Assassin's Creed 2 PC

[Intel_Hydralisk]

Which makes me believe its the pirates whining.

I bought it. I don't like it.

I'm a pirate? What?

 

[heatlesssun]

Because I know PR bullshit when I hear it. Its the same bullshit as all those people use to strip away freedoms by claiming its "to protect the children" or "to stop the terrorists". While there might be a sliver of truth to it, its still a bullshit excuse that they know most people will flock to like sheep because most people are too stupid to think for themselves.

PS: I'm not saying you're stupid for agreeing with their decisions only if you blindly follow what they say.

All I'm trying to say is that DRM isn't the issue, PIRACY IS. Do you think that DRM would even exist if piracy WASN'T a problem? Why would anyone bother with it if people didn't pirate at the levels they do now?

This is what bothers me about this debate. Too many people want to blame devs ENTIRELY for this situation and give the crooks a pass. I won't.

 

[Intel_Hydralisk]

All I'm trying to say is that DRM isn't the issue, PIRACY IS. Do you think that DRM would even exist if piracy WASN'T a problem? Why would anyone bother with it if people didn't pirate at the levels they do now?

This is what bothers me about this debate. Too many people want to blame devs for this situation and give the crooks a pass. I'm won't.

I think piracy is a given in the industry (and many others). It all goes back to "don't copy that floppy!" I don't think anyone becomes a major game developer without realizing that fact. How you handle it is completely up to the devs, and in this case I don't think this was the correct response.

 

[Derangel]

All I'm trying to say is that DRM isn't the issue, PIRACY IS. Do you think that DRM would even exist if piracy WASN'T a problem? Why would anyone bother with it if people didn't pirate at the levels they do now?

This is what bothers me about this debate. Too many people want to blame devs ENTIRELY for this situation and give the crooks a pass. I'm won't.

Of course it would. Publishers would find another excuse to limit the freedom we have with our games.

 

[nerdydesi]

I'd like to ask that since Ubisoft has implemented this DRM, why did EA remove DRM from Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age: Origins for instance? All three games I'm sure have equally high piracy rates? Though I hear the recent C&C game from EA has put back DRM.

 

[heatlesssun]

Of course it would. Publishers would find another excuse to limit the freedom we have with our games.

So devs are going to spend MILLIONS of dollars they wouldn't have to in a piracy free world to take away gamer's freedoms?

This makes NO SENSE. You need more than a visceral argument about freedom to make this case. Down is green. Up is phone. These statements are just as valid as your argument.

 

[heatlesssun]

I think piracy is a given in the industry (and many others). It all goes back to "don't copy that floppy!" I don't think anyone becomes a major game developer without realizing that fact. How you handle it is completely up to the devs, and in this case I don't think this was the correct response.

A given and giving up are two different things. Capitulation to crooks only invites more and more demands from the crooks. BULLIES DON'T STOP WITHOUT A FIGHT!

People who want to put this ALL of the devs and then say "nothing can be done about crooks, let them have their way" are being as dishonest as the companies those very same people lie about the impact of piracy.

It is a FUNDAMENTAL tenet of our civilization that one doesn't take that which isn't theirs. EVERYONE here agrees with that when it comes to their own property. It's easy to ignore it when you're not the victim.

Why are so many content with letting the bad guys do their thing? Do you honestly think that these all these guys stop at games? They steal credit card numbers, social security numbers, you name it, they take it!

 

[Derangel]

So devs are going to spend MILLIONS of dollars they wouldn't have to in a piracy free world to take away gamer's freedoms?

This makes NO SENSE. You need more than a visceral argument about freedom to make this case. Down is green. Up is phone. These statements are just as valid as your argument.

If it wasn't piracy it would be something else. Look at the console market. Publishers aren't bitching about piracy there, they're bitching about used sales. They're coming up with tactics to try to convince people to buy games new instead of used. What do you think they're going to try next when that fails the stem the tied of people buying used games and "taking money away from them"? Some company will come along and claim to have the perfect solution to the used game problem. They'll make long winded, bullshit pitches, that they'll make sure the stock holders hear. The stockholders being morons who only care for money will buy it and force the companies to adopt it. Much the same way SonyDADC promises that SecuROM will prevent piracy.

I'm not saying piracy isn't a problem, it is. Its a big one, but its being blown out of proportion. The solution isn't more bullshit DRM that makes it harder to play games. The solution is to offer games people want to play and give them a good reason to buy it. Treating them like criminals isn't going to make people happy. The primary goal of a company should always be to please the customer so they keep returning and buying more stuff. Hell a good way of doing that would be to improve the activation method. Follow Apple's example and give people an easy option to deauthorize ALL activations at once without having to deal with calling a company's CS number. Actually, thats something SonyDADC should do.

