Ubi DRM: Their Side of the Story

[naum]

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=235596&site=pcg

Do Ubisoft understand that we don't want to be permanently online?
They've spotted the outcry, yes. "We know that requiring a permanent online connection is not a happy point for a lot of PC gamers, but it is necessary for the system to work.

Which PC games will require an always on internet connection?
All announced Ubisoft PC games will include the online services, whether sold online, or from brick and mortar stores. That includes Splinter Cell, Silent Hunter 5, Assassin's Creed 2, Prince of Persia and the newly announced Ghost Recon. "It's hard for us to say, yes, from now until the day that we all die all of our games are going to include this," says their spokesperson, "but most will."

[schild]

Are you trying to be the new Gutboy Barrelhouse?

[Strazos]

How often is this really a problem?

[naum]

Are you trying to be the new Gutboy Barrelhouse?

What?

[Rasix]

Post your thoughts.  Drive by linking/quoting is something you shouldn't do.

[Sheepherder]

You reposted a press release from another site with all the relevant bits butchered out of it, the title has nothing to do with the text you've posted, you've added nothing to the topic of debate, and you posted it in "PC/Console" rather than "News".  If you changed that link you'd be indistinguishable from an adbot.

[Samwise]

Ubi say there are three advantages to their online services.  The first: you don't need a disc. The second: that you can install the game on as many PCs as you like, as many times as you like.

I would like to point out that these two "advantages" were the norm before companies started dicking around with SecuROM and its ilk.  And obviously pirates always get to enjoy these advantages regardless of the DRM system used.

Also, Steam has the same advantages, including the cloud service (note: not sure if this is used for savegames yet, but the infrastructure is definitely there), but it will also let you play your single player games when your internet connection is out.  And yes, this is occasionally important, like the last time I moved; I had a week with no internet and got to spend it catching up on my backlog of single player Steam games.

[naum]

Post your thoughts.  Drive by linking/quoting is something you shouldn't do.

Originally, typed a remark, but deleted it as I did not want to "prime" the discussion.

Was curious of what F13ers thought of it — I searched to see if there was another thread on the matter, but my search-fu must be weak or it's just not considered a relevant development…

[Ratman_tf]

Ubi are shortsighted. This is intentionally adding limitations to their product in order to accomplish absolutley nothing, since it does not limit piracy. Their target audience are experienced computer users who are going to know where to find the hacks and how to use them. Or know a friend who can tell them.
As long as other people are making software that doesn't require internet validation, they're making themselves the inferior product.

[Paelos]

I don't want to buy CDs anymore. I also don't want to be treated like I'm a degenerate for buying a game

EDIT: Oh and I should add, I will consider anything at the $20 mark. If you make your game with $50, I'm really really questioning that purchase. This is not the economy or the market to be pulling those price points unless you are a spot-on producer. An example would be Diablo 3. Sell it for what you like.

[Ratman_tf]

You know, I'm a little mirfed that this meme where if only they can require online validation, like WoW, then piracy will go away. You really can't require online validation like that unless you're providing a service like a MMOG, thats designed from the ground up to be online multiplayer only. Trying to shoehorn an offline single player game into that role is dumb.

[naum]

The man represents pirates. The car represents paying customers. The bus represents Ubisoft DRM.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Strangely appropriate.

[Azazel]

And thus the day is marked when I will no longer buy any Ubi products for PC, and if there's something I simply must play on PC, I'll retain the services of a fucking eyepatch.

[Musashi]

I'm happy to report that none of their products interest me in the slightest.  I have a theory about good products and the postulated need for DRM.  It goes something like this:  If you make something worth buying, people will buy it.

[Hoax]

I'm happy to report that none of their products interest me in the slightest.  I have a theory about good products and the postulated need for DRM.  It goes something like this:  If you make something worth buying, people will buy it.

Crazy but true.

[Triforcer]

I have a theory about good products and the postulated need for DRM.  It goes something like this:  If you make something worth buying, people will buy it.

Remind me again- is that reason #4 in between "piracy actually makes the retailer more money" and "I buy their T-shirts and go to their concerts", or is it #11 between "Piracy makes me a freedom fighter" and "DRM justifies piracy because it proves the company is mean?"

