Ubisoft’s E3 Line-Up Examined. In London.

RPS didn’t got to E3. So E3 came to RPS, with Ubisoft showing their E3 demos in London yesterday. South London being slightly easier to reach than Los Angeles, I went along to have a look at what they have to offer us in the coming twelve months. Well, quite a bit. While ManiaPlanet will await a future date to look properly at it, there were four key PC-relevant games on show: Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood, Driver: San Francisco, Ruse and – though it hasn’t been announced for the PC, I’ll be surprised if it’s not – Ghost Recon: Future Soldier. What did I make of them? I tell you below, via the medium of telling.

Brotherhood is what was most immediately striking, and demanded the majority of my time – and the time was spent on one portion of the game. While the single-player basically is adding a little scale (the eponymous brotherhood) to the superior Assassin’s Creed sequel, the multiplayer is something quite unexpected and unprecedented. Well, unprecedented in a mainstream game, anyway.

Everyone plays an assassin in an urban area. You get given player target, who you’re lead towards with a scanner. You’re also warned if you’re made the target of another player. And your mission is to – er – off them. The main spanner in the works is that while each player character has their own look, they’re also shared by the computer controlled character. So you follow the tracker, trying to find the monk character – only to find out it leads to a whole bunch of monks, because the player in question has spotted them and decided to hang out. Once you’ve given the game away and botched an assassination, the stealth turns into chase, with you having to pursue your quarry wherever they go. Don’t get them in time – or lose them – and your contract is cancelled, and you have to wait for the next gig to earn points.

In other words, it showcase two of the better parts of Assassin’s Creed mechanics. On one side, we have the stealthy trying to keep cover. On the other, the Parkour runs across the rooftops. Throwing in character classes with their own abilities – like morphing into a different look, dropping smoke bombs or using throwing knives – and you’ve got a really unusual take on multiplayer. Clearly, it has its precedents in the indie scene – like The Ship and the forthcoming SpyParty – but to see a mainstream developer take similar idea and actually work into something that’s actually strikingly accessible is impressive. It’s certainly something I can see myself playing.

Which is something I can’t really say about Ghost Recon: Future Soldier. Which – it’s worth stressing – is more my problem than its. Ghost Recon: Future Soldier spins off further in the future from Wafighter, positioning itself about 20 years in the future. Hence, even fancier tech. The one which is central is the actual active camoflage, which makes the Ghost Recon soldiers even Ghostier than ever. At least in what was demoed to me, the idea seems to be to give the game a kind of rhythm of tension and release. The camouflage seems to be perfect – but immediately turns off when you make an aggressive action. In other words, if there’s a firefight kicking off, you’re going to basically be visible all the time – but there’s going to be the extended periods where you’ll be trying to take people down. Also, lots of other fun techno-malarkies like Augmented Reality windows explaining who everyone is you’re shooting.

So yeah, for something that’s carrying Tom Clancy’s name, you raise eyebrows on the realism front. Stealth suits that turn off when you kill somebody is the sort of design flaw which gets picked up even in the worst lowest-bid-tendered supplied military organisation. While the developers explain that the aim isn’t to compete directly with something like Modern Warfare or Gears of War, some of the changes do bring it a little closer to something that’s increasingly divorced from Ghost Recon’s militaristic roots. For example, fire-fights are now deliberately at closer range – so increasing viscerality of the action. And – equally predictably – there’s a cover system. While such elements stand out in a limited demo, there is also a lot of what is best described as cinematic moments, something which the Devs talk about trying to increase. In other words, planned, precise military moments designed to play out beautifully. Taking down that guard at a certain point, timed to be particularly visually appealing.

I suspect this will be strong and at least polished, but it’s not exactly part of the medium which appeals to me at the moment.

Conversely, Driver: San Francisco does what I thought impossible and make me actually interested in it.

