Slashdot Mirror
Ubisoft's Authentication Servers Go Down
ZuchinniOne writes "With Ubisoft's fantastically awful new DRM you must be online and logged in to their servers to play the games you buy. Not only was this DRM broken the very first day it was released, but now their authentication servers have failed so absolutely that no-one who legally bought their games can play them. 'At around 8am GMT, people began to complain in the Assassin's Creed 2 forum that they couldn't access the Ubisoft servers and were unable to play their games.' One can only hope that this utter failure will help to stem the tide of bad DRM."
I don't know anything else that should be said here.
Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
Does it really matter though? If they're using something like this, they should had have hardened and test the system properly. Things like this are completely unacceptable. I would have thought they did as otherwise its going to backfire so good, but it seems stupid people never cease to amaze you.
Can't find it now, but definitly NOW the DRM protection WILL be the discussion topic on the schoolyard. And maybe company lunchrooms too. People who bought the game will ask around, especially their "IT clued" friends what they could do to play what they paid for, and they will be informed about how to get cracks.
People who never pondered cracking will now be introduced to it. So far they did actually buy their games. Either because they simply didn't know about it or, worse, because they didn't want to go through the hassle and thought that paying 50 bucks is easier, faster and less of a problem than futzing about with cracks and copying this and cracking that and executing this registry tuner and writing that into the registry...
Now they learn that buying games leads to more futzing, more frustration, more "it doesn't just work" than finding it in P2P and downloading it. Legal copies just lost the only edge they had over cracked ones: Ease of use and "just working".
Great job, UBIsoft. Just as the software industry finally regained some footing in the battle against copying, you go and aim the bazooka at your (and the industry's) foot.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Gamers have already paid for the game but you see the issue we have here is that gamers have only paid once for the game. All DRM schemes are about extorting more money out of customers. Whether by killing the 2nd hand market or planned obsolescence they want you to pay to keep playing your games.
Mark my words, in 12 or 18 months time EA/UBI and so forth will start complaining that keeping these DRM servers online is costing them money, meaning they require more money from existing customers to keep them on line.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
It doesn't really matter to the user, does it?
And before you say "A DDoS wouldn't be UBIsoft's fault": Deliberately and needlessly introducing a single point of failure to your system is patently dumb, and most definitly the fault of the party that introduced it if it fails.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
When I saw this story: *laughing for 5 mins* *gasping for air* *laughing for another 2 minutes* wooooooooooooooooooooooooo! ha ha ha
First time I've heard of a DDoS attack being used to break DRM...
It didn't break the DRM, it broke the game.
Deltron 3030 - Virus (music video)
I think the more likely option is that they'll be taken offline about the time Assassin's Creed 3 is brought to market.
Deliberately and needlessly introducing a single point of failure to your system is patently dumb
Quiet! You'll give them ideas.
Maybe they should educate themselves then. Consumer abuse such as DRM is getting by largely because of public ignorance. Even if they have to learn the hard way, ie buying a defective product, they learn nonetheless. If they need to feel burned to start taking notice then I'm glad we have companies like Ubisoft around to burn them.
Now they know better.
This is the best possible thing that could have happened to them.
Then implementing something that requires your servers to be available 24/7 OR ELSE is patently stupid.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Ok, so please inform us how you would had hardened their systems against the DDoS if there was one.
Uhhh..... Not have playing the game tied to an online authentication? That might help. I think that's kinda the point.
1) Gamers may try and return the game. I suppose Ubisoft could refuse to issue refunds but that opens them up to lawsuits. Like it or not, a sold product does have an implied warranty of fitness, meaning that it will work for the purpose you sell it. If it doesn't, customers can get their money back and if you won't give it to them, a court can and will force the issue.
2) It puts off people who haven't bought the game yet. Not everyone buys a game on the day it comes out. Plenty of people wait a bit. Well, they see this, realize that it is true if the auth servers are down there's no game to be played, and decide "Nah, I'll buy a different game." I mean we do not at all lack for good games these days, people can and will take their money elsewhere.
3) It can lead to these people refusing to be customers again. Sure you got their money this time, however a business does not live based on selling one product. You need repeat sales. People who get burned by this (or just hear about it) may decide to give Ubisoft products a miss in the future because of it.
The idea of "Oh well they got their money," is rather short sighted. When businesses operate like that, screwing people over and saying "We already got the money so who cares?" the end result is often the business suffering or going broke in the future.
"Then implementing something that requires your servers to be available 24/7 OR ELSE is patently stupid."
So is buying a game from such a company...
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
The sad part is that it's likely quite a few of these actually have engineering degrees and real problem-solving skills but learned within a few weeks of starting their jobs that thinking for yourself and trying to find solutions that would not only temporarily fix a single customer's problem but also avoid having the problem happen to anyone else is not only not encouraged but downright discouraged, because thinking about things like that is what management is supposed to do.
This is at least how my experience with working tech support was, a bunch of guys, ~50% of which were engineers or computer scientists, sitting in a room applying the same stupid workarounds all day every day and complaining amongst each other about how they weren't being put to good use.
/Mikael
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Now is the time to send a message to Ubisoft that this sort of intrusive DRM will NOT be tolerated. If the servers had stayed up and people just refused to buy the game, they would have written the poor sales off as being caused by "pirates." Now, you have a chance to prove otherwise. Every single person who bought this game on PC should return it to the store. Yes, most will attempt to deny the returns due to policy, or to exchange with a new copy since that one is perceived as damaged/defective. Do not stand for this. Tell them that yes, it is defective, but ALL copies are defective. Let them know that the software itself works just fine on your computer, and in fact ran EXACTLY the way it was supposed to. However, you are forced to return it because it does not work properly on yours or ANY system, because Ubisoft's servers weren't online to allow you to play a game that you legally purchased and met all the requirements for being able to play.
Ubisoft won't be able to shrug it off as "piracy" when their sales numbers for this game begin to shrink due to returns and angry retailers. THIS will hit them in the pocketbook more than a simple, dubiously effective boycott. When they are forced to start handing money back because of their failures, that will speak much louder than never having been paid that money to begin with.
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."