 

[Disposed]

If it wasn't piracy it would be something else. Look at the console market. Publishers aren't bitching about piracy there, they're bitching about used sales. They're coming up with tactics to try to convince people to buy games new instead of used. What do you think they're going to try next when that fails the stem the tied of people buying used games and "taking money away from them"? Some company will come along and claim to have the perfect solution to the used game problem. They'll make long winded, bullshit pitches, that they'll make sure the stock holders hear. The stockholders being morons who only care for money will buy it and force the companies to adopt it. Much the same way SonyDADC promises that SecuROM will prevent piracy.

I would quit wasting your time he simply will never get it. Let him pay for the shit DRM and like it nothing you say will break through that stubbornness.

 

[WabeWalker]

Heatlesssun, you're wasting your time.

I've argued with these people until I've been blue in the face. They seem to believe that piracy doesn't hurt the industry. Their argument here seems to be that people who pirate games wouldn't have bought those games in the first place - which is such bullshit on so many different levels - but nevertheless this is what they actually believe.

And so you present the argument to them that if even if that were the case (which it isn't) it still doesn't make it legitimate for people to pirate games. You say to them - it doesn't matter if pirates weren't going to pay for the games, companies like Ubisoft still don't want people playing their games for free. That's right - they worked hard at creating something, and they don't want people taking a free ride. Doesn't matter whether or not the pirates were or weren't going to be paying for the game - Ubisoft still does not want people playing its games for free. End of discussion.

They tend to ignore this argument, since they haven't got an answer for it.

Then they'll be adamant that they're not pirates themselves. And yet they'll endorse the actions of an 'organization' like Skidrow, one of the groups who has done more damage to our hobby than any other.

You can say to them that back in the day it was Skidrow who pirated some of the greatest games ever created, such as Deus Ex, and the Fallout games, and Planescape Torment. They'll respond to that by saying: "Well good, I'm glad that Skidrow pirated those games because some of those games are now very hard to find."

You can then point out to these people that actually Skidrow pirated those games back in the day, when stores were selling them and when they were available everywhere, but they don't respond to that argument, because once again they don't know how to.

You can tell them that DRMs don't cause piracy, that piracy causes DRMs.

But here you're just shouting into the wind. They believe that companies like Ubisoft are the bad guys, and that the good guys are the pirates.

Here's how sick and twisted some of these people are: One person here actually said that Skidrow are paying customers. They bought both Assassins's Creed and Silent Hunter Five, he said. They're paying customers of Ubisoft's. LOL at that! What a sick and twisted argument. Of course they had to buy the game! They were attempting to crack it so that they could pirate it!

Oh, but fool that I am - these organizations aren't about piracy. No, they're very proud people, I've been told. They crack games and then post at their websites that they encourage people to go out and buy the games! Quadruple LOL at that statement.

Seriously, you're just wasting your time.

PC Gaming is in serious trouble. The Me Generation is going to be the final nail in the coffin. Yeah, everything should be free. Music. Games. Nah, we don't have to pay for any of that.

 

[WabeWalker]

I would quit wasting your time he simply will never get it. Let him pay for the shit DRM and like it nothing you say will break through that stubbornness.

No, he does get it. You're the one who doesn't get it. Like about 95% of the people here. And don't argue with me that the majority rules.

The majority is NOT always right.

The majority once believed that the world was flat. The majority of young people today believe that music is free - and we know statistically that the vast, vast majority of young people have never even bought a music CD ever.

The majority is not always right.

 

[Disposed]

Piracy hurts the industry without any doubt this DRM hurts only legitimate customers.

THATS what you and heatlesssun are failing to grasp.

No amount of piracy justifies the shit they dish out to the paying customers.

 

[WabeWalker]

Piracy hurts the industry without any doubt this DRM hurts only legitimate customers.

THATS what you and heatlesssun are failing to grasp.

No amount of piracy justifies the shit they dish out to the paying customers.

I paid for this game. Did YOU pay for it? How am I hurt by this game? Tell me. I'd love to know how I've been hurt by Ubisoft here?

I finished the game last night. Best game I've played in months. Not one disconnection. Not one problem connecting to the server. Didn't even know it was there the DRM.

So I want to know how I personally was hurt by Ubisoft here. Enlighten me, please, since I'm obviously so completely in the dark about this?