Driver’s story is… well, it was a bit of a mess. The first one built its name, basically by doing a GTA-in-3D thing before GTA did it, but with an undercover cop driver scenario. However, by Driver 3, things had turned, and it had become a game that was openly savaged by the press (Well, most of them) and mocked by gamers. This is basically a total reboot of the game, razing to the ground and then building from the concepts – with just enough nods to keep the fans happy. If it works, it’ll basically be the equivalent of the Star Trek films.

The core thing is that it’s a driving game. As in, you can’t get out of the car. It’s about driving, and fearlessly so. It chooses to concentrate.

It also chooses to go a little bit mental.

The majority of the game is played with your lead cop character in a coma. This gives him a limited ability to… well, jump between bodies and possess others. Press a button and you zoom out to high above the city. Select who you want to control and… biff! You’re in the seat. It’s basically the plot of Life on Mars meets the mechanic of Messiah (Or, for REALLY old people, Paradroid). It’s such a bizarre thing to throw into an open-world driving game, you have to sort of blink a lot then applaud for just trying it.

In the multi-player games, it mainly is used as an automated version of the catch-up feature in things like Micro-Machines. So we’re playing a “stay on the taillights of a car” game, racing after them. You crash. Instead of trying to catch up, you take to the skies, choose an appropriate car and get back in the game. The mechanic means that racing seems to lean more towards that frenetic, close-encounters manoeuvring. About driving rather than racing, if you see what I mean. In the single player – where they stress it will be limited – it’s something which can really alter how you complete a mission. The example they show is that rather than trying to ram a car off the road in a traditional fashion, you possess a truck in the oncoming lane, and drive it head-on into your quarry.

Which is mental. Can’t wait to see how it turns out.

Finally, Ruse, the game we’re most familiar with. It’s the first time I’ve seen it in the flesh and I’m actually quietly impressed by it. It’s very much in the tradition of EndWar – being the strategy game which is trying to actually try and make a RTS game that works both on the PC and the consoles.

And I’m actually quite impressed with how they’ve done it. It’s a game which recalls World In Conflict, except with a more traditional RTS economic model beneath it and more units – though not so many as to become totally unmanageable. It also picks up where Supreme Commander left off, in terms of making the game entirely playable from the far-zoomed out mode. Individual mobs of tanks smoothly become stacks of counters, with large militaristic arrows showing the orders of troops. In other words, it does everything to bring the actual strategic elements to the fore.

And by embracing a very slight abstraction allows the eponymous Ruse system to come to the fore. These are basically tricks you can play – either defensively or offensively. Five are available, one which re-charges every minute, allowing you to throw them all out quickly, or save them. Each one can be applied in one of the formal regions of the map, hiding everyone or making them frenzied fighters or making a fake offensive of wooden tanks or whatever.

I’m looking forward to this. In fact, it’s so unusual a take on the material only now when writing it up now do I realise that it’s actually that most cliched of PC games – the WW2 RTS. For a game to make me forget that simple fact says a lot. Fingers crossed and all that.

So – of the four major games, three I’m actually personally interested in and one which looks competent enough, but may not be for me. That’s not a bad showing. The actual problem, as always with Ubisoft, is the floating question of where they’re going to be heading next with their DRM. It’s been a wave of games since they introduced it, and I haven’t played any games with it. Clearly, it’s going to be an issue we’re going to be following closely.

Oh! Just Dance 2 is enormously good fun and/or stupid, but that’s kind of outside of our PC games boat-house, so I’ll shut up.


  1. Vinraith says:

    A post about a pile of Ubisoft games without even a mention of Ubi’s online-at-all-times DRM? Sure everyone that cares already knows, but I was under the impression you guys were taking a stand on that. Has that changed?

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      That’s what I get for writing it quickly. I wanted to mention DRM stuff. Will edit it in now.


    • Vinraith says:

      It’s a damn shame too, as both this new Assassin’s Creed and Ruse both look genuinely intriguing. It’ll be a cold day in hell before Ubi sees a cent from me for either of them, though. Maybe, if I ever get around to buying a next gen console, I’ll pick up bargain-bin used copies of them in a few years.

