more like a cabal of six companies that lowers our "expectations" to the point where we're supposed to have two forms of ID so we can wait in line for the privilege of paying to get kicked in the nuts.

Honestly. You're the consumer. More than having no standards, how can you possibly argue that the rest of us should have none?

Althea
29-10-2011, 10:12 PM
how can you possibly argue that the rest of us should have none?
I'm arguing no such thing. I'm arguing that Ubisoft have done what they believe to be in the best interest for their consumers, whether it's the decision of themselves or it's been pressed upon them by shareholders or someone like that, and that they are - in terms of major publishers one of the least evil ones around. They give PC exclusive releases, they support their games (Perhaps not as much as they should, but more than some), they don't cripple their games with 18 forms of DRM and they give us the attention we deserve.

I don't think Ubisoft are perfect, far from it, and I'll happily criticise them for things I think they've done wrong. But I'm not going to boycott the only major publisher putting out their kind of releases, because I don't see what good that will do to me or them. I want Blue Byte to keep making Settlers games, I want Related Designs to keep making Anno games, I want Ubisoft to keep using other developers to make M&M games. If I turn my back on Ubisoft, I turn my back on three franchises which mean something to me.

Games these days seem to be so throwaway. I don't care too much about what'll happen in 5-10 years with my game, because the chances are that I'll be playing something else and won't want to go back. Games today aren't made like games were 10 years ago. I won't hold them to the same standards because the situations have changed. But the threat of Ubi shutting the servers down is no less risky than Steam going down. How many of us here have tens or hundreds of our currency into Steam? I know I do, and I bet most of us have a substantial collection in some form or another. Steam is just as restrictive, if not more so, than other forms of DRM, yet no-one really seems to be bitching about it any more. Heck, we've got a bunch of devout "No Steam, No Sale" sheeple kicking around.

Are companies being a bit dickish with things like DRM? Yeah, they are. I don't agree with always-on DRM, I don't even agree that much with disc checks these days as they're pointless, I don't agree with having to have a billion accounts to play my games. I want to install, patch and go. Closest I've had to that recently? Ubisoft, oddly. Rainbow Six Vegas 2 I can just boot up. The Settlers 6 I just boot up. The Settlers 7? It boots up UPlay, hit a button and then bam, I'm in. Anno 1404? I can just boot that up too.

Hensler
29-10-2011, 10:20 PM
That animation doesn't really explain anything.

Doesn'tmeananything
29-10-2011, 10:23 PM
That animation doesn't really explain anything.

It does.

For more intelligent arguments visit http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/

slick_101
29-10-2011, 10:42 PM
To be honest. If you like the look of a game. Buy it. Then just put a crack on top. I've done this for so many ubisoft games its like second nature.... Now stop arguing about DRM and get to the good stuff. I.e. THE GAME.

outoffeelinsobad
29-10-2011, 10:49 PM
Why does he take off his shirt?

Nalano
29-10-2011, 10:55 PM
I'm arguing no such thing. I'm arguing that Ubisoft have done what they believe to be in the best interest for their consumers

Then let me disavow you of this misguided notion that Ubisoft or any other company gives a shit about their customers. They give a shit about their bottom line.

And the funniest thing is, you know who else were more than willing to shit on their customers in perceived service to their bottom line? The member companies of the RIAA. Worked out so well for them, which is why Virgin and Tower records are doing splendidly and filesharing is dead.

Althea
29-10-2011, 10:58 PM
Yes, because file-sharing = piracy, as everyone knows. Just like how Twitter is the great evil that allows people to riot.

And I'm not in a position to comment about the RIAA.

Nalano
29-10-2011, 11:13 PM
And I'm not in a position to comment about the RIAA.

Clearly.

Look. Valve has pretty much proven (http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/10/25/gabe-newell-on-piracy-and-steams-success-in-russia/) that you don't need to shit on your customers with ridiculous DRM to get sales. Apple's pretty much proven that suing your customers for not buying your shitty CDs is a pretty shitty business model and there are better alternatives.

