Ubisoft DRM Causing More Problems

Joe Helfrich writes "Ubisoft's Settlers 7 servers have been causing problems for over a week for users worldwide, and Australian gamers are hardly able to connect at all. 'The problem reportedly strikes after the game has already confirmed an active Internet connection, and prevents the user from playing even the single-player campaign, returning the error "server not available." But they are available, because other people are logged into them and merrily playing away.' Wonder how they're going to describe this one as an attack."

Comments

Settlers 7

[sopssa]

I won't be buying Settlers 7 before they remove this DRM. Settlers is one of my favorite series and Settlers 2 probably my favorite game of all time, and what I've read about Settlers 7, it again has more emphasis on economy and all the other aspects that used to make Settlers series great before they changed the game play too much. Settlers 7 would had been a nice strategy game fix right now, but I can surely wait for the upcoming Civilization V too.

That being said, while it's an intrusive and assholish DRM, every game that uses it's remain uncracked (before you post links to torrent searches, everyone of those are badly cracked or only contain a tutorial and not rest of the levels and so on). Silent Hunter after 1.5 months, Assassins Creed after a month and now Settlers 7 too. It will most likely make Ubisoft want to use it even more and more, and it most likely does lead to more sales from the pirates front as they can't play the game otherwise. I also suspect it leads to fewer sales from those who always buy games (from me and probably rest of the slashdot crowd), but most of the people aren't as technically savvy as we are. Too bad you can't really compare how a game would sell without any DRM or with a draconian DRM like this one.

But in the case it gets cracked, I won't be even pirating it - I give my time and money to the companies that do it correctly. Pirating it isn't a good answer either because you're still getting your gaming fix from that company and most likely ignoring other companies games that don't have such DRM in place. The only way to get a change is to ignore companies that use draconian DRM and support those who don't.

Re:Settlers 7

[IceDiver]

It might lead to more sales, but not from me.

I won't buy them, and I won't try to download any of these games, even if they ARE successfully cracked. Besides being illegal, it would just give UbiS*** ammo for their claims that they are losing sales to pirates.

Don't buy and don't download cracked games. Maybe then all these idiot companies will get the message.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Of all three games, Assassin's Creed II is the only one of note in that it actually has a decent following, but also has a console version. If Ubisoft does this with their Tom Clancy line of games, it won't take long before enough pirates are motivated to really break the game's DRM in half.

While highly publicized, all three games are still protected through relative obscurity. A similar DRM wouldn't last too long if it were implemented on the next Modern Warfare.

Re:Settlers 7

[Culture20]

it most likely does lead to more sales from the pirates front as they can't play the game otherwise.

I seriously doubt this. Pirates are after free stuff. Even ye olde sea pirates were after free stuff. It's not like they'd say "Yarr, we haven't found a spice merchant ship to raid in over a month, lets go legally buy some spices at port and sell them at another port." No, they'd just go raid a small village somewhere.

This type of DRM will cause nothing but loss for Ubisoft. They spent money to make it (or license it), pirates will move elsewhere, and people that would have bought it will be reduced in number because they hear from their friends "It never lets me play!", assuming they didn't hear from their techy friends that "It won't let you play some day".

Re:Settlers 7

[DarkOx]

It might lead to more short term sales. People have lots of path commitment. If you were anticipating playing a certain up coming title when it became available you will like do whatever you have to do to get there even if that means paying for when your original plan was pirate it.

If people have a bad experience because of the DRM they won't start anticipating the next round of titles in the first place, and that will translate to lost sales.

Re:Settlers 7

[sopssa]

While definitely not all of the pirates will buy it, it would be foolish to think some of them aren't just trying to get the game for free, like these comments show. It would probably have been more true in the 90's, but piracy is widespread now and many people use it just to get something for free. If they can't get something they really want, they will then buy it.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

No, actually it's sending a message to Ubisoft that their DRM works. We want to send the message that they are losing sales BECAUSE of DRM. It certainly worked for Spore.

Re:Settlers 7

[DaMattster]

I agree. The solution to the DRM problem lies with the consumer. If the consumer refuses to buy games that include DRM, companies that use it will need to make the change due to "market forces" in action.