    • Mac says:

      It really is a shame regarding their retarded DRM … I would have picked up quite a few Ubi games, but no way whilst they are using their preferred solution.

    • Eli Just says:

      The DRM is really a shame. I read through the whole article and they sounded interesting, but only from an intellectual perspective because I have no intention of ever playing any of those games. Too bad really, I would love to try out AC2.

    • subedii says:

      In a year of good RTS’s and the upcoming Starcraft 2, it wasn’t exactly hard for me to drop RUSE from my list. There are plenty of other games that I can play that aren’t that stupid.

      To be honest, I feel kind of sorry for the devs as aside from having this… thing tied around their necks, they’re also releasing an RTS soon after Starcraft 2 hits, which nobody wants to do, even if they are different styles of RTS.

      On the other hand, I suppose that also means they’ll likely pick up more console sales, since they’re one of the few console RTS’s available at a time when something as big as SC2 might be giving the genre a little more interest.

    • Wooly says:

      What a shame.

    • Zogtee says:

      I’ll just repeat what the others have already said, it’s such a shame that these games ship with DRM that is unacceptable to me, because some of Ubi’s new titles look genuinely interesting. I have made the decision to not buy (or pirate) these games, and possibly StarCraft 2, depending on what shenanigans Actizzard might add to it.

      Obviously, this will mean sod all to Ubi and Actizzard, but it’s all I can do. I’m drawing a line here.

    • medwards says:

      I spoke with a dev/employee/something from Ubisoft Montpellier and he claimed this DRM shit was ultimately all Ubisoft Montreal’s fault. I was given to believe that this madness was limited to what Ubisoft Montreal produced but I feel like I either misinterpreted or was just fed some PR now… I mean that seems weird for just one portion of a studio to implement a broad DRM scheme. But then the entire thing is *madness* so who knows. I hope not because I want to try this Driver game. Also bringing The Ship back sounds like a good idea since it wasn’t all that satisfying when it came out but had so much potential.

    • SuperNashwan says:

      On the subject of where Ubi are going with the DRM; someone claiming to be a dev posted on Something Awful saying the DRM was being ramped up to the servers actually running some code away from the client, and when PoP was eventually cracked that was confirmed by the crackers. I don’t know how easy it was for them to get around but it took them weeks and will present a unique challenge for every game Ubi do this with. And I get the feeling that there’s more yet that can be offloaded to the server to make the job even harder. In any case, the DRM clearly works to prevent piracy for some time after a game’s release so don’t expect it to be going anywhere unless the sums don’t add up.

    • Shivoa says:

      It’s a real shame Ubi have decided not to release any of these games for stock PCs (in my book this always connected DRM, and talk of server side code, turns the games into their own form of an almost OnLive/Gaikai platform distinct from standard requirements and in the category that includes MMOs with dead social pools*) as they’re making some games I’m rather partial to. Assassin’s Creed 2 would look rather lovely on a PC I’d guess but I ended up being part of the problem and buying a cheap copy for the 360 (yes, stone me now) simply to avoid the DRM.

      * “I was all alone in the MMO, the last remaining PC. At least I wasn’t paying a monthly fee for the privilege.”

  2. robrob says:

    I thought you guys weren’t going to report on Ubisoft games now? Whereas the endless threads on DRM are getting tiring, it is impossible to ignore the issue when talking about their upcoming releases.

    • Optimaximal says:

      Seconded… I’m going to boycott RPS, but still read it at the same time!

      Nothing like the best of both worlds, eh?

  3. The_B says:

    I think the most important thing this post is missing is a WIT of the Tom Clancy: Future Soldier Jam that was given away at the party. Is it delicious? Is it fruity? Will it make my toast taste all Future Soldiery?

  4. William Morris says:

    Can we just take DRM as read? So this post becomes a kind of “What you won’t be playing later this year..”

