Ubisoft DRM confirmed to boot you from your singleplayer game when the net drops out

[Purkake]

Next-gen console games cost an extra $10 because of licensing fees.

 

@entrerix: Nintendo is the only one who can release a new console relatively painlessly, as long as it has backwards compatibility. Microsoft was probably going to announce a new console sometime this year, but went with Natal, because of 360's continued success and the recession. They are probably dying to release a new one, but it just wouldn't work at this point. Sony is pretty much riding by the seat of their pants, hoping that PS3 has enough staying power to outlive the 360 and enough processing power to rival the next Xbox.

Edited February 20, 2010 by Purkake

[Humodour]

I feel like we could just have a "DRM thread" template instead of making a new once each time.

 

OP: New form of DRM is going to be used by company X.

*Woe is me, PC gaming is dying, developers don't care about PC gaming, I'll never buy from X again...*

*Someone mentions piracy*

Thread closed

 

Would you stop being a tool and consider that this form of DRM is unique and more dangerous than any before it? YOU CAN'T PLAY YOUR SINGLEPLAYER GAME WITHOUT A STABLE INTERNET CONNECTION, PURKAKE. It's entirely worth raising awareness of this and discussing things like its potential to set a precedent.

 

Don't post in the damn thread if you are sick of hearing about DRM.

Edited February 20, 2010 by Krezack

[Humodour]

The irony is that Krezack is being patronizing by... not trying to be patronizing.

 

'Normal People' like a whole combination of things. One minute they are playing Guitar Hero on the Wii at 3AM with their friends then the next day they are playing Alpha Centauri III and micro-ing their space empire. Not in Krezzie's world, where you are either the sort of person whose brain is taxed by Halo 2 or a backwoodsman who only plays American Civil War hex-based wargames only six people bought.

 

:: sigh ::

 

Actually, no. I felt it was stupid of you to be trying to blame anybody at all for the way they enjoy their gaming. Evidently you missed this.

[~Di]

If Alpha Protocol or some other game that you REALLY want, had this kind of DRM, what would you do?

 

 

And for the advanced students, what if it was only available on PC?

 

I would not buy the game, nor would I acquire it by other means. I won't die if I can't have what I want. I'll just move on.

[Humodour]

But at least 90 percent illustrious, with Chart-Track stating the game has already outsold Bethesda's Oblivion by 57%, pulling in sales of 55% on Xbox 360, 28% on PS3, and 17% on PC.

 

A little better than what I remembered, but still losing 5 to 1 against the consoles.

 

Ignorant statement. It's not losing 5 to 1 against any single console. That's what people talking about 'the consoles' fail to grasp: the PC is a platform. The Xbox is a platform. The console is NOT a platform. The breakdown of sales is roughly 6:3:2. For this game sales on the PC lag those on other platforms, but they are still high (more than high enough to justify porting - and on that note, it'd cost more to port it from Xbox to PS3 than Xbox to PC, assuming they didn't actually code it for PC first, which they often do).

[Purkake]

Would you stop being a tool and consider that this form of DRM is unique and more dangerous than any before it? YOU CAN'T PLAY YOUR SINGLEPLAYER GAME WITHOUT A STABLE INTERNET CONNECTION, PURKAKE. It's entirely worth raising awareness of this and discussing things like its potential to set a precedent.

 

Don't post in the damn thread if you are sick of hearing about DRM.

Except that we already had a thread about that and it went to hell in a handbasket just like all the previous 74 threads. I'm not complaining about you making the thread, just about the direction it always takes.

 

As for OMG CAPS, if I want to play the game enough, I'll put up with always needing a stable connection, if I don't then I just won't buy it. Simple enough.

 

Ignorant statement. It's not losing 5 to 1 against any single console. That's what people talking about 'the consoles' fail to grasp: the PC is a platform. The Xbox is a platform. The console is NOT a platform. The breakdown of sales is roughly 6:3:2. For this game sales on the PC lag those on other platforms, but they are still high (more than high enough to justify porting - and on that note, it'd cost more to port it from Xbox to PS3 than Xbox to PC, assuming they didn't actually code it for PC first, which they often do).

The original question was why the PC always gets the short end of the stick and this is pretty much why.