 

[Disposed]

I paid for this game. Did YOU pay for it? How am I hurt by this game? Tell me. I'd love to know how I've been hurt by Ubisoft here?

I finished the game last night. Best game I've played in months. Not one disconnection. Not one problem connecting to the server. Didn't even know it was there the DRM.

So I want to know how I personally was hurt by Ubisoft here. Enlighten me, please, since I'm obviously so completely in the dark about this?

If you are so thick that after 5 pages of discussion you dont know the answer to that question nothing i say will matter here one tiny bit. I have no desire to explain something thats been explained to you 50 other times.

 

[Derangel]

Heatlesssun, you're wasting your time.

I've argued with these people until I've been blue in the face. They seem to believe that piracy doesn't hurt the industry. Their argument here seems to be that people who pirate games wouldn't have bought those games in the first place - which is such bullshit on so many different levels - but nevertheless this is what they actually believe.

And so you present the argument to them that if even if that were the case (which it isn't) it still doesn't make it legitimate for people to pirate games. You say to them - it doesn't matter if pirates weren't going to pay for the games, companies like Ubisoft still don't want people playing their games for free. That's right - they worked hard at creating something, and they don't want people taking a free ride. Doesn't matter whether or not the pirates were or weren't going to be paying for the game - Ubisoft still does not want people playing its games for free. End of discussion.

They tend to ignore this argument, since they haven't got an answer for it.

Then they'll be adamant that they're not pirates themselves. And yet they'll endorse the actions of an 'organization' like Skidrow, one of the groups who has done more damage to our hobby than any other.

You can say to them that back in the day it was Skidrow who pirated some of the greatest games ever created, such as Deus Ex, and the Fallout games, and Planescape Torment. They'll respond to that by saying: "Well good, I'm glad that Skidrow pirated those games because some of those games are now very hard to find."

You can then point out to these people that actually Skidrow pirated those games back in the day, when stores were selling them and when they were available everywhere, but they don't respond to that argument, because once again they don't know how to.

You can tell them that DRMs don't cause piracy, that piracy causes DRMs.

But here you're just shouting into the wind. They believe that companies like Ubisoft are the bad guys, and that the good guys are the pirates.

Here's how sick and twisted some of these people are: One person here actually said that Skidrow are paying customers. They bought both Assassins's Creed and Silent Hunter Five, he said. They're paying customers of Ubisoft's. LOL at that! What a sick and twisted argument. Of course they had to buy the game! They were attempting to crack it so that they could pirate it!

Oh, but fool that I am - these organizations aren't about piracy. No, they're very proud people, I've been told. They crack games and then post at their websites that they encourage people to go out and buy the games! Quadruple LOL at that statement.

Seriously, you're just wasting your time.

PC Gaming is in serious trouble. The Me Generation is going to be the final nail in the coffin. Yeah, everything should be free. Music. Games. Nah, we don't have to pay for any of that.

Ugh. Wabe. Your stupidity and bullheadedness make my brain hurt. I'm tired of reading your bullshit. To the ignore list!

 

[heatlesssun]

If it wasn't piracy it would be something else. Look at the console market. Publishers aren't bitching about piracy there, they're bitching about used sales. They're coming up with tactics to try to convince people to buy games new instead of used. What do you think they're going to try next when that fails the stem the tied of people buying used games and "taking money away from them"? Some company will come along and claim to have the perfect solution to the used game problem. They'll make long winded, bullshit pitches, that they'll make sure the stock holders hear. The stockholders being morons who only care for money will buy it and force the companies to adopt it. Much the same way SonyDADC promises that SecuROM will prevent piracy.

I'm not saying piracy isn't a problem, it is. Its a big one, but its being blown out of proportion. The solution isn't more bullshit DRM that makes it harder to play games. The solution is to offer games people want to play and give them a good reason to buy it. Treating them like criminals isn't going to make people happy. The primary goal of a company should always be to please the customer so they keep returning and buying more stuff. Hell a good way of doing that would be to improve the activation method. Follow Apple's example and give people an easy option to deauthorize ALL activations at once without having to deal with calling a company's CS number. Actually, thats something SonyDADC should do.

I'm all about adding value to a product and I would rather see less DRM of course.

But if piracy is blown out of proportion, so is DRM. I have a constant internet connection on my phone, my tablet pc and of course my cable modem at home. I need them for work so at least from my personal perspective at this time, getting upset about needing something that I HAVE to have anyway is just silly.

Now if I didn't have all this then sure I'd be more upset. But the time is coming where connectivity ISN'T going to be optional. I GUARENTEE this.