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Probably, but you never know. Ubisoft have bounced back and forth on DRM before their current system.


    • DeepSleeper says:

      Well, I will.

      But on a console.

    • Mac says:

      I’m not even uying on colnsole – principals ….

    • subedii says:

      Ubisoft seemed pretty firm on it when they announced it, and have been very adamant that they’re not going to change stance on it.

      Which just strikes me as all the more pointless now that the DRM’s been cracked anyway and we’re back to square one again. IIRC Splinter Cell was even cracked on launch.

  5. Ravenger says:

    No more Ubi games for me until they get rid of that DRM. Ironic really, because I would definitely have bought AC2 full price otherwise.

  6. Gorgeras says:

    The DRM issue will never go away. It’s like when Beyonce had all the members of Destiny’s Child she didn’t like killed; their fans on the web would never let her forget.

  7. Sidorovich says:

    Whilst some of these games do look damn sexy, DRM makes ’em completely unattractive prospects.

    Leave Driver’s twitching corpse alone Ubi, and get making Heroes of Might and Magic VI like wot you promised.

  8. Kunal says:

    AC Multiplayer looks promising. On an unrelated note, does anyone know if “The Ship” is still an active game ? I’ve been wanting to try it for some time, but I don’t want to buy it, log on and find that there aren’t any people to play with.

    • vanarbulax says:

      The Ship is sadly quite dead. I haven’t played it in a while though, got disappointed to many times because the players in servers were bots instead of humans.

  9. Jimbo says:

    I’ve always liked Ubisoft games, but I haven’t bought a single one since they introduced their new DRM and – and I’m not even just saying this – I would probably have bought all of them had they not used it. I bought the previous game in most of the franchises that they have released since then (Splinter Cell, Silent Hunter, Assassin’s Creed, Settlers).

    It isn’t even some idealogical objection – if they want to release it like that, whatever, it’s their product – I just don’t consider the games to be worth what they’re asking anymore, given the limitation they have introduced. This will apply to Driver, Ghost Recon and RUSE too.

    I’ll still play Assassin’s Creed, because I’ve always played that (first) on console and I’m not cutting off my nose to spite my face over this.

  10. jalf says:

    DRM and no BG&E2? Eh, remind me to check back in a year or two.

  11. Sunjumper says:

    I can only echo what others have said.

    I am very interested in three out of four of those games and I’d also love to buy Assassins Creed 2 but not as long as they use their deeply insulting new DRM system.

  12. iainl says:

    It sounds like maybe, just maybe Nadeo have enough wiggle-room to bring those MediaPlanet games out without always-on DRM. I really, REALLY hope so, because my net connection isn’t reliable enough to make spending money on titles with it worth doing, but Trackmania United has eaten far too many hours of my life.

  13. Ginger Yellow says:

    San Francisco is the perfect location for Driver, given that the best thing about the original game was the Bullitt style American muscle car and the insane air you could get off bridges and ramps before slamming through a police blockade. God knows what made them come up with this insane gameplay mechanic, though.

    • Kommissar Nicko says:

      San Fransisco was my favorite map in the original, hands down. Although I still can’t for the life of me figure out why they insisted on making every single turn a right angle. I remember screaming along highways and hurtling headlong into a wall because of that.

      A reboot of the series would be welcome, though it honestly wasn’t such an outrageous concept when it began that “fans” would be disappointed should they do something strange. Strange is fun!

    • Jonas says:

      Actually there’s a plot twist near the end of that Driver game that justifies and explains the mechanic, making it a lot less outrageously mental. I know this because we had a lecture by the game’s writer, and he gave it all away basically. So if anybody’s turned off by how fucking oddball is sounds… don’t be. It makes sense in the end.

  14. Devan says:

    Yeah, some of those look interesting. I probably would pick up AC2 if not for the DRM, but none of these games are even a consideration for me now.

