Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Ubisoft: DRM "Vital" To PC Success

VG247 quotes Splinter Cell: Conviction creative director Max Béland saying Ubisoft's PC DRM, which requires a constant internet connection, is "vital" to their business. He said: "We consider that protecting our PC games is vital to our business, and will allow us to continue investing in the development of creative and innovative games on the PC platform." This is excerpted from a full interview with Béland, which is accompanied by the first 20 minutes of Splinter Cell: Conviction in video.

View
120 Replies. 6 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Older >

120. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 21, 2010, 11:01 Paketep
 
Closed Betas wrote on Apr 20, 2010, 05:07:
Could it be they are using the PC Game industry for future testing?

No. They're just complete morons.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
119. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 20, 2010, 05:07 Closed Betas
 
Could it be they are using the PC Game industry for future testing? It's no secret everyone is bailing from PC...

Can they be using the self inflicted dieing PC industry and lackluster sales to incorporate this technology into console monitoring....

The only reason piracy is not an issue here because it is not tracked, once it becomes the easy way.. It'll will be their problem, then what do they do?

I don't buy the fact they are leaving this industry because of piracy, they just don't want to support and deal with the headaches of the non tech savvy customer and the gajillion different pc's and performance levels, multiple OS's and bits.. let alone all the 3rd party problems in between, networking, etc.

Consoles are easy, cheap, pretty non supportive, and sell for more...

If they can develop an anti piracy issue to take online console games.. that could be the bank they are truly looking at.. using piracy as the hoopla smoke and mirrors
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
118. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 20, 2010, 04:40 Closed Betas
 
I'll never support this type of DRM ever.
Nothing wrong with that decision, no excuses needed to feel this way.

Ubisoft thinks end users will cave. Not going to happen. This type of system encourages and promotes piracy.

If I want to play my game while my wife drives out to our cottage for a weekend, and cant because dont have internet access. That is pure ridiculousness. I dont care if I have internet access. If i dont want to log my computer into the port, then so be it... I won't miss any Ubisoft title, and no matter what great game they make.. I'll pass.
They won't make us cave, and in the end they seperate themselves from their fan base, the worst choice any company can ever make.. Right now they still see 900 million per quarter.. just wait 2 years of this.. See where it goes and itll be too late for them.. Too bad, we look forward to the losses.. not the games.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
117. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 19, 2010, 23:34 Jerykk
 
This DRM is created to stop people from downloading and playing these games without paying for them at the time. Which is exactly what you do.

So is the irony that the DRM doesn't actually stop me from downloading and playing their games for free? Or is the irony that this DRM is supposed to increase sales but actually does the exact opposite?

You may want to look up "irony" in the dictionary, as I don't think it means what you think it means. If you think that a pirate giving business advice (or in this case, common sense advice) is ironic, it's not. Ubisoft wants more sales. That's the reason DRM exists. DRM is supposed to stop piracy and turn pirates into customers. However, that doesn't actually happen. If Ubisoft wants to turn me into a customer, they need to make good games and stop using this DRM. No irony there, just basic logic.

You find reviews that you believe you can trust (and read them rather than just rely on final scores), do some research and then determine whether or not you want to buy the game.

Yes, I could do that. Or I could just play the game and then A) Buy it if I enjoy it or B) Stop playing it if I don't enjoy it. Seems a lot more logical to trust my opinion over anyone else when it comes to entertainment.

While I won't don't have the time to write a personal review for you, I can tell you that after logging more than 80 hours I am thoroughly enjoying it and have yet to encounter a single problem with the DRM. There you go. You can go out and buy it now without pirating it ...

Unfortunately, you are in the minority here. The vast majority of people who have played the game say it sucks. It has an average Metacritic score of 63. I'm also not very interested in sub sims. However, for all I know, you could be right. The game be awesome and hook me on the genre. Unfortunately, there's no demo. So without the ability to make my own judgment, who should I trust? The majority of people who say the game sucks or you? If I don't pirate the game, I'll have to rely on the opinions of the majority and as such, there's no chance that I will ever buy this game. Conversely, if I pirate the game and end up enjoying it, I will buy it... once Ubisoft removes the DRM.

That said, I have zero interest in sub sims so I won't even bother pirating it. Still, food for thought.

This comment was edited on Apr 19, 2010, 23:47.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
116. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 19, 2010, 18:30 Talisorn
 
Jerykk wrote on Apr 19, 2010, 02:51:
Ah. So that's how you justify piracy.

I guess..? Should I be ashamed that I don't throw my money away on a whim? Or that I think the best way to judge a game is to actually play it?
No. you don't throw money away at a whim. You find reviews that you believe you can trust (and read them rather than just rely on final scores), do some research and then determine whether or not you want to buy the game.