The cloud represents a VERY EFFECTIVE way to put an end to rampant piracy and I'm affraid that the more people pirate the faster the cloud is going to rule and local execution simply won't be an option.

And as much as people in a forum like this don't care much for something OnLive, LOTS of people will LOVE not having to deal with a computer or complex device. Just a simple set top box you hook up to a TV and go. That's VERY appealing to a lot of customers while effectively solving the issue of piracy.

So if you think in the long run that pirates are doing us favors in the long run, think again.

 

[Derangel]

I'm all about adding value to a product and I would rather see less DRM of course.

But if piracy is blown out of proportion, so is DRM. I have a constant internet connection on my phone, my tablet pc and of course my cable modem at home. I need them for work so at least from my personal perspective at this time, getting upset about needing something that I HAVE to have anyway is just silly.

Now if I didn't have all this then sure I'd be more upset. But the time is coming where connectivity ISN'T going to be optional. I GUARENTEE this.

The cloud represents a VERY EFFECTIVE way to put an end to rampant piracy and I'm affraid that the more people pirate the faster the cloud is going to rule and local execution simply won't be an option.

And as much as people in a forum like this don't care much for something OnLive, LOTS of people will LOVE not having to deal with a computer or complex device. Just a simple set top box you hook up to a TV and go. That's VERY appealing to a lot of customers while effectively solving the issue of piracy.

So if you think in the long run that pirates are doing us favors in the long run, think again.

My major issue with this is due to having to rely on servers to stay up and running to play a single player game. I know far too much about servers and hardware in general to trust them that much. Servers crash and video game companies have proven, time and again, that they're too incompetent to properly set-up back up servers to handle the stress when a heavily used server crashes. Server crashes can take days to fix depending on the problem and if the data isn't properly back up and the other servers can't properly handle the stress there is going to be a lot of problems. It also seems like Ubi's IT department someone didn't count on this DRM making people act like douchebags and doing stupid retaliatory attacks to the servers. So the servers weren't set up to deal with DOS attacks. Then there is the fun fact that its more surprising when a PC game with MP launches without major issues than when it does.

As for OnLive. I like the idea but I hate how they're doing it. The way they're setting it up feels very anti-consumer. It would be like Valve charging a subscription to use Steam and if you don't pay it you don't get to play any of the games you bought through Steam. Which is exactly how OnLive works and I think its crap.

PS: I bought ACII from a forum member so sometime next week I'll be testing their DRM out for myself to get a first hand experience of it. I'll also have a new modem on Monday (DOCSIS 3 yay!) so hopefully that one will be a little more stable than the one I have right now.

 

[heatlesssun]

Piracy hurts the industry without any doubt this DRM hurts only legitimate customers.

THATS what you and heatlesssun are failing to grasp.

No amount of piracy justifies the shit they dish out to the paying customers.

I NEVER said that DRM doesn't hurt customers. But at the same time, and I'm only talking about me, I'VE NEVER HAD SHOW STOPPING ISSUE. NEVER. WITH ANY FORM OF DRM ON A PC. I just haven't. I simply don't know what else to say.

So as a result of my PERSONAL EXPERIENCE I think that the harm DRM causes customers is over as overblown as the harm piracy causes devs . I could be wrong. But I have no way to know EXACTLY how many customers have issues versus the total base versus people who wouldn't have bought the game anyway.

I don't know and no one here does either.

 

[heatlesssun]

No, he does get it. You're the one who doesn't get it. Like about 95% of the people here. And don't argue with me that the majority rules.

The majority is NOT always right.

The majority once believed that the world was flat. The majority of young people today believe that music is free - and we know statistically that the vast, vast majority of young people have never even bought a music CD ever.

The majority is not always right.

To me it is a moral issue. For whatever evil and greed that others may exhibit, I don't have to join in. And you're quite right about the majority not always being right. Plenty of eamples in world history were much evil was done when the majority went along for the ride at the very least.

 

[Plague_Injected]

He keeps posting like a Ubisoft sales rep, or the sole crusader against piracy.

When crappy review sites (like IGN and Gamespot) who fall over themselves to kiss Ubisoft's ass over their broken/unpatched/plain crappy games start saying their DRM is broken and invasive, you know something is seriously wrong.

 

[heatlesssun]

He keeps posting like a Ubisoft sales rep, or the sole crusader against piracy.

When crappy review sites (like IGN and Gamespot) who fall over themselves to kiss Ubisoft's ass over their broken/unpatched/plain crappy games start saying their DRM is broken and invasive, you know something is seriously wrong.

Why would I bother as everyone has their mind made up and I'm far from any type of crusader.