Edited February 20, 2010 by Purkake

[Tigranes]

As for OMG CAPS, if I want to play the game enough, I'll put up with always needing a stable connection, if I don't then I just won't buy it. Simple enough.

 

But you're not going to question why the dilemma comes up to begin with? These lines of reasoning wear the attractive mask of pragmatism, but are super thin.

[Purkake]

Dilemma or not, in the end you still either buy it or not, why muddy up the waters? Complaining about it is not going to change anything.

 

Also, Ubisoft can do whatever they want with their products, no matter how stupid or ineffective it actually is.

Edited February 20, 2010 by Purkake

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Complaining about it is not going to change anything.

 

I disagree, if you do not buy the games and then tell Ubisoft that you did not buy the games because of X they might be inclined to change X into Y. Look at Mass Effect vs. Mass Effect 2 - the "complaining about it" seemed to work there.

[Purkake]

I meant complaining about it here.

[Calax]

Actually I'm expecting PS3 sales to start rising as the exclusives and graphics get markedly better.

[Nepenthe]

The Wii is going like they're giving it away with a happy meal.

 

The PS3 seems to be following the XBOX curve all the way... I'd say these sales are peaking because the cost of the consoles has dropped sufficiently for them to become accessible to most people + many of the older games can be bought at smaller prices. Still, there's about a year to go I guess until it starts winding down.

 

I suspect the PS3 has an inferior attach rate. AFAIK, a lot of people are buying it because its the best blu-ray player on the market, they won't be gobbling up games at the rate the fauxhawk fratboy x360rs do.

[Calax]

The Wii is going like they're giving it away with a happy meal.

 

The PS3 seems to be following the XBOX curve all the way... I'd say these sales are peaking because the cost of the consoles has dropped sufficiently for them to become accessible to most people + many of the older games can be bought at smaller prices. Still, there's about a year to go I guess until it starts winding down.

 

I suspect the PS3 has an inferior attach rate. AFAIK, a lot of people are buying it because its the best blu-ray player on the market, they won't be gobbling up games at the rate the fauxhawk fratboy x360rs do.

Except that now a days the PS3 299 bundle is overall a better deal than Xbox for the same price

 

http://www.gamestop.com/Catalog/productDet...aspx?sku=020315

vs

http://www.gamestop.com/Catalog/productDet...aspx?sku=020321

 

And on the ps3 for 50 bucks more you get double the HD space.

 

Honestly I've been noticing the Wii has the lowest attach rate, because most people will buy it after seeing it at a friends place, then take it home and find that they NEVER use it, so they bring it back and sell it to us.

[Nepenthe]

The Wii is going like they're giving it away with a happy meal.

 

The PS3 seems to be following the XBOX curve all the way... I'd say these sales are peaking because the cost of the consoles has dropped sufficiently for them to become accessible to most people + many of the older games can be bought at smaller prices. Still, there's about a year to go I guess until it starts winding down.

 

I suspect the PS3 has an inferior attach rate. AFAIK, a lot of people are buying it because its the best blu-ray player on the market, they won't be gobbling up games at the rate the fauxhawk fratboy x360rs do.

Except that now a days the PS3 299 bundle is overall a better deal than Xbox for the same price

 

http://www.gamestop.com/Catalog/productDet...aspx?sku=020315

vs

http://www.gamestop.com/Catalog/productDet...aspx?sku=020321

 

And on the ps3 for 50 bucks more you get double the HD space.

 

Honestly I've been noticing the Wii has the lowest attach rate, because most people will buy it after seeing it at a friends place, then take it home and find that they NEVER use it, so they bring it back and sell it to us.

 

Not exactly sure what the "except" does there in view of my quote, especially as nothing you're saying seems to relate to my suspicion that the amount of blu-ray player buyers among PS3 purchasers might lessen the games/console ratio ("attach rate") considerably in comparison to the x360.

 

I'll be the first to say that the "more expensive" PS3 is anything but. I mean, I own two consoles, a PS3 and the "Mass Effect Machine"

[Humodour]

I meant complaining about it here.

 

Complaining about it here will change a damn thing, because word of mouth is a very powerful force in marketing. Don't assume this thread on this forum is an isolated case. And a bunch of people who read about it on each forum are going to go warn their friends. Who'll probably further warn their friends, etc.