Re:Settlers 7

[sopssa]

No, actually it's sending a message to Ubisoft that their DRM works. We want to send the message that they are losing sales BECAUSE of DRM. It certainly worked for Spore.

No. Pirating the game will just tell Ubisoft that you like their game but they need to make their DRM stronger so they get you to buy a game you like. At the same time you're also getting your gaming fix from the game you pirated and won't be alternatively buying games from developers and publishers that dont include such DRM. Not only are you showing to the bad companies that they need to strenghter their DRM, you're advancing their business by them keeping you from spending money on their competitors.

The only good answer is not to buy and not pirate it altogether, but ignore the whole game.

Re:Settlers 7

[centuren]

Of course, software pirates aren't actually the pirates of yore. I agree, though, they are generally after free stuff. I know there's at least a small percentage who download a cracked game in the absence of a good demo, and have bought the game trying it out. For the most part, however, I think game pirates are like music pirates: the vast, vast majority of what they download can not be considered lost sales. It's not being downloaded as a substitute for buying the game/cd, it's being downloaded because it's there, it's free, and the pirate has at least passing interest. "Content Piracy" means there's no need to weight cost against value, so I think most pirates with a big hard drive and fast connection download for the sake of accumulating the content. If one has a terabyte+ of games, music, and movies, ever-growing in size, then consuming that content doesn't really seem like it's at the heart of that endeavor.

Re:Settlers 7

[MrMista_B]

"Don't buy and don't download cracked games. Maybe then all these idiot companies will get the message."

I'm afraid your wrong.

They will simply decide that your lack of a purchase is proof of your piracy.

People aren't buying their games? It must be piracy!

Re:Settlers 7

[JackDW]

Same - although in my case, the game I won't be buying (or pirating) is R.U.S.E.

If we reward Ubisoft's DRM with money, then it won't be long before every publisher adopts this DRM strategy. Goodbye, Steam offline mode, we hardly knew ye.

By steadfastly refusing to reward the publishers, we at least create the possibility that DRM will be cut back to a bare minimum in order to increase sales. "Amazon MP3 for Games": that is the goal. It's not life or death, but it's important enough to change my behaviour.

Re:Settlers 7

[Jurily]

The message is already out there: the World of Warcraft client doesn't contain anything that would resemble DRM, copy protection, registration, whatever. You just copy it over from your friend, and run it. Changing from the retail server to a private one is accomplished by changing one line in a plain text file with Notepad.

Here's the trick: the game you pay for is better than the one you get for free. The maintainers of the private servers simply cannot keep up with Blizzard's development speed. They're not threatening Blizzard's profit, they're basically marketing for them.

Let me say it again, in case someone from Ubisoft reads this. The WoW you pay for is better than the one you get for free.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

As usual, sopssa just posts useless drivel without any rational thought your useful point. Anyway, the Settlers 7 problem is isolated to just a few users who don't understand how their own computers work. The game runs just fine for me, no problems. Maybe if they'd stop using cracked versions, they wouldn't have issues with the DRM.

Re:Settlers 7

[sopssa]

You cant really compare an MMO and a single-player game. Most of World of Warcraft work is done on server-side, including quests, NPC's, interacting with other players, trading.. etc almost everything. Private servers cant keep up with Blizzard because so much is kept on server side. In fact, this is something that Ubisoft would take as a pro thing for their DRM - start keeping even more on server-side and it will never be breakable. The unavailability of cracked versions of the games having this DRM already shows this very same thing.

Re:Settlers 7

[MrHanky]

Assassin's Creed 2 still hasn't been cracked successfully, and doesn't seem to sell particularly well. At least not enough to indicate that every pirated game is a lost sale.

Re:Settlers 7

[Bugamn]

Worse, you can compare. Maybe in the future, instead of downloading a game, you will only download the image, and send you keystrokes to a server. I'm sure I saw this idea somewhere. It means you will be able to play better games on worse computer, true, but I'd rather play on my computer with no need for net.

Re:Settlers 7

[Jurily]

In fact, this is something that Ubisoft would take as a pro thing for their DRM - start keeping even more on server-side and it will never be breakable.