Companies like Ubisoft are doing what they think is best for the business, and they're wrong. Piracy is prevalent. I can get Driver San Fran off of Bittorrent without issue, just like I could get AssCreed 2 a week after release. Their DRM has never worked. No DRM has ever worked. Every dollar they spend on DRM is wasted money, because it's a flawed business model.

If you want continued games from their member developers, then you'd be best served trying to convince them that their system is wrong and there is a better way. It isn't even a moral question. It's a "hey, idiots, you're running the company into the ground on outdated concepts."

Vexing Vision
29-10-2011, 11:24 PM
In a day of activation limits, SecuROM et all, I think a major publisher not limiting installs/activations is a good thing.

Well, it was UbiSoft who actually first started using SecuROM to the point where Settlers V is still the title holding the record for the most returns in the entire industry, because the version of SecuROM they used was incompatible with any older DVD-drives.

I haven't bought a single Ubi game since their new DRM apart from RUSE, which did not feature it. So it's more the pirates trying to convince UbiSoft to commit suicide one customer at a time.

Nalano
29-10-2011, 11:30 PM
So it's more the pirates trying to convince UbiSoft to commit suicide one customer at a time.

No, it's Ubisoft committing suicide because it cares more about pirates than it does customers.

It's the difference between wanting Ubisoft to die and wanting Ubisoft to be run right. I want Ubisoft to be run right, but they seem hellbent on falling on their own sword.

Spider Jerusalem
29-10-2011, 11:42 PM
Actually, I would say Ubisoft's output is consistently of a better quality than EA and possibly 2K.
bit of a strange comparison, because neither (less so for 2k) of those are exactly paragons of quality.

Jacques
30-10-2011, 12:04 AM
Well, it was UbiSoft who actually first started using SecuROM to the point where Settlers V is still the title holding the record for the most returns in the entire industry, because the version of SecuROM they used was incompatible with any older DVD-drives.

I haven't bought a single Ubi game since their new DRM apart from RUSE, which did not feature it. So it's more the pirates trying to convince UbiSoft to commit suicide one customer at a time.

SecuROM has been on games for years and years and years, way before the fuss about limited installs came about, and way before the Starforce stuff kicked off.

TillEulenspiegel
30-10-2011, 01:01 AM
Wasn't SecuROM previously just a disc check? Hence the name? It's mostly unrelated to the modern DRM that shares the same name.

By the way, I'm continually amazed that the whole Overton Window thing keeps being proven right. You really just have to take a step back and think, to avoid being taken in by what is very simple, very deliberate manipulation.

Nalano
30-10-2011, 01:29 AM
Wasn't SecuROM previously just a disc check? Hence the name? It's mostly unrelated to the modern DRM that shares the same name.

By the way, I'm continually amazed that the whole Overton Window thing keeps being proven right. You really just have to take a step back and think, to avoid being taken in by what is very simple, very deliberate manipulation.

I have never before now heard of the Overton Window - at least not by name - but the art of moving it is exactly what this is. Thankee.

Althea
30-10-2011, 08:42 AM
Wasn't SecuROM previously just a disc check? Hence the name? It's mostly unrelated to the modern DRM that shares the same name.
And it often still takes the form of a disc check. Hunted, GTA IV + EfLC, a couple of others I can't think of right now. No disc, no play.


bit of a strange comparison, because neither (less so for 2k) of those are exactly paragons of quality.
And just how is it a strange comparison? Is it so strange to compare one major publisher to two others? I can't compare to Activision as their PC output is lacking. Oh, OK, let's go for THQ. Ubisoft are probably about equal with THQ in terms of the PC.



Look. Valve has pretty much proven (http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/10/25/gabe-newell-on-piracy-and-steams-success-in-russia/) that you don't need to shit on your customers with ridiculous DRM to get sales.
No, but Valve elect to shit on their customers in other ways. Constantly disappointing with failing to live up to their own release margins (Sorry, but Valve Time is not an excuse), unnecessary and overpriced item shop in Portal 2, never actually fixing Steam's Offline Mode, the way Steam patches which is only just being corrected. Oh, and of course, Episode 3. Valve are as bad as the rest of them. Is Steam an alright form of DRM? Yeah, it is. I don't mind having Steam or a Steamworks game, but it doesn't mean I exactly like it.