I'm simply pointing out that if you think piracy doesn't have an enormously negative impact on digital media and that most companies are simply going to capitulate to piracy and that piracy isn't the main force that drives DRM that you're being as ridiculous as those companies that think they can stop the piracy of locally executed code.

However the days of locally executed code are eventually going to end.

I think there's a company called Google that's working on it along with a few others.

 

[Plague_Injected]

Why would I bother as everyone has their mind made up and I'm far from any type of crusader.

I'm simply pointing out that if you think piracy doesn't have an enormously negative impact on digital media and that most companies are simply going to capitulate to piracy and that piracy isn't the main force that drives DRM that you're being as ridiculous as those companies that think they can stop the piracy of locally executed code.

However the days of locally executed code are eventually going to end.

I think there's a company called Google that's working on it along with a few others.

Sorry, I was referring to WabeWalker.

Companies are better off trying to maximise their sales (with advertising campaigns, "limited editions" that come with extra goodies like concept art or an Ezio bobblehead - some people go for that sort of thing) instead of just trying to cut down how many copies get pirated. Ubisoft has alienated a large part of their customer base by implementing this form of DRM - just because you or other people living in urban/suburban America aren't having trouble with it, doesn't mean people in other parts of the world (who pay a lot more for their games than you) or those who cannot access or afford stable, high-speed Internet aren't having an entirely intolerable experience.

 

[heatlesssun]

As for OnLive. I like the idea but I hate how they're doing it. The way they're setting it up feels very anti-consumer. It would be like Valve charging a subscription to use Steam and if you don't pay it you don't get to play any of the games you bought through Steam. Which is exactly how OnLive works and I think its crap.

PS: I bought ACII from a forum member so sometime next week I'll be testing their DRM out for myself to get a first hand experience of it. I'll also have a new modem on Monday (DOCSIS 3 yay!) so hopefully that one will be a little more stable than the one I have right now.

Yeah I don't like the OnLive model either. You should get something for $15 a month other than the right to play.

I've not even started up AC 2 but it you look threw the Steam forums its seems that a lot of the complaints about connectivity are from Europeans. But overall the mood is MUCH more positive than this thread.

So yes it is causing some people some problems and yes this is a sign of honest customers getting grief from the DRM. But then there's plenty of people not having any issues as well. I'll give it a shot sometime today.

 

[arcturus]

To me it is a moral issue. For whatever evil and greed that others may exhibit, I don't have to join in. And you're quite right about the majority not always being right. Plenty of eamples in world history were much evil was done when the majority went along for the ride at the very least.

Actually, opponents of this DRM are simply more vocal. Their visibility would suggest they're in the majority but in fact they're not. A classic vocal minority scenario.

Frankly I hope other Devs are encouraged by UBI's success. This is exactly what the gaming industry needs, a stimulus to make great games with the promise of high profits as opposed to a smaller paycheck and seeing one's hard work go down the toilet due to piracy.

 

[Climber]

Actually, opponents of this DRM are simply more vocal. Their visibility would suggest they're in the majority but in fact they're not. A classic vocal minority scenario.

Frankly I hope other Devs are encouraged by UBI's success. This is exactly what the gaming industry needs, a stimulus to make great games with the promise of high profits as opposed to a smaller paycheck and seeing one's hard work go down the toilet due to piracy.

There is more proof in the industry that great games sell well without the need of intrusive DRM schemes than there is for games with intrusive DRM. As it has been stated numerous times throughout the debate, no one is blaming the publishers or developers for wanting to protect their IP's, just that there are better ways than intrusive and draconian DRM schemes.

I also disagree to the nth degree this is what our industry needs. Gaming needs to get back to its roots. Awesome stories told visually, allowing players to make choices, multi-player capabilities that help develop friendships and more challenging game play, etc...etc...Not sloppy console ports brought out months after the original hit the market, not these 3dmark visual simulations that you can play in for a couple hours, nor do we need 4 hour single player games that cost more than 49.99.

Make games that meet the criteria from the first list and people will flock to it in droves and buy. Make the game have re-playability and people will pay more, make the game worth more than the minor inconvenience of the DRM and people will buy it. These are all proven facts as admitted by Brad Wardell, Gabe Newell, John Riccitiello, and many others not as well known have stated. This theme was highly lauded at the last GDC awards ceremony.

Basically my thoughts and many others are the ways to combat piracy is what John Funk states when he says:

I think that's what rankles me the most about the whole Ubisoft fiasco. The ironic part is that without the absurd "you must be connected 100% of the time to play" stipulation, the Ubisoft service could have actually been successful at reducing piracy by providing incentives instead of punishment.