See, that's the difference. Blizzard stays ahead of the private servers by making a superior product. Ubisoft thinks they can require an internet connection for a single-player game.

Re:Settlers 7

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

Except Piracy is stealing fucking ships on the open seas.

And downloading and cracking software is .... downloading and cracking software.

Re:Settlers 7

[Deorus]

Only Warden...

Re:Settlers 7

[sopssa]

I'm sure I saw this idea somewhere. It means you will be able to play better games on worse computer, true, but I'd rather play on my computer with no need for net.

OnLive. They even do explicit distribution contracts with developers so that their games are only playable via their streaming platform, like you describe.

Re:Settlers 7

[Nemyst]

It's also led to one of the worst backlashes ever. I mean, half of the PCGamer review of AC2 was about the DRM scheme and how it sucked. This thing is so intrusive and aggressive that people WILL notice it, even the less tech savvy. Further, those same non-geeks won't get what's going on (people who do understand what's happening might just wait, knowing there isn't much else to do), will angrily flood Ubisoft's tech support asking for answers and thus maybe one day Ubisoft will understand that it may not be the best way to go.

Re:Settlers 7

[makomk]

Supposedly, the Silent Hunter crack does actually work, it's just that many people are incapable of actually reading the instructions that tell you how to use it.

Re:Settlers 7

[sopssa]

You ignored most of my points. WoW is only a superior product because by design their game is closed. It doesn't need DRM on executables or game data as nobody has a direct access to their server-side assets. In a way this is exactly what Ubisoft is doing - are you saying that their DRM laden product is superior one?

Re:Settlers 7

[SScorpio]

You probably saw the this from OnLive who is supposedly launching this summer though there is at least on competing service as well. The main issue with them is that it looks like you pay a monthly fee to access the service, and then you still need to purchase the individual games that are then linked to your account. Their reported ability to pause a game a anytime and then resume it minutes, hours, weeks later on a different computer located across the country is pretty neat though. As well as the fact that since they are steaming video, they added the ability to save clips after they occurred, so if you have one of those cool moments in a game you could save a clip and post it to youtube to show off to your friends.

http://www.onlive.com/

Re:Settlers 7

[Shihar]

This isn't going to lead to a sales boost. When I was 14 and a pirate I pirated because I was poor. Every game I didn't or couldn't pirates wasn't a game I bought. It was just a game I didn't own.

Well, now I am twenty something and out of college with an engineering degree. I am single, make a tidy pile of money, and have pretty much no expenses beyond student loans. I buy every single video game that catches my fancy without thinking twice. I never pirate because I don't need to. I just pass on DRM titles. There are more than enough without DRM that it isn't a hard decision.

Ubi has lost money from me. I would have bought Assassins Creed 2 and Settlers 7. Hell, I was even eying Silent Hunter 5 a little. Instead though? I just went out and got Bioshock 2, both Empire and Napolian Total War, the new STALKER, the new Dragons Age, and Mass Effect 2, on top of a couple of small indie games. Metro 2037 and MW2 are in my list of games to buy as soon as I catch up on the pile I have already bought.

I really doubt Ubi has "forced' pirates to buy any games. They might not be playing any Ubi games, but what good does that do if they don't buy the game either? For people like me though, I have not and will not buy any Ubi games. Keep a pirate from playing and you gain nothing. Make me and people like me not want to play, and you lose a few hundred bucks.

Re:Settlers 7

[RoFLKOPTr]

Silent Hunter after 1.5 months

Actually, SKIDROW's Silent Hunter V crack was out within 24 hours of the game's release and it works just fine. Of course, I wouldn't know this from personal experience.

Re:Settlers 7

[Rallion]

I plan to find a way to get in contact with Ubisoft and tell them WHY I'm not buying RUSE. I played the beta a bit, and I really like it, and I can honestly say that the DRM will cost them my money. But not buying it isn't actually helpful, because they will twist any sales numbers or piracy estimates to mean whatever they want. We've reached a point where the only way that we can actually communicate with the publishers is to actually directly spell out our feelings to them in verbal or written form.

If they misinterpret a letter that says "I would have purchased this game if it didn't have this awful DRM, instead I will give my disposable income to your competitors," we really know that it's a lost cause.