On that note, with regard to Silent Hunter 5 ... if you are a fan of Sub-Sims, then I can personally recommend it. While I won't don't have the time to write a personal review for you, I can tell you that after logging more than 80 hours I am thoroughly enjoying it and have yet to encounter a single problem with the DRM. There you go. You can go out and buy it now without pirating it ...

... I can't see that happening though.
 
Avatar 19028
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
115. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 19, 2010, 09:01 shponglefan
 
Jerykk wrote on Apr 19, 2010, 02:51:
With that said, I really don't see any irony in what I said.

Of course you don't.

This DRM is created to stop people from downloading and playing these games without paying for them at the time. Which is exactly what you do.

Your brain must be exhausted with all the hoops it keeps jumping through to justify yourself.
 
Avatar 54594
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
114. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 19, 2010, 02:51 Jerykk
 
No, the irony is Mr. "I don't buy games without playing them first, thus justifying my piracy and then arbitrarily deciding on a price indepedent of the game company because I have this sense of over-entitlement and feel that I should get to play whatever I want, whenever I want regardless of the game company's rights in the issue" telling game companies how to increase sales.

Arbitrarily deciding on prices? Oh dear. I sincerely hope you buy every game at full MSRP because consumers evidently have no say on how much they're willing to pay for any given product.

And God forbid you think one game is worth more than another because it offers more content and/or quality.

With that said, I really don't see any irony in what I said. I buy games that I enjoy. Were it not for the DRM, I would buy AC2 (though not for $60 because I definitely don't think it's worth that much). I would most likely buy the upcoming PoP game as well. However, as long as the current DRM is in place, I will never buy these games. If Ubisoft removes the DRM, I will buy them. Seems logical enough to me.

Petty moral indignation aside, were there any specific points that you disagreed with? Do you think this DRM actually increases sales? Do you think that pissing off your customers is a good business practice? Do you think that delaying ports for 6 months will get you more sales?

Ah. So that's how you justify piracy.

I guess..? Should I be ashamed that I don't throw my money away on a whim? Or that I think the best way to judge a game is to actually play it?

This comment was edited on Apr 19, 2010, 02:56.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
113. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 19, 2010, 00:35 Sepharo
 
Talisorn wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 18:03:
Jerykk wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 15:35:
No, I'm never first in line because I don't buy games without playing them first. But if the games prove to be good, I do buy them, as opposed to the current situation where I'll never buy any Ubisoft game that has this DRM.

Ah. So that's how you justify piracy.
Uh...
Welcome to Bluesnews!
Talisorn, Jerykk.
Jerykk, Talisorn.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
112. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 18, 2010, 20:51 shponglefan
 
Jerykk wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 02:27:
Yeah, it is somewhat ironic that Ubisoft's attempts to gain sales actually results in me not buying their games.

No, the irony is Mr. "I don't buy games without playing them first, thus justifying my piracy and then arbitrarily deciding on a price indepedent of the game company because I have this sense of over-entitlement and feel that I should get to play whatever I want, whenever I want regardless of the game company's rights in the issue" telling game companies how to increase sales.

Yeah.
 
Avatar 54594
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
111. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 18, 2010, 18:03 Talisorn
 
Jerykk wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 15:35:
Really? So if Ubisoft did all this, you'd be first in line to buy their games right?

No, I'm never first in line because I don't buy games without playing them first. But if the games prove to be good, I do buy them, as opposed to the current situation where I'll never buy any Ubisoft game that has this DRM.

Ah. So that's how you justify piracy.
 
Avatar 19028
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
110. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 18, 2010, 07:16 Jerykk
 
But the only evidence of them being stupid decisions is your opinion.

If they weren't stupid decisions, they wouldn't have pissed off customers and Ubisoft wouldn't have revoked them. They would have stuck with one perfect DRM scheme because as an experienced publisher, they obviously know they're doing, right?

I still don't understand why you're defending Ubisoft on this. It's pretty clear that their attempts to stop piracy are fairly short-sighted, which is why they've tried and dropped multiple DRM schemes over the years. All these failed attempts cost time and money and tarnished Ubisoft's reputation. Their current DRM scheme appears to be following this trend. This is not indicative of a company that knows what they're doing.

Also, it's not an opinion that consecutive ports generally sell better than ports that come out 6 months later. Consecutive ports benefit from the fresh hype and marketing that lead up to it. Delayed ports have no hype or marketing. If someone really wanted to play the game, they would have likely played it on consoles already.

This comment was edited on Apr 18, 2010, 07:22.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
109. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 18, 2010, 06:00 StingingVelvet
 
Jerykk wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 01:33:
Ubisoft isn't using Securom. But yes, I do think they are idiots who bounce around the room knocking their heads into things wondering how to sell games and curb piracy. Moreso the latter. You keep assuming that they know what they're doing but if that's the case, why do they continue to make such stupid decisions?