 

It may not prevent everyone from buying a game, but if it puts enough of a dent in sales it could well make the stupid suits think twice, because there's nothing they like more than higher margins.

[Slowtrain]

I meant complaining about it here.

 

 

That's a remarkably jaded and cynical view.

 

 

Discussion rarely if ever changes things immediately, right here, right now. Just as Krezzie says, discussion does serve to increase awareness of an issue and works to cause change over a period of time.

 

Not just discussion here, but anywhere. When thoughts and ideas are exchanged among people, the potential for change is set in motion.

[Purkake]

But we already had a thread on this very form of DRM, everyone around here already knows.

 

Also this could very well be Ubisoft's last push, if this doesn't prevent piracy and/or increase sales they might just pull out of the PC market.

Edited February 20, 2010 by Purkake

[Morgoth]

I wonder why Ubisoft even bothers making PC ports. That new protection scheme (pulls you out when disconnect) is a pile of horse****. And it probably gets cracked within days anyway.

[Slowtrain]

But we already had a thread on this very form of DRM, everyone around here already knows.

 

 

There's lot of threads on repeated or semi-repeated issues. Discussions move forward and new threads get started. Many of the issues remain the same, but that's OK, isn't it?

 

 

Also this could very well be Ubisoft's last push, if this doesn't prevent piracy and/or increase sales they might just pull out of the PC market.

 

 

I agree. That's very possible. Which is why I asked some of the questions that I did earlier. It's part of the discussion. People bring up different points based on the issues that are important to them.

 

FOr me, personally, forced on-line connectivity during single-player gameplay isn't a deal-breaker, but it is annoying. ANd it does raise issues about how far are we as consumers going to allow game companies (and others) to monitor our on-going activities for whatever unknown purpose.

 

Is this really an anti-piracy issue? I have my doubts. I don't think DRM has been about combatting piracy for some time now.

[Purkake]

But we already had a thread on this very form of DRM, everyone around here already knows.

 

 

There's lot of threads on repeated or semi-repeated issues. Discussions move forward and new threads get started.

If only!

 

But in an effort to help out, consider this: what if this did work and gave a Starforce-level of protection from piracy. Most other big publishers would probably adopt a similar model as soon as possible. Would it be worth it?

 

We all know that in the end it is going to come down to how far you're willing to limit the user to stop piracy.

Edited February 20, 2010 by Purkake

[Monte Carlo]

The music industry managed to adapt and survive in the digital age, but the gaming industry (allegedly hi-tech) is still flailing around like a rubber Godzilla in a late 60's Japanese disaster movie.

 

Piracy is an issue, sure, but the happy confluence between DRM and increased revenue harvesting hardly seems coincidental.

[Purkake]

The difference is that the music industry was collectively going to fall off a cliff if they didn't adapt and even then Apple had to twist their arm.

 

The gaming industry is doing just fine, it's the PC that's the problem. Since it only brings in a fraction of the profits, they aren't really analyzing the problem from all angles, but just slapping a giant patch on it. When the going gets too tough they can easily pull out and cut their losses.

[Monte Carlo]

The movie industry, more analagous perhaps with gaming, is also managing quite nicely thankyou. In the UK IP bans for copyright infringement are beginning to become more popular.

 

Any business that penalises the honest because it's easier than prosecuting the thief is on a hiding to nothing.

[Purkake]

I don't think any one of the industries is directly comparable, they all have their problems and failed solutions, even the book industry with the raise of ebooks.

 

That said, the music industry should probably be the example to follow with digital distribution.

[Monte Carlo]

Security compliance schemes across all areas of human activity are problematic. Any crime prevention expert will tell you that --- it's the argument of proportionality. We could eradicate virtually all acquisitive crime by imposing curfews aggressively policed with heavy-handed sanctions. Execution or state-sanctioned indeterminate sentences for narcotics possession would put that one to bed. We could curtail people smuggling with privacy-degrading biometric ID cards for all. And so on.

 

But they're not proportionate.

 

In the UK the identity card scheme has cost hundreds of millions of pounds and is heading for the dustbin of political history. People asked, not unreasonably, why the government wasn't taking less draconican measures like actually enforcing the laws we already have to address the issues the ID cards were meant to solve.

 

It's the same with gaming. The industry simply puts the smackdown on the honest. There seems to be little or no effort to punish theft. And it's wrong.