  15. Skusey says:

    I sort of hope that Massive are working on a WiC sequel, but even if they are I won’t be able to play it. Not because of any moral objection to their DRM, it’s just that my internet isn’t consistent enough to be able to play anything with that DRM. I haven’t heard anything about them since they were bought up by Ubisoft and their website says that they’re working on “undisclosed projects”.

  16. LewieP says:

    What are Outerlight up to anyway. I know they were initially working on The Ship 2, but then they decided to make something else instead.

  17. Travis says:

    I guess I’m part of the problem, because I couldn’t care less about the DRM. I played through AC2 on PC and it didn’t cause me any problems. There was never quite this level of outrage about some of the older stuff (was it SecuROM in Bioshock 1?) that actually continually degraded performance for legit users.

    I’m excited about AC:B and Driver. Never cared about a Driver game before but given that they’re setting it in my city it’l let me live out a lot of personal reckless fantasies.

    • Kommissar Nicko says:

      Ah, you must be who murdered my first born child. The angel mumbled something about DRM and stabbed the poor boy to death in his crib because of you. I HOPE YOU ENJOYED AC2!

    • Vinraith says:

      that actually continually degraded performance for legit users.

    • Vinraith says:

      Let’s try that again:

      link to yfrog.com

    • jaheira says:

      Yeah, I don’t give a toss about the DRM either. I’m lucky enough to have a stable connection, AC2 played fine, I imagine Splinter Cell will too. Be very interesting to see sales figures, don’t spose we ever will though.

  18. pkt-zer0 says:

    No mention of Eric Chahi’s Populous-like Project Dust? That’s the most interesting thing coming out of Ubisoft, I’d say. Shame about the DRM, though.

    • Alastayr says:

      Project Dust is console-only afaik. Which hurts.

    • pkt-zer0 says:

      No, it’s coming for PC as well. It was mentioned in an interview with Eric Chahi.

    • The Hammer says:

      Yeah, it’s coming out on the PC too, and really intrigued me. I thought it’d fit firmly inside of RPS’s scope, but maybe it just wasn’t shown?

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Hammer: It wasn’t shown.


  19. Arthur!!! says:

    I was on RUSE beta and it was amazing. Online games feel like chess matches. Game had good balance. There is no one superior tactic, there is counter attack for everything. Cant wait it to come out. Most anticipated game of 2010 for me.

    • Arathain says:

      I really enjoyed the RUSE beta. I thought it hit all the right notes of complexity and accessibility, with tons of scope for creative tactics. It’s obviously had a lot of thought and love put into it. I feel bad for the devs getting caught up in this whole DRM mess, and this includes any of Ubi’s other devs as well.

      Unfortunately, for me, as for others, my stand on the DRM matters more.

  20. Smeghammer says:

    I played the ruse beta extensively when it was available on steam. I haven’t had as much fun with an rts since the original starcraft. Playing 3v3’s is especially satisfying. I hope ubi doesn’t ruin it with their broken drm.

  21. Navagon says:

    Ubi… who? Didn’t they used to make games or something?

  22. Freud says:

    Like others here I will not buy any Ubisoft games. It is not really a matter of me worrying that I can’t play the games. My connection is very solid. It is about them crossing the line in how they view and treat their paying customers.

    Of course, given corporate idiocy, they probably view fewer sales (if people boycotting them have any real effect) as an indication of piracy and hence need for even more DRM.

    • Hidden_7 says:

      What’s fun here is that they can’t claim both that there were fewer sales because of pirates AND that their DRM is working. It’s one or the other. Either it’s ineffective at stopping pirates and harming legitimate user’s experience and thus pointless, or sales were lower but not due to piracy, so it must be down to other reasons.

  23. Torgen says:

    Tried RUSE beta, and liked it enough that I’d have preordered it, except for the UbiDRM.The new AC sounds interesting as well, but because of UbiDRM, I will not purchase it either. That’s 3 sales so far that Ubi has lost just from me due to their idiocy: RUSE, Settlers 7, and the new AC game.