DRM is shit, I will agree with that. I don't like it, just like many of you. But unlike some, I accept that it's a part of PC gaming, it's something I should expect to find on a game. To use your own logic and points, Nalano, if DRM free is to be expected, then why do people praise CDProjekt, both the RED side and the GOG side? It's because they also don't like DRM, and they do what they can to not use it.

Lukasz
30-10-2011, 09:11 AM
Constant net connection required for SP game is not good drm. it is in fact the worst possible drm ever. while having gazillions of login and passwords (its not like most of us don't have those for facebook, forums, other services anyway) might be annoying at least it doesn't prevent you from playing the game you spend 50 bucks on.
When asscreed 2 was released... pirates played the game without issue. Legitimate customers could not.

Steam offline might be unrealiable. it does work tough most times than not.
One time online activation might be annoying and problematic. but after it is done game works.

Your defense of Ubi drm is completely illogical. You might praise them for releasing games on PC... good for them and for us. That's irrelevant. It does not make their DRM any more stupid.
Your argument about it being better than some other forms of drm is also flawed. Yes. Ubi/any other publisher could use even more draconian system to protect its right. It does not mean the current one is good.
You also fail at the unnecessary software running. why it matters? its not like they consume any resources these days.

Althea
30-10-2011, 09:18 AM
I never said Ubi DRM is "good DRM". I've had minimal issues with it, and whilst I would like it to be removed, I'm not going to get in a huff about it because - as far as I can see - it hasn't inconvenienced me at all. Steam has caused more issues for me than Ubi DRM has. I'm always connected so always-on DRM doesn't matter to me.

As for AssCreed 2, is that the AssCreed game that took two or so weeks to be cracked?

Lukasz
30-10-2011, 09:47 AM
I never said Ubi DRM is "good DRM". I've had minimal issues with it, and whilst I would like it to be removed, I'm not going to get in a huff about it because - as far as I can see - it hasn't inconvenienced me at all. Steam has caused more issues for me than Ubi DRM has. I'm always connected so always-on DRM doesn't matter to me.
me me me
okay. so you are just looking at the problem with your limited experience instead of looking at the bigger picture. I know get your arguments.


As for AssCreed 2, is that the AssCreed game that took two or so weeks to be cracked?
yeah. although maybe it was AC3...
also there is problem with that
http://www.1up.com/news/ubisoft-drm-servers-attack-hackers

Grizzly
30-10-2011, 09:49 AM
Wasn't SecuROM previously just a disc check? Hence the name? It's mostly unrelated to the modern DRM that shares the same name.


Some versions of Securom do activations - So you can only install your game 5 times or so, like it was done in Mass Effect. Securom also installs 'Level 0' drivers (drivers with Root acces, essentially) on any computer - Which can cause problems.

Mihkel
30-10-2011, 09:50 AM
AC2 took about a month for a proper crack, but alternate cracks were out in a week or so. Clever system they did tbh, creating a mock server for the drm.

Drake Sigar
30-10-2011, 09:54 AM
me me me
okay. so you are just looking at the problem with your limited experience instead of looking at the bigger picture. I know get your arguments.
Unrav is defending a point of view from the best possible position - personal experience. Why do you feel the need to go around trying to make freedom fighters out of people who just want to play games? I spent years boycotting anything which required so much as an Internet activation, and I'm here to tell you it's not worth it.

Lukasz
30-10-2011, 10:14 AM
Unrav is defending a point of view from the best possible position - personal experience. Why do you feel the need to go around trying to make freedom fighters out of people who just want to play games? I spent years boycotting anything which required so much as an Internet activation, and I'm here to tell you it's not worth it.

that's not the best position. its the worst. He is using his extremely limited experience to create an argument where he defends Ubisoft. It is not the same as boycotting.
If he said: "i never had problems with ubisoft drm so I'll just play their games" That's completely alright. Creating an argument defending said DRM just because he had no problem with... that's not a proper argument.
I don't want him to fight Ubi, to boycott any games. It's his choice and it ain't my business to tell him whether it is right or wrong. Only he, based on his own experiences, can make that decision, where everyone else can just present situation where he might encounter a problem.