I mean, SERIOUSLY.  Piracy only affects games everyone dislikes?  If you make something good, that makes it MORE likely to be pirated, not less.  

I keep forgetting that when it comes to piracy, the pretty-damn-intelligent-on-average F13 posters start in with the stammering, paper-thin contortions of logic and rationality of the type that they instantly and concisely excoriate when it comes to any other topic.

[Sheepherder]

And the better a game gets, the more people will pirate it, ergo the ultimate game would have no sales because everyone is pirating it, right?

They're right, you're wrong.  The only cost to pirating is time and bandwidth.  Bandwidth is effectively free for ISP's with reasonable or no caps, ergo the cost of pirating the game is simply the time it takes to find a cracked version of said game, a cost anyone with the slightest interest and no compunctions would pay.  Pirates will steal good and bad games equally, but people who buy will only buy games worth their time.  Therefore, with greater market share and roughly the same amount of pirates the good game will be less pirated than the bad.

Corollary #1: Loading the game with DRM makes the game unenjoyable for people who would otherwise enjoy it.  Less people buy it, the same amount of people pirate it, because they're pirating cracked versions with non-functional DRM anyways.

Corollary #2: Because the cracked versions are more valuable to the buyer for lack of DRM, and cost less to boot, the only thing that prevents a buyer from becoming a pirate when they would actually like to have the game is moral compunctions.  Ergo, when you add DRM to a game the opportunity : cost for the buyer skews more in favour of the pirated version.

[Musashi]

Not make something good.  Make something worth buying.  Generally things that are worthy of being bought are also good, but it isn't necessary.  I'm talking about being of value, like Blizzard patching Diablo ten years later, or steam distributing three of the most awesome games in history for fifty bucks seamlessly on my pc while providing me a way to communicate with all my friends who also saw the value in buying. 

Also, I'm not remotely advocating piracy.  I'm merely saying that if your product isn't worth buying it will be pirated, and all the DRM in the world won't stop it.

[UnSub]

I have a theory about good products and the postulated need for DRM.  It goes something like this:  If you make something worth buying, people will buy it.

Your theory is flawed when it comes to many things, including piracy.

A good game without DRM gets pirated at the same rate (and maybe higher) than an ordinary game without DRM. However, there is a chance it will make its money back, whereas the ordinary game doesn't. Some might think of this as a good thing, but it becomes a game of publishers only picking sure things when it comes to what they release, of which sure things include IP-titles (which are likely to sell well, even if they are crap), franchises and sequels. Innovative games that might have borderline chances of financial success (i.e. not going to be a big seller) get knocked back.

Piracy is slowly choking the PC single player game industry, pushing it inevitably towards subscription services that force players to have accounts to log in and play. Ubisoft is following this model, minus the sub fee / set-up cost. Someone will probably find a way to circumvent it and then Ubisoft will respond, going in a patch fix - pirate hack circle, but it's the way things are going.

Now, PC gaming is never going to die, but it isn't a healthy place at this point either. Plus a lot of devs are finding the solution to PC piracy is to release on consoles instead (which have their own piracy issues, yes, but it requires a physical pirate copy whereas PC pirates only require a connection to a torrent site).

[UnSub]

And the better a game gets, the more people will pirate it, ergo the ultimate game would have no sales because everyone is pirating it, right?

No, the better a game is the better the chance it will sell the minimum number of boxes to fall into the 'profitable' side of the spreadsheet. It can still have an 80% or 90% piracy rate and be profitable if it sells enough boxes. Or DLC - another path the PC gaming industry is going down.

[Azazel]

For me personally, the more invasive DRM gets, the less it's worth my time. It's essentially the argument that I want the bullshit-and-hassle-free version.

I mean, I say the same shit in every thread where this comes up, from Spore to Mass Effect to whatever. The fact and truth is that I haven't pirated a game in years because I can now afford to buy whatever I want and I also like owning the physical object (there's that thing again) - even to the extent of going back and buying legot copies of games I played and finished years ago in Pirated form.

I do though still retain the opinion that if I do ever really want to play one of these games that are DRM-fucked, I'll download the torrent/pirate version. From Spore to whatever Ubi is pumping out. In practical trerms as opposed to moral outrage standpoint ones though, I just end up either buying the console version or skipping the game altogether when I'd most likely have bought it.