"Hey guys, if you buy and register your game with us, you get to download and install it as many times on as many computers as you want, and you have the option of storing your games in our cloud so you can pick up where you left off no matter the machine!" If Ubisoft had just stuck with that, wouldn't it have encouraged people to buy their games for the goodies?

That would be a step in the right direction with a DRM scheme and I would have been one of the first in line to buy the game. DRM is not the problem here. We're used to all sorts of DRM schemes that we put up with. What we're arguing against are the invasive forms of DRM, ones that hinder gameplay experience. While your particular gameplay experience may not have been hindered, many others have been. That is evident. If I would of had SH5 or AC2 I would have been unable to play early this last week as a snowstorm knocked out internet in parts of Northern Colorado for almost 36 hours. Instead I was able to load up Steam, play Batman: AA, DoWII, and a few other games in my steamlist. So while rare, the possibility remains that incidents outside of our control may affect our internet connections.

While we may be a vocal minority we are still a large part of sales. Would a less restrictive form of DRM been bad? Would a form of DRM similar to the one I mentioned above hurt sales or improve them? Look at the sales on AC2 from Amazon. Look at the posts from all the gaming review sites, enthusiasts sites, and add all those lost sales up. How many pirates do you think have bought this game? Do you think that the DRM Ubisoft has provided helped sales or hurt them? Compare AC2 numbers on Steams sales charts to other hit titles over the last couple months.

We're not pirates, nor are we thieves, nor do we have shitty internet connections, the vast majority of us just want to buy games without having to feel like we're being punished for other peoples illegalities.

 

[Q-BZ]

There is more proof in the industry that great games sell well without the need of intrusive DRM schemes than there is for games with intrusive DRM. As it has been stated numerous times throughout the debate, no one is blaming the publishers or developers for wanting to protect their IP's, just that there are better ways than intrusive and draconian DRM schemes.

I also disagree to the nth degree this is what our industry needs. Gaming needs to get back to its roots. Awesome stories told visually, allowing players to make choices, multi-player capabilities that help develop friendships and more challenging game play, etc...etc...Not sloppy console ports brought out months after the original hit the market, not these 3dmark visual simulations that you can play in for a couple hours, nor do we need 4 hour single player games that cost more than 49.99.

Make games that meet the criteria from the first list and people will flock to it in droves and buy. Make the game have re-playability and people will pay more, make the game worth more than the minor inconvenience of the DRM and people will buy it. These are all proven facts as admitted by Brad Wardell, Gabe Newell, John Riccitiello, and many others not as well known have stated. This theme was highly lauded at the last GDC awards ceremony.

Basically my thoughts and many others are the ways to combat piracy is what John Funk states when he says:

I think that's what rankles me the most about the whole Ubisoft fiasco. The ironic part is that without the absurd "you must be connected 100% of the time to play" stipulation, the Ubisoft service could have actually been successful at reducing piracy by providing incentives instead of punishment.

"Hey guys, if you buy and register your game with us, you get to download and install it as many times on as many computers as you want, and you have the option of storing your games in our cloud so you can pick up where you left off no matter the machine!" If Ubisoft had just stuck with that, wouldn't it have encouraged people to buy their games for the goodies?

That would be a step in the right direction with a DRM scheme and I would have been one of the first in line to buy the game. DRM is not the problem here. We're used to all sorts of DRM schemes that we put up with. What we're arguing against are the invasive forms of DRM, ones that hinder gameplay experience. While your particular gameplay experience may not have been hindered, many others have been. That is evident. If I would of had SH5 or AC2 I would have been unable to play early this last week as a snowstorm knocked out internet in parts of Northern Colorado for almost 36 hours. Instead I was able to load up Steam, play Batman: AA, DoWII, and a few other games in my steamlist. So while rare, the possibility remains that incidents outside of our control may affect our internet connections.

While we may be a vocal minority we are still a large part of sales. Would a less restrictive form of DRM been bad? Would a form of DRM similar to the one I mentioned above hurt sales or improve them? Look at the sales on AC2 from Amazon. Look at the posts from all the gaming review sites, enthusiasts sites, and add all those lost sales up. How many pirates do you think have bought this game? Do you think that the DRM Ubisoft has provided helped sales or hurt them? Compare AC2 numbers on Steams sales charts to other hit titles over the last couple months.

We're not pirates, nor are we thieves, nor do we have shitty internet connections, the vast majority of us just want to buy games without having to feel like we're being punished for other peoples illegalities.