That's why I said I get his arguments now:
Cause it went from
General: Ubi's drm is alright
to
Personal: I am alright with Ubi's drm

Taidan
30-10-2011, 10:42 AM
No, but Valve elect to shit on their customers in other ways. Constantly disappointing with failing to live up to their own release margins (Sorry, but Valve Time is not an excuse), unnecessary and overpriced item shop in Portal 2, never actually fixing Steam's Offline Mode, the way Steam patches which is only just being corrected. Oh, and of course, Episode 3. Valve are as bad as the rest of them. Is Steam an alright form of DRM? Yeah, it is. I don't mind having Steam or a Steamworks game, but it doesn't mean I exactly like it.

I don't really count "Not giving me products to buy fast enough" to be an evil on par with "purposefully breaking a product I've paid good money for, while achieving exactly nothing in return". I'd say we're definitely in two different ball-parks in that case.

The Portal 2 item shop is also a tough case to pick at, as it doesn't actually detract from the game in any way at all. It just seems like a cynical experiment to see how much money they can siphon out of certain gullible sectors of the market. Obviously, if you fall into that particular "market sector", and are don't have the mental fortitude to resist throwing away your hard-earned money on stupid virtual hats, I could see that as a valid complaint.

As for the rest of it, the many benefits of the service far outweigh that one problem I had with Steam, which was about seven years ago, and inconvenienced me slightly for a few hours.


DRM is shit, I will agree with that. I don't like it, just like many of you. But unlike some, I accept that it's a part of PC gaming, it's something I should expect to find on a game.

Don't accept it. If nobody accepted it, then nobody would have to deal with it.

Althea
30-10-2011, 11:07 AM
Don't accept it. If nobody accepted it, then nobody would have to deal with it.
And then I'd have nothing to play because there'd be no games.

Lukasz; Uh, my argument is "I don't agree with Ubi's DRM, but I can live with it". Has it given me problems? Yes, twice I've had a case of my game being paused because my connection had a hiccup, but I lost no progress and the game gave me the option to save. I could have quit and played something else, or I could have waited (Which is what I did) for it to sort itself out. You know what I was doing at the time? Downloading something on my iPod. My own fault there. But if my connection goes out just before I want to play a game, I'm screwed with Steam as much as I am Ubi, and the same goes with some other forms of DRM.

P.S. Her.

Skalpadda
30-10-2011, 11:09 AM
I just hope they don't pull a "From Dust" on the two titles I mentioned

You mean, patch their DRM out and make the cloud saving an optional extra you could use if you want to? Granted, they probably only patched it out as damage control, trying to stem the tides of rage for putting it in in the first place but there's nothing offensive about the game's DRM now.

soldant
30-10-2011, 11:16 AM
Some versions of Securom do activations - So you can only install your game 5 times or so, like it was done in Mass Effect. Securom also installs 'Level 0' drivers (drivers with Root acces, essentially) on any computer - Which can cause problems.
Which reminds me. I recently installed GTAIV using Steam, which is already a form of DRM. After that I also had to endure a CD key check, SecuROM activation, and then GFWL. Geez Rockstar, do you think you've got enough DRM there? And STALKER is another one. The TAGES protection system for that was infuriating for me because my ISP, for whatever reason, seems to have some sort of routing issue with their auth servers and the request never gets through, forcing me to use a friend to activate the game.

Lukasz
30-10-2011, 11:28 AM
But if my connection goes out just before I want to play a game, I'm screwed with Steam as much as I am Ubi, and the same goes with some other forms of DRM.

P.S. Her.
but if your connection goes out after you log in you can play games alright while with ubi drm you can't.
and it is not entirely the case. Steam offline works. it is wonky and if your net breaks down when you are updating the steam you will have problems. but you can run steam offline most of the time.

deano2099
30-10-2011, 01:01 PM
Sorry but DRM that requires you to be constantly online is measurably worse than DRM that requires you to be online every time you start the game, which itself is measurably worse than DRM that requires you to be online once to activate it.