[Kail]

Piracy is slowly choking the PC single player game industry

I don't think anyone here is saying that piracy is good for the industry.  The question is if this move by Ubisoft (or maybe DRM in general) is good for the industry.  If companies like Ubisoft are actively pushing people to piracy, by providing a poorer product than the pirated version, while punishing the people who legitimately purchase the product with restrictive DRM, then they are contributing to the problem themselves, and this DRM shit is stupid and they should stop doing it.  You can say "they have to make money" and "it's their property" and whatever else you want, but if it drives away even one customer who would have otherwise bought it, it's a stupid business move, even if it stops a million people from pirating it.  You don't make money from people not-pirating your software, they have to actually buy it.

[tgr]

I'm going to go on the record and say that while piracy sucks, DRM sucks even more. Not copy protection, that's a different beast, and the distinction has to be made.

Copy protection just hinders you from making copies of the game, it doesn't stop you from, say, playing a game, and then giving it to your friend or brother or sister or mother. DRM does.

I've probably easily gone from buying 3-4 games a month purely by perusing the brick-and-mortar shops, to maybe 1 every 3 months by careful planning and tons of pre-purchase investigation. And if there's a game I really really want, but it has DRM (again, not copy protection), then I'll grit my teeth and read books/play eve online instead.

It isn't just piracy that's choking the PC single player game industry, they're happily helping themselves along as well, while decrying "them thar ebul piwatez".

[Azazel]

What I find interesting is that older, more mature gamers who have the financial wherewithall and willingness to buy a lot of games like myself and a lot of the f13 crowd are buying fewer or barely any PC games now as a result of the increasingly horrid DRM. Self-fulfilling prophecy, anyone?

I mean, teenagers and college kids are going to pirate shit which they can't afford to buy either way. Same as it ever was. Except for the occasional f13_moral_crusader who never even listened to a mix tape. 

fake edit - I guess this is a rehash of what tgr just said. Ah well, bears repeating.

[Sheepherder]

And the better a game gets, the more people will pirate it, ergo the ultimate game would have no sales because everyone is pirating it, right?

No, the better a game is the better the chance it will sell the minimum number of boxes to fall into the 'profitable' side of the spreadsheet. It can still have an 80% or 90% piracy rate and be profitable if it sells enough boxes. Or DLC - another path the PC gaming industry is going down.

That was sarcasm, a logical extension of Triforcer's theory of "good games get pirated more."

[tgr]

Oh, and just to add to this, when I want to play a singleplayer game, then I don't give a fuck about saving my savegames online. I have 1 gaming rig, that means I don't give a flying fuck whether or not I can reach those savegames from a different PC. By all means, add it as an additional service, but do not require it. I've also seen some copy protection/drm systems use both a disc check AND the possibility for activating online, if you so choose. That way, you get the best of both worlds, and you still have access to the game even if your internet is down as you install/start it.

Case in point, I've missed out on a Call of Duty tournament once, because I'd installed it via steam, told steam to update it, but I hadn't started the game itself, so it hadn't "activated" itself or whatever. The internet connection at the lan party was also down until about 2 hours after the tournament started, at which point it was too late for me to get in. A normal disc check would've gotten me over that hump, as we had all the required patches at a local server somewhere.

It may fuck up only 0.01% of the time, but by god is that 0.01% fucking annoying. It also doesn't matter for pirates, as they've removed it anyways, so the more they go down this path, the worse it is going to be for real customers. And that, I believe, is a bad thing.

Fake edit: yes, what azazel said, the more fiscally stable I am, the less games I've been buying, because they're getting too annoying with the damn protection schemes of theirs. It's a nice self-fulilling prophecy, and it's always "them thar ebul piwates", and never "whoops, maybe we're getting too far ahead of ourselves". Take Spore. EA tried to use 3 activations, reauthed every 10 days. They removed the reauths due to bitching, then they upped the limit to 5. That still wasn't enough to stop people from whining, and now ubisoft is going to stop your game in the middle of a run if you lose your internet connection, because you're one of the üntermenschen PC gamers? And this struck anyone over there as a good idea? Really?

