The PC version of the next game in Ubisoft's Driver series will require a persistent internet connection to run, reviving a former Ubisoft policy that drew ire from many fans.
Ubisoft first introduced a policy of requiring a constant internet connection for "most" of its PC titles in early 2010, a move the company said was "what we think is the best way to deal with ... the big, huge, hairy problem" of piracy.
Fans expressed outrage over the move, with some even going so far as to organize a denial-of-service attack on the DRM servers, shutting down access to PC Ubisoft titles in Europe for one weekend in March.
The company scaled back the policy earlier this year, retroactively allowing PC releases such as Assassin's Creed 2 and Splinter Cell: Conviction to be played offline for the first time.
So, basically... if I'm not online, I can't play? I really don't see how this solves anything. Especially when you're trying to play the singleplayer portion.
Obviously, multiplayer wouldn't work without some kind of network connection going, but why arbitrarily limit singleplayer like this?
Because someone at Ubi, somehow, against all the facts, thinks that it will do something against piracy.
The truth is already known: they'll lose sales, and pirates will end up with the best version. And when the game sales are lower than expected because of the DRM, of course they'll say it will be because of rampant piracy, and not because of their own dumb decisions.
We know how this goes. The pirates will have it patched in a week and only those who actually paid for their software will get the privilege of dealing with draconian DRM.
It's a huge catch twenty two anyways. You are screwed by the bosses if you do nothing to try and stop pirates. And if you do something to try and stop the pirates, you get screwed by the masses.
If you do something that limits "the masses" enjoyment of your title, then they're going to complain.
If you come up with a DRM method that doesn't limit paying customers from using your product (i.e. it isn't broken), then you can make both sides happy.
I don't care that Ubisoft uses DRM, I just don't want to buy a game that is only playable when their servers aren't down...
I bought Prince of Persia: Forgotten Sands, and discovered that I was limited to a single save game, even if I installed it on two machines. In other words, my son can't play through the game until I finish it.
Will boycott all future titles with this stupid feature.
This is a stupid move by clueless idiots who should get the hell out of the industry - you can't tell me that this is necessary for a company that made $926.2 million in PROFIT and had a 19% sales increase in 2010 (http://www.montrealgazette.com/technology/Ubisoft+earnings+fiscal+2010/4773448/s tory.html)
Stuff your game, Ubisoft, and stuff anything else you churn out too.
Eh. If it really is an issue get it for a console. Yes the amount of people that will pirate the game are the same that would pirate it with or without DRM so all they are really doing is alienating the portion of their demographic that don't want to keep their systems connected to the internet, though I don't understand this reasoning. Somehow I doubt the amount of people that this alienates will outweigh the profit they will receive. Just one more reason I don't like PC gaming.
I will NEVER buy an Ubisoft PC game. There are so many quality games and alternatives on Steam, that it is laughable that they think people will buy this crap.
I thought this was a game developers site? Leave the pitchforks on Kotaku people.
The only issue of interest is if this increases PC game revenue, or decreases it. Since console ports to PCs have generally been finanical losers the last few years, you can hardly blame them for trying something different.
Jose - I welcome intelligent game developer comments about DRM or any other subject. Danboi style comments. And yours near the top of this thread was one of those intelligent comments, where you argued this is pointless because pirates will defeat it in a week anyway. Actually I think you are right.
My post above was more a reaction to fanboi comments like "I will NEVER buy an Ubisoft PC game"
"you can hardly blame them for trying something different."
Actually, they aren't trying something different. They're trying the same thing others have done. Heck, they tried it before and it created outrage. It didn't work for the others or them before, why would it work now?
I'm not actually a fan of Ubisoft games. Just not my style. However, I am a fan of games I can play anywhere while on my laptop. Sometimes hotel rooms just don't have a reasonable internet connection. So much for playing that brand new shiny game. I wouldn't really buy a game that had this kind of DRM scheme. At least, not knowingly.
My personal opinion, as a game dev, is that we should limit DRM to minimal methods. This keeps the casual pirates at bay, and doesn't offend the buying populace. The hard core pirates aren't going to buy the game anyway.
" I thought this was a game developers site? Leave the pitchforks on Kotaku people. "
This.
If you don't agree with Ubisoft, just ignore their products, then they're doing no harm to you so there is no excuse for insults.
You guys really think that they're going to read the forums and count how many angry gamers wrote "I'm boycotting until they remove the DRM"? And how many of those are bluffing anyway? The blackmail and tantrums are completely useless.
I'm sure Ubisoft have weighted the pros and cons of this DRM.
They've done it before, so clearly they know better than you guys what impact it has on piracy.
Yet you pretend to know better than them, you claim it only increases piracy and they're just idiots?
Oh well... it's the internet... anyone can just make stuff up and insult people...
Obviously, multiplayer wouldn't work without some kind of network connection going, but why arbitrarily limit singleplayer like this?
The truth is already known: they'll lose sales, and pirates will end up with the best version. And when the game sales are lower than expected because of the DRM, of course they'll say it will be because of rampant piracy, and not because of their own dumb decisions.
If you come up with a DRM method that doesn't limit paying customers from using your product (i.e. it isn't broken), then you can make both sides happy.
I don't care that Ubisoft uses DRM, I just don't want to buy a game that is only playable when their servers aren't down...
Sure I am one man, but I am one of a continually growing many.
Will boycott all future titles with this stupid feature.
tory.html)
Stuff your game, Ubisoft, and stuff anything else you churn out too.
IT CREATES MORE.
The only issue of interest is if this increases PC game revenue, or decreases it. Since console ports to PCs have generally been finanical losers the last few years, you can hardly blame them for trying something different.
My post above was more a reaction to fanboi comments like "I will NEVER buy an Ubisoft PC game"
Actually, they aren't trying something different. They're trying the same thing others have done. Heck, they tried it before and it created outrage. It didn't work for the others or them before, why would it work now?
I'm not actually a fan of Ubisoft games. Just not my style. However, I am a fan of games I can play anywhere while on my laptop. Sometimes hotel rooms just don't have a reasonable internet connection. So much for playing that brand new shiny game. I wouldn't really buy a game that had this kind of DRM scheme. At least, not knowingly.
My personal opinion, as a game dev, is that we should limit DRM to minimal methods. This keeps the casual pirates at bay, and doesn't offend the buying populace. The hard core pirates aren't going to buy the game anyway.
This.
If you don't agree with Ubisoft, just ignore their products, then they're doing no harm to you so there is no excuse for insults.
You guys really think that they're going to read the forums and count how many angry gamers wrote "I'm boycotting until they remove the DRM"? And how many of those are bluffing anyway? The blackmail and tantrums are completely useless.
I'm sure Ubisoft have weighted the pros and cons of this DRM.
They've done it before, so clearly they know better than you guys what impact it has on piracy.
Yet you pretend to know better than them, you claim it only increases piracy and they're just idiots?
Oh well... it's the internet... anyone can just make stuff up and insult people...
It's just sad to see that crap on Gamasutra.