Personal experience "I've never had a problem, I'm alright Jack" stuff is relevant sometimes, but not here. Because each one includes the others then adds more DRM.

Squiz
30-10-2011, 01:13 PM
...until they turn off the servers in a couple of years.Interestingly, this won't be the case for Anno 1404. I don't know if it is BlueByte's decision to make, but the official FAQ clearly states that they'll be giving out a patch for unlimited installs if the support for additional install authentication codes ever goes down. Which sounds pretty fair in my opinion.

Lukasz
30-10-2011, 01:46 PM
something related to OP's post
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ltu3t8SYmp1qfjjglo1_400.gif

DickSocrates
30-10-2011, 02:08 PM
I'd like to know the point of DRM. Who, going to a torrent site and downloading a game is going to be put off by having to apply the work around? Who, that wasn't going to buy the game, then does because the torrent they downloade had a simple to follow readme that explained what to do? People who can't read? People unable to follow the simplest of instructions? There are videos on youtube by 8 year olds explainaing how to crack software... maybe.

The only goal of DRM should be to stop pirates. There is no DRM that does this yet, and nothing they've come up with even looks likely to. The normal consumer is not a leet hacker, so yeah, it stops them copying games, but that isn't where ANYONE gets their illegal copies. Find a way to stop pirates or don't bother with all but the lightest, direct disc burner DRM. The rest of it is totally pointless and has 0 impact on sales. If I was going to illegally download a game, all I'd do is check if it has been cracked. The answer is always yes. The only thing that would result in one more sale would be when a DRM that can't be cracked comes out. Right now, fiddly DRM only reduces sales, though probably not by as much as forums complainers suggest. "I WOULD HAVE BOUGHT THIS BUT IT HAS DRM SO NO BUY" 90% of those people don't even know what DRM is, they've just heard it's bad. And they end up buying it anyway.

I think delaying games on PC is perhaps the best strategy as much as it pains me to say that. Just wish they'd be more open about it and not spring delays on us at the last second. I doubt knowing Batman wasn't out for a month after console release would have changed anyone's mind. May have even lead to more console sales. The game companies are being devious in order to tackle devious pirates, but the pirates don't care and the devious acts only hurt legit consumers.

Mihkel
30-10-2011, 02:57 PM
I think delaying games on PC is perhaps the best strategy as much as it pains me to say that. Just wish they'd be more open about it and not spring delays on us at the last second. I doubt knowing Batman wasn't out for a month after console release would have changed anyone's mind. May have even lead to more console sales.

It's funny because pirating games on a console is in some ways shit easy considering some PC DRM and the fact that if PC/console release is at the same time, the console version usually leaks as far as a month before the actual release and the PC version usually gets torrented on the release day.

Vexing Vision
30-10-2011, 03:03 PM
SecuROM has been on games for years and years and years, way before the fuss about limited installs came about, and way before the Starforce stuff kicked off.

Yes, but with SecuROM v4, it became a lot more aggressive and frickly, and the older DVD drives sold to the more mass-market computers at that time couldn't keep up.

Believe me, I know - I did some UbiSoft tech hotline support for Germany at that time. The amount of calls we got concerning this issue was quite abnormal.

Taidan
30-10-2011, 03:50 PM
And then I'd have nothing to play because there'd be no games.

Your logic is faulty. Removing obtrusive, draconian DRM from the lives of gamers would not lead to gaming as a hobby suddenly blinking out of existence.

To suggest so is a most extraordinarily unreasonable argument.

Althea
30-10-2011, 04:40 PM
Your logic is faulty. Removing obtrusive, draconian DRM from the lives of gamers would not lead to gaming as a hobby suddenly blinking out of existence.

To suggest so is a most extraordinarily unreasonable argument.
What you said implied that everyone should not buy a game if it has a certain form of DRM. If the publisher get 0% sales, they might drop the PC as a platform, stop using that franchise or create even more bizarre forms of DRM.

Sorry, but life is too short to boycott everything. I boycott Activision games out of principle, I now boycott Blizzard too. As for Ubi? No, no way in heck am I giving up The Settlers just because of DRM.