Co-signed 100 percent.

 

[Shalafi]

I've been playing AC2 on my PS3 all night, I have to say it's an awesome game. Too bad I can't experience it on my PC because of the DRM and plus, shelling out an extra $30 for it on PC isn't worth it.

Maybe if this shifts Ubisoft away from PC development to consoles, that's a good thing, with DRM like this, I hope they just stop developing games for PC.

 

[Q-BZ]

I've been playing AC2 on my PS3 all night, I have to say it's an awesome game. Too bad I can't experience it on my PC because of the DRM and plus, shelling out an extra $30 for it on PC isn't worth it.

Maybe if this shifts Ubisoft away from PC development to consoles, that's a good thing, with DRM like this, I hope they just stop developing games for PC.

I'm waiting maybe another month tops and if this DRM doesn't go away I'll just buy it on my PS3 and be done with it.

 

[Shalafi]

I'm waiting maybe another month tops and if this DRM doesn't go away I'll just buy it on my PS3 and be done with it.

Best Buy had a sale on it all week for $30

They aren't profitting top dollar off my purchase, and I didn't buy a DRM filled $10 extra PC version.

See, I just pop the Blu-Ray in, and the shit just work, I even disabled my internet connection on my PS3 for the hell of it.

I'm at 47 percent of all trophies obtained and I have 5 discs from the Assassin's tomb. I started playing it Friday and literally played it nonstop yesterday.

It's VERY damn good, just keep your eyes open for the lowest price you can get it for, do NOT pay full price for it (even though it's worth it )

 

[Q-BZ]

Best Buy had a sale on it all week for $30

They aren't profitting top dollar off my purchase, and I didn't buy a DRM filled $10 extra PC version.

See, I just pop the Blu-Ray in, and the shit just work, I even disabled my internet connection on my PS3 for the hell of it.

I'm at 47 percent of all trophies obtained and I have 5 discs from the Assassin's tomb. I started playing it Friday and literally played it nonstop yesterday.

It's VERY damn good, just keep your eyes open for the lowest price you can get it for, do NOT pay full price for it (even though it's worth it )

Will do. I'm not waiting much longer to play this great game I can tell you that. If I see it for that price I'll buy it.

I'm fairly patient about it since I have other games to play and I've waited this long but not much longer.

 

[Shalafi]

well, let me do some googling and see if i can't find you the lowest deal, honestly $30 at BB all this past week was the lowest I've seen it.

Again, you're talking to a guy who paid $50 for FF13 by having his friend buy it for him in exchange for me buying him Bioshock 2 when he didn't get his paycheck for a few days lol.

 

[Intel_Hydralisk]

I've been playing AC2 on my PS3 all night, I have to say it's an awesome game. Too bad I can't experience it on my PC because of the DRM and plus, shelling out an extra $30 for it on PC isn't worth it.

Maybe if this shifts Ubisoft away from PC development to consoles, that's a good thing, with DRM like this, I hope they just stop developing games for PC.

I was very close to doing the same on my xbox360.... unfortunately consoles can't do eyefinity.

 

[Climber]

I'm waiting maybe another month tops and if this DRM doesn't go away I'll just buy it on my PS3 and be done with it.

I may try and find a used copy so Ubi doesn't get my money. Was going to pick it up at BB on sale, but really don't want to support Ubi in any way shape or form if this continues to be their practice.

I'm really bummed about SH5 the most though

 

[WabeWalker]

This thread is hilarious.

So let me see if I've got this right. You guys are going to play Assassin's Creed 2 on the console, when you've got a kick ass PC that will run it ten times better (and that's no joke, either... I rented this game at Christmas for the 360, and now after experiencing the PC version, I can say without hesitation that it isn't even close... the PC version, maxed out, looks like a different game to me) - and you're doing this because you object to having to be connected to the internet all the time?

Say what?

Okay, the last time I checked, you can't take your 360 or your PS3 to work with you. Consoles are anchored in people's living rooms. The argument I keep on hearing is that people want to play on their laptops in places where there is no internet (Afghanistan has been mentioned once or twice) - well with the console version you can't play on your laptop either. Sorry, but you can't.

Is it because of some great moral code that you think you have?

"There's no way I'm going to support a company who forces me to have an internet connection! It's the year 2010 now! How dare these companies suggest that I be connected to the net!"

So it's this same moral code, is it, that allows you guys to cheer on Skidrow, the biggest group of scumbags on the planet who have done more harm to PC gaming than Ubisoft will ever do. That moral code? The one that allows you guys think that the pirates are the heroes, and Ubisoft, the company that actually made this great game, is the villain? THAT moral code?