  24. Tei says:

    I feel bad for the people that made these games, and see how a ugly system os put on place to screw gamers. I , as a gamer, my only option is to skip these titles. Sorry about that, but Ubisoft is tryiing to make the life of gamers misery with his pointless and zealot system, and theres only one right response: never buy a game again from Ubisoft.

  25. Isometric says:

    No more Assassins Creed games for me thanks. Cue music “Won’t get fooled again”

  26. dingo says:

    Nice report.

    Did you try to grill Ubi people on the DRM or is it a topic that is not to be discussed with them?
    Did other journalists try to get some opinions on that?

  27. Tunips says:

    AC Brotherhood sounds exactly like I’ve always wanted a Hitman multiplayer game to be. Maybe I should actually play the first one.
    Driver: The Nomad Soul? Sounds good to me.

  28. Hidden_7 says:

    I just thought I’d add my voice to those perplexed at this coverage of UBI titles when there’s really no indication that DRM has been removed. I don’t have a problem with that generally (though make sure one mentions it, which you did) but I thought it was RPS’s policy that “the only story” about UBI games was the DRM. I seem to recall Kieron saying that to Quinns on a podcast when he was about to give his opinion on AC2. It’s fine if this is no longer the policy, or if the policy is innocent until proven guilty on future titles, I just hadn’t seen this elaborated anywhere.

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      We’ve never elaborated on it on the site in a formal way. If we were going to make a deal about it, there’d be a story on RPS about it. Like most of our editorial decisions, we tend to keep it all beneath the surface. Because there’s nothing more tiresome than a site going on about itself and why it does things.

      (Since you ask, in a perverse way, while the DRM was the story we were serving our readers need-to-know about the games while just concentrating on that one issue. However, since we’re not going to keep on writing *just* about “This new Ubisoft game has this DRM” forever, and – a wave and a half on – we felt we were failing to provide that service to people who don’t give a toss about the DRM. Because as outrageous as we think it is, some people don’t care. It seemed like the best way to serve both audiences was a reintegration of the DRM-stuff inside a more “normal” context. As in, the only way to carry on saying that the DRM is bad is to have another reason to write about it.)

      I dunno. We could change our mind tomorrow.


    • Hidden_7 says:

      That seems very reasonable, I was just curious because it did seem like you were very unequivocal when the story first broke, both in the story on the site, and in comments on the podcast. I may have been misreading that, however. The fact that there wasn’t the same sort of statement of intention when you guys decided that that wasn’t the best way forward makes the change then seem somewhat unintentional, though I very much get your point about not wanting to make too much story of how you guys do things. Thanks for the clarification.

      Totally unrelated side note to balance out what I feel may come across as a bit of a negative tone in my posts: I’m really digging your current stint on Thor, Kieron, it’s neat!

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Hidden7: Yeah, that’s style as much as anything – as in, how we wanted to present the story. We were aware that if it continued, we’d inevitably want to change tack somehow, which is why we never actually did a NO UBISOFT ON RPS! story – which, if we were doing a proper boycott, we’d have done.

      And no, you didn’t come across as too negative. They’re perfectly reasonable questions. But thanks about being nice about Thor!


  29. Alexander Norris says:

    So basically, AC2 multiplayer is The Ship: Renaissance Edition?

  30. Zerotonine says:

    The only one of those games that I’m really looking forward to is AC:B. I’ve played both AC games on my 360, the game is more suited to comfy couch, big TV with controller in hand. Plus, my gamer mates have consoles, so the (very exciting sounding) multiplayer between friends is on the cards.

  31. Novotny says:

    I’m really old :(

  32. DMJ says:

    I accidentally read a much more awesome title from the front-page excerpt:
    Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood Driver: San Francisco Ruse.
    I hear ACBD:SFR will be the only game worth buying next year.

  33. Urthman says:

    I’m sorta boycotting Ubisoft’s insane-DRM games. I’ll probably eventually buy AC2 and the new Prince of Persia game in a year or so when they’re $9.99 on Steam or at Wal-Mart, provided there’s a working crack to disable the DRM (which I assume there will be by then).