But the only evidence of them being stupid decisions is your opinion.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
108. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 18, 2010, 02:27 Jerykk
 
Rhetorical question is rhetorical.

Hard to distinguish between rhetorical and sarcastic comments on the interwebs, sorry.

Also: massive irony.

Yeah, it is somewhat ironic that Ubisoft's attempts to gain sales actually results in me not buying their games.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
107. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 18, 2010, 01:37 shponglefan
 
Jerykk wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 15:35:
No, I'm never first in line because I don't buy games without playing them first. But if the games prove to be good, I do buy them, as opposed to the current situation where I'll never buy any Ubisoft game that has this DRM.

Rhetorical question is rhetorical.

Also: massive irony.
 
Avatar 54594
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
106. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 18, 2010, 01:33 Jerykk
 
They know SecuROM is easily hacked, but they use it anyway... why?

Ubisoft isn't using Securom. But yes, I do think they are idiots who bounce around the room knocking their heads into things wondering how to sell games and curb piracy. Moreso the latter. You keep assuming that they know what they're doing but if that's the case, why do they continue to make such stupid decisions?

They tried Starforce, consumers got pissed, so they stopped using Starforce. Then they tried install limits, consumers got pissed, so they dropped that too. Then they tried no DRM whatsoever, which was good. Unfortunately, they tried it on PoP 2008, HAWX and EndWar, all of which sold like crap (on all platforms). I'm guessing they associated this lack of sales with lack of DRM. So now they're trying the most restrictive DRM yet. Consumers are, once again, pissed but Ubisoft claims to be sticking to its guns this time. We'll see how long that lasts.

I think the big problem here is that they think that DRM will make all their games sell well. When that doesn't happen and/or consumers get pissed, they try another protection scheme. It's pretty clear that no, they don't know what they're doing, otherwise they would have devised a copy-protection scheme that actually worked and didn't piss off legitimate customers.

You don't need to be a mighty genius to understand that:

1) Delays of ports will result in fewer sales.
2) Pissing off potential customers will result in fewer sales.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
105. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 17, 2010, 23:37 StingingVelvet
 
Jerykk wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 19:33:
And there you go proving my point... this large corporation dedicated to selling games, with a rich PC history, with tons of people working on the piracy and DRM problem, but they're all idiots and Jerykk has the answers.

So basically, you think that everyone who works in a corporation is always fully qualified and never makes a poor decision..?

That's pretty ridiculous. If all publishers always knew what they were doing, Starforce would never have been used, install limits would have never been used, Deus Ex: Invisible War wouldn't exist and every game would sell 10 million copies.

I'm not really sure why you're siding with Ubisoft on this when they have a history of making poor decisions and this new DRM is very obviously one of them.

I'm not saying they are infallible, I am saying acting like they are idiots who bounce around the room knocking their heads into things wondering how to sell games and curb piracy is ridiculous.

Everything you have thought of and said they have thought of and discussed as well, that is my point. You are not a mighty genius who can explain DRM, piracy and PC gaming to them, as if they were children looking for advice. They simply choose to go another way, because of facts we may or may not know. They know SecuROM is easily hacked, but they use it anyway... why? We can't really know for sure, but it's not because they are so dumb they don't know it's hacked.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
104. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 17, 2010, 21:09 wtf_man
 
ASeven wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 20:02:
Let me explain to you how this works.

You see, the corporations finance Team America.

And then Team America goes out, and the corporations sit there in their... In their corporation buildings, and, see, they're all corporation-y...

...and they make money.


 
Avatar 19499
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
103. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 17, 2010, 20:02 ASeven
 
everyone wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 19:59:
Large corporations are far from infallible.
Just look at the music industry and their crusade against napster, how did that work out for them?
Another recent example of corporate failure is investment banks.


Heck, let's look outside the game industry. The 2008 depression happened because of big corporations fucking up big time. Anyone that defends corporations are reasonable shouldn't speak at all. Corporations are unreasonable and sometimes utterly unethical.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
102. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 17, 2010, 19:59 everyone
 
Large corporations are far from infallible.
Just look at the music industry and their crusade against napster, how did that work out for them?
Another recent example of corporate failure is investment banks.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
101. Re: Ubisoft: DRM Apr 17, 2010, 19:33 Jerykk
 
And there you go proving my point... this large corporation dedicated to selling games, with a rich PC history, with tons of people working on the piracy and DRM problem, but they're all idiots and Jerykk has the answers.

So basically, you think that everyone who works in a corporation is always fully qualified and never makes a poor decision..?

That's pretty ridiculous. If all publishers always knew what they were doing, Starforce would never have been used, install limits would have never been used, Deus Ex: Invisible War wouldn't exist and every game would sell 10 million copies.

I'm not really sure why you're siding with Ubisoft on this when they have a history of making poor decisions and this new DRM is very obviously one of them.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
120 Replies. 6 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo