|
|
 |
| [Nov 24, 2011, 2:09 pm ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
Though plans for a PC edition of Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier was previously confirmed by Ubisoft, PC Gamer has word that the next installment in the Ghost Recon series is for consoles only, and that PC gamers will get Ghost Recon Online instead, which is apparently Ubisoft's new approach to PC piracy following their almost universally despised always-on DRM. Here's word from Ghost Recon Online producer Sébastien Arnoult: We are giving away most of the content for free because there’s no barrier to entry. To the users that are traditionally playing the game by getting it through Pirate Bay, we said, ‘Okay, go ahead guys. This is what you’re asking for. We’ve listened to you – we’re giving you this experience. It’s easy to download, there’s no DRM that will pollute your experience.’
We’re adapting the offer to the PC market. I don’t like to compare PC and Xbox boxed products because they have a model on that platform that is clearly meant to be €60’s worth of super-Hollywood content. On PC, we’re adapting our model to the demand.
“When we started Ghost Recon Online we were thinking about Ghost Recon: Future Solider; having something ported in the classical way without any deep development, because we know that 95% of our consumers will pirate the game. So we said okay, we have to change our mind.
We have to adapt, we have to embrace this instead of pushing it away. That’s the main reflection behind Ghost Recon Online and the choice we’ve made to go in this direction.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 157. |
Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier |
Nov 25, 2011, 20:09 |
^Drag0n^ |
|
|
WarpCrow wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 16:59:
You do realize that a US attorney is simply a high-ranking lawyer, right? A lawyer who, in this case, was prosecuting in a case of commercial piracy? Which is, incidentally, legally completely separate from small-scale piracy for personal, non-commercial use.
Yes. Point being remarks like the ones he delivered are an indication of how the AG views certain crimes, and what their legal position would be should they chose to attack individuals in the future.
My real point here is I don't think that one needs a judge to tell them what is right or wrong, you pretty much can figure that one out on soul searching.
I won't hide it; I am of the opinion that piracy does take something away from the people that created it, and I guess that comes from having been on both sides of that equation. Again, I believe perspectives on this get scewed when you're responsible for the welfare of individuals that make these games
That said, I also think that it's piss-poor marketing and PR to sit back and blame the PC for all of your companies woes; people have pirated, do pirate, and will continue to pirate games, music, and movies. The smarter companies will look at this, and rather than try to milk blood from a stone, will adopt their means and methods such that they not only do not alienate existing customers, but also make buying their products less of a hastle than dealing with the risks inherent in Pirate Bay and hacked copies off BT or hack sites.
IMO.
^D^ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "Never start a fight, but always finish it." |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Twitter 