[Ratman_tf]

You don't make money from people not-pirating your software, they have to actually buy it.

This should be carved into the foreheads of anyone who whines about lost sales due to piracy.

[Fabricated]

This DRM is stupid and unjustifiable in every sense of the word. The pirated versions of these games with the DRM stripped out will literally be a superior product to the legit versions.

That's about all that really needs to be said.

[Reg]

I guess I'm just lucky that not one of the games they mention as having this new and offensive DRM is one I want to play.  Even without the DRM I'd never have bought any of them.

[tgr]

If statistics are to be believed, then PC gaming is indeed dying, and console gaming seems to be on the rise. One statistics claims that MW2 was downloaded 4+ million times on the PC, and sold 200-300k units, while the console version sold 5+ million, and was pirated 900k times or so. What the statistics isn't taking into account is, while MW2 was "the most popular game of 2009" was also one of 2009's most bitched at games due to a lot of features it had which smacked of consoleitis. Of course it's going to sell badly on the PC, when PC users expect features IW brush off with comments like "the game is not balanced for lean". I was going to buy MW2. I saw that attitude, and I decided not to.

There's only so much piss-taking that PC gamers will accept, and I hit my limit 1-2 years ago. Console gamers appear to have taken up the slack, so PC gamers are getting games with clear signs of consoleitis, 1-6 months launch delay to "curb piracy", heavy restrictions on how the games can be used, and they're still looking at declining sales and going "wtf? damn pirates!"

Does anyone have a clear view of what the difference between PC gamers and console gamers are? My current view is that console gamers are probably younger, with a shorter attention span and less focus on gaming details and more on "the latest hip game" or the social aspects of a game, whereas PC gamers are more into the nerdy bits of a game, be that modding it or just through game mechanics.

I find that the older I get, the more I get into strategyish/simulator games. That market seems to be drying up slightly as time goes on.

Edit: Slightly stoked about the news of Civilization V, but fearing it'll be wrought with consoleitis, rendering it mostly hopeless to play.

[amiable]

I haven't pirated a game since the early 90's, but I would sooner pirate a Ubisoft game now than acquiesce to this ridiculous DRM scheme.  Most likely though, I just won't bother to either purchase or play the game.  I think I read somewhere "the PC gaming industry isn't dead and it isn't dying, it is being stabbed to death by the very people who could benefit from it the most..."

I have a friend who CONSTANTLY pirates game (successful professional as well) and I am always harping on him for not supporting the talent that puts these games out.  To be honest after this I kind of feel like a chump making that argument.

[Riggswolfe]

I have a friend who CONSTANTLY pirates game (successful professional as well) and I am always harping on him for not supporting the talent that puts these games out.  To be honest after this I kind of feel like a chump making that argument.

No, you were right to harp on him Amiable. He's not supporting the talent. Just because a publisher makes a stupid, dickish move doesn't mean that your friend is any less of a dick and that the devs aren't still making less money. Let's be honest. Piracy is costing the industry billions and I'd say it's responsible for things like studios being in a weak position which allows EA to move in and buy them out.

[amiable]

. Let's be honest. Piracy is costing the industry billions and I'd say it's responsible for things like studios being in a weak position which allows EA to move in and buy them out.

Billions?  Really?   I'm not in a position to argue the veracity of that statement but my response is that if that's true this doesn't seem like a good solution.  I mentioned this to my wife, who has never pirated a game in her life and even she said "F-that, I'm not going to ever buy a game with that type of copy protection, I would sooner download an illegal copy."  Punishing the legitimate customer never, ever ends well.  Effectively what this type of protection does is allow the pirates to offer a superior version of the software than the publisher.  It's insane.

[kildorn]

Honestly, the fix to this type of thing is either a steam style activator (if you have a net connection, validate every once in a while), which will still get hacked, but at least it's not total bullshit. Or offer frequent online updates that include a security update as well. So encourage randomly checking in online with a copy of the app that isn't cracked to not check in, in order to get content updates.

You're never going to reduce piracy to 0. But you need to try not to default your design to "howabout we just pass the buck to the people who actually buy the game, and make them suffer for it"