Okay, go play AC 2 on the console and celebrate your great moral victory then.

Jesus.

 

[Climber]

Not sure what Wabe said, but I bet it is full of Strawmen arguments and completely missing the point as usual.

 

[WabeWalker]

I'm not sure what Climber said but I bet it is full of Strawmen arguments and completely missing the point as usual.

 

[Shalafi]

Not sure what Wabe said, but I bet it is full of Strawmen arguments and completely missing the point as usual.

Basically, that's correct, he said something about something about consoles, and PC and which version is better, it went right over my head though, I couldn't see past the straw man argument

 

[capable heart]

I can't wait until Ubisoft is done with PCs, and then they will go on to do something similar to consoles games. Such as, including a one-time unique activation code that both ties the game (single and multi) to your gamertag permanently, as well as lets you download the equivalent of the main game's EXE file (which is encoded with your unique key) in order to actually be able to play it. Consoles have hard drives now, so this is totally feasible.

Right now games offer extra multiplayer maps for those who purchase the game new, soon it will be a code that unlocks the multiplayer function itself, period. After multiplayer goes to this scheme, then single player will

Is there any reason why they haven't done this stuff already?

Yes, yes, I know, it's a slippery slope argument. But seeing as how literally in exact letter for letter this process has already happened for PC games, I don't think it's far fetched at all.

 

[Derangel]

Right now games offer extra multiplayer maps for those who purchase the game new, soon it will be a code that unlocks the multiplayer function itself, period.

Is there any reason why they haven't done this stuff already?

Sony did that with one of the SOCOM games.

 

[Blakestr]

The Nazi's had DRM that they made the Jews use....



Seriously though, Climber said it very well. I think the source of the anger is the concept of punishing innocent people... Ubisoft is doing a source of Video Game freedom prohibition...because some people abuse the system or pirate games, legitimate gamers who did nothing wrong get inconvenienced to downright screwed - launch day for a gamer who has been waiting years to play a game only to find he can't play for days because of patch issues, server connections, or ISP problems? That's a big deal to a true, [H]ard gamer...that's like being late to Christmas or something. The government doesn't outlaw alcohol because the alcoholic related deaths are up, they stiffen the penalties or put more traffic stops....but they don't strap a monitor to you that reads your BAC every 5 minutes.

I feel bad for the actual artists involved in this...I bet it was some white collared jackass who knew nothing about video game design that forced this DRM on them...

If you are interested, go read any torrent thread on AC2...this is the first time I have ever seen that many people who own the game but are asking if the torrent can crack it? Will using the crack lose their current save games? Do you see the irony here...these are real customers of Ubisoft who are now being introduced into the pirating world...before they knew little to nothing about it but they heard from a buddy who works at gamestop that there is a way to play AC2 without being online... so what do you think they are going to do the next time, gee, that wasn't so hard to use that torrent, maybe I'll try that again for the next game. Maybe I'll just try it out first and see Mark my words, Ubisoft stopped a few hundred pirates for a week but created thousands of new ones.

Think along these lines--why do you think you never hear about newsgroups in the mainstream media? Why do you never hear R.I.A.A. going after them publicly? Because they don't want every jackass in a college dorm to say, "Wait, that guy got busted for downloading what off where? You can do that? Is it hard?"

By the way, I'm not calling anyone out specifically, but it's very curious to that people here know so much about the piracy process, how everything is done, how to do it, but have never done it before? I'll admit I remember borrowing floppy disks that had Doom on it. I think I was 11 with no money but it all started from there...that evil stolen game that I tried to steal to crippling the infant modern PC gaming market, literally got me into PC gaming. I've since probably spent over $10,000 in games and related hardware over the past few years.

By the way, other than graphics (which are still hollow without gameplay) the only other true trump card the PC has over consoles is freedom. Freedom to customize, freedom to mod, freedom to make your own maps instead of paying for them... Take the freedom away and what is there?

I don't expect developers to release games on the honor system...."Hey, we made a game so good that you'll just want to give us money." I've seen enough companies fall, and the reason is usually not piracy, (Sega dreamcast notwithstanding). But have enough respect for your paying customers to not make them jump through so many flaming hoops to use the product they purchased. Valve is a great example...I don't know if it is because they don't answer so much to shareholders but remember how many times HL2 was delayed? I'll always respect them for that, because instead of releasing a product that isn't ready or without a support structure, I'M TALKING TO YOU E.A. AND BAD COMPANY 2, they respected their customer base to want to deliver the best. /fanboyhat