Taidan
30-10-2011, 05:29 PM
What you said implied that everyone should not buy a game if it has a certain form of DRM. If the publisher get 0% sales, they might drop the PC as a platform, stop using that franchise or create even more bizarre forms of DRM.

And? Even if this massively improbable fairyland fantasy scenario (that a single publisher would be insane enough to quit a massively profitable market due to something that is entirely their own fault, and very easy to fix) did actually happen why do we care?

The PC gaming market is huge, and people are going to continue spending money on it, no matter what happens. Thus games will continue to be made, no matter what happens.

Nalano
30-10-2011, 06:13 PM
What you said implied that everyone should not buy a game if it has a certain form of DRM. If the publisher get 0% sales, they might drop the PC as a platform, stop using that franchise or create even more bizarre forms of DRM.

There's one very important reason why all these companies hem and haw about how evil the PC platform is, yet still publish on the PC.

BECAUSE THEY'RE PUBLICLY TRADED CORPORATIONS AND THEIR INVESTORS WILL NOT LET THEM IGNORE THE MARKET.

They will always develop for the PC. We're trying to convince them not to do it in such a stupid manner.

sinister agent
30-10-2011, 06:29 PM
If a developer with a terrible attitude stops developing for the PC, this is a Good Thing. It'll leave room for the scores of others trying to break into the market who don't have a terrible attitude.

This isn't the wii or the amiga or 360 we're talking about. It's the PC. Anyone can make games for the PC, and it's already ubiquitous and not going anywhere. If big publishers sod off, more will appear.

soldant
31-10-2011, 01:18 AM
If a developer with a terrible attitude stops developing for the PC, this is a Good Thing. It'll leave room for the scores of others trying to break into the market who don't have a terrible attitude.

This isn't the wii or the amiga or 360 we're talking about. It's the PC. Anyone can make games for the PC, and it's already ubiquitous and not going anywhere. If big publishers sod off, more will appear.
Anyone can make games for the PC. Not everyone makes games worth playing. You can have the best intentions for the platform, but if a game is shit then nothing will change that fact. And more often than not games which are good and liked by the majority will succeed whether or not the publisher is large. Niche titles and games with a cult following might be fun for a section of the greater player base but this doesn't mean they will have universal appeal if the larger studios weren't around.

Nalano
31-10-2011, 01:23 AM
Anyone can make games for the PC. Not everyone makes games worth playing. You can have the best intentions for the platform, but if a game is shit then nothing will change that fact. And more often than not games which are good and liked by the majority will succeed whether or not the publisher is large. Niche titles and games with a cult following might be fun for a section of the greater player base but this doesn't mean they will have universal appeal if the larger studios weren't around.

You seem to be making the assumption that larger studios make qualitatively better games.

I'll agree insofar as they make larger budget games, but that's as far as I'll walk that path.

soldant
31-10-2011, 03:27 AM
You seem to be making the assumption that larger studios make qualitatively better games.

I'll agree insofar as they make larger budget games, but that's as far as I'll walk that path.
I'm not. Perhaps you missed this part:


And more often than not games which are good and liked by the majority will succeed whether or not the publisher is large.

You can extend that to developers. I'm just pointing out that if a title isn't well-liked by people it isn't going to sell well. The assumption that the larger publishers going away will suddenly result in a renaissance of PC gaming isn't necessarily correct. Yes, people with good intentions might move in to fill the gap, but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll produce better games. If a game is well liked by people it'll do well, and there are plenty of examples where this happens outside of the major publishers and devs.

Nalano
31-10-2011, 03:41 AM
I'm not. Perhaps you missed this part:



You can extend that to developers. I'm just pointing out that if a title isn't well-liked by people it isn't going to sell well. The assumption that the larger publishers going away will suddenly result in a renaissance of PC gaming isn't necessarily correct. Yes, people with good intentions might move in to fill the gap, but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll produce better games. If a game is well liked by people it'll do well, and there are plenty of examples where this happens outside of the major publishers and devs.

I won't necessarily say the grass is greener. I'm just saying that we shouldn't accept our current situation just 'cause.