    I’m certainly not going to pay $50 or $60 for a game that’s going to crap out if my net connection isn’t perfect.

    I do think that RPS maintaining a boycott on Ubisoft coverage would have way more of an impact than any of us boycotting the games, but I can understand if you don’t think that’s feasible.

  34. pipman300 says:

    i’ve never boycotted a game, not even once. i have better things to get flustered over

    • Vinraith says:

      Isn’t “boycotting” in this context just “not buying a game for a reason?” Everyone’s done that.

    • D says:

      Bravo for your lack of solidarity. However, customer rights will probably be much important in the future than racism.

    • pipman300 says:

      but only in that gamers care more about drm then they do about racism

    • pipman300 says:

      it takes a very sheltered person to say something like you did

    • D says:

      In 5000 years time we’ll all be the same color. Leave corporate rule to that time and we’ll all be slaves, or dead. It’s logic that one is more important than the other. Or maybe I’m just reacting to your asinine comment.

    • Tei says:

      racist is a more sensitive problem, it hurts more for the people affected, but corporate badpractices affect everyone (even the people that is affected by racism).

      is political incorrect to say that a problem of a minority is less important than a problem that affect everyone (even such minority) but that don’t make logical sense (maybe make humanist sense, I don’t know) .

  35. RRR says:

    DRM is lose lose kind of situation for PC gamers. To me boycotting is not an option. I mean there is nothing to gain from it, but a lot to lose. It will just decline the sales and that is another reason to leave PC market. They are not going to remove DRM by boycotting. I will send angry email to UBI insted.

    • pipman300 says:

      but if they don’t boycott it over drm then how will they justify pirating it later? that’s what happens most of the time. damn spoiled babies want to have their cake and eat it too.

    • pipman300 says:

      imo people should either boycott the game and never play it at all not even in secret with a copy they torrented or buy it like the rest of us who don’t have the delusion we’re somehow entitled to play games for free

    • Vague-rant says:

      Wait is that your assertion that most people will end up pirating the game and vocally claim its due to DRM? Even if that does turn out to be the case I very much doubt that that will be case for RPS readers. Preaching to the converted there buddy.

      So basically what you’ve said is people should buy games and not torrent them. Fair enough. Doubt you’ll get much argument.

    • Freud says:

      Voting with your feet is the most efficient way to influence businesses.

    • Wisq says:

      To me boycotting is not an option. [. . .] It will just decline the sales and that is another reason to leave PC market.

      As far as I’m concerned, there’s very little difference between Ubisoft staying in the PC market with their current DRM, or leaving the PC market altogether. Either way, I’m not going to play their stuff.

      And no, that’s not due to boycotting them. It’s just that I know their products aren’t worth more than a few dollars to me as they stand.

  36. bill says:

    I want to see sales figures on these DRM enriched Ubisoft games?

    Does anyone have any? Is there a reliable source for sales figures for PC games? Is there any way to compare AC1 and AC2, or the latest Splinter Cell with the previous ones?

    If only we knew some games journalists that could investigate!

    • Gorgeras says:

      It’s taking an unusually long time for specific sales figures to come out regarding AC2 on PC. It was a similar story with GTA IV: no one was buying it for being a shoddy port so Take-Two kept the figures buried for ages. When Bioshock sold 5 million copies, we KNEW it sold 5 million copies; that was made freely available as quickly as possible.

  37. terry says:

    Most appropriate use of “ruse” tag ever.

  38. Count Elmdor says:

    Just one more soul here who’s not buying any more Ubisoft PC games until they back off of this insane DRM. There is just too much else out there to enjoy rather than be complacent with this outrage.

  39. Rinox says:

    It’ll be a cold day in hell before Ubi sees me spend cash on their games with the current DRM. Too bad, as I would have loved to play AC2 and Silent Hunter 5. Ah well.