Re:Settlers 7

[Smauler]

I'm with you. Football Manager 2009 had nasty DRM, the first game I purchased which really pissed me off with it, and I vowed then and there I wouldn't ever purchase another single player PC game that required an internet connection. Hell, I didn't even have an internet connection here until a few months ago. Anyway, football manager 2010 came out, with no really nasty DRM, and I bought it, and posted a reply to my scathing forum post about 2009, saying I had bought 2010 purely because of the lack of DRM. Dragon Age : Origins was going to have heavy DRM right up until a couple of weeks prior to launch, and I was hugely pissed at that - however, they dropped the DRM and I bought it.

Anyway, I was going to buy Settlers 7, but like you, am definitely not until it gets fixed.

Re:Settlers 7

[Khyber]

"That being said, while it's an intrusive and assholish DRM, every game that uses it's remain uncracked"

I'm not going to post links to torrents but I know for a fact it has been reliably cracked. I was playing ACII before it ever hit the shelves and beat it before release.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it is cracked, kinda.

http://datemate.in/home/index.php?topic=7

Re:Settlers 7

[Khyber]

"Assassin's Creed 2 still hasn't been cracked successfully,"

Nonsense. Quit using torrents and worm your way into the real release scene. I beat ACII before it was even released. That DRM has been cracked.

Re:Settlers 7

[Khyber]

"start keeping even more on server-side and it will never be breakable."

One DDoS will take care of that bullshit.

Re:Settlers 7

[brit74]

I've seen pirates pay for stuff when they couldn't get it online for free.

Re:Settlers 7

[JWW]

The next step is for those less tech savvy folks to begin flooding their Attorney General's offices with phone calls.

If a company requires internet service to run the game and a customer has the legally purchased game and internet service, but can't play the game, the company is being fraudulent in their marketing and sales for the game.

There should be an expectation (which has been true since the beginning of gaming) that if a single player sits down with a game and has an adequate system to play it that they should be able to PLAY THE GAME. The requirement that the game company have enough servers working and available to authenticate all possible customers querying the DRM servers, is IMHO absolute. Otherwise the company is selling fradulent software.

As to the companies being victims of DOS attacks, too bad. The customer has an expectation of the product working as advertised. If the customers can't use the product as designed to play the game they were sold, I think they have a right to sue over their grievances.

It amazes me how fast we've gone from "the customer is always correct" to "f the customer". If I were an Ubisoft customer and could not play this game due to their incompetence, I'd enact a lifetime ban on me buying their products.

Re:Settlers 7

[Rallion]

If customers just stop buying their games, the determination will not be that they need to stop implementing harsh DRM. It will be that there are not enough people willing to buy PC games legitimately. Their sales were too low before because of the pirates, and now they're too low because those pirates won't pay for the games even if they make them uncrackable. If sales are even lower than they were before, it's because the PC market is shrinking.

They will decide to switch to an all-console strategy, while legions of PC gamers just want them to publish something they can play without jumping through hoops.

Re:Settlers 7

[Rallion]

According to Ubisoft, one did...

Re:Settlers 7

[icebraining]

Nonsense. WoW doesn't include DRM, because the whole MMO model is DRM.

The problem with Ubisoft games is that it's supposed to be a single-player game, yet it requires a constant internet connection to play them. That's not a problem with WoW because MMO are supposed to require an internet connection.

Re:Settlers 7

[icebraining]

Or maybe they're trying to play legal versions while not connected to the Internet.

Dumbass.

Re:Settlers 7

[jargon82]

I tried REALLY hard to find a good way to contact ubi about silent hunter. I LOVE the silent hunter series, and I was ready and willing to buy it, but not with this DRM. I have every previous version of the game, all paid for. Silent Hunter 3 is the best, a brilliant, fun game that I've probably put several hundred hours into (a lot for me).

Anyway, I failed. The support email I found for them bounces. The people on the phone don't care. They are lost at sea.
My last attempt was emailing jaime.cottini@ubisoft.com, apparently someone who does PR. I figure this is a PR issue, or would be, if they cared what we thought. The full message follows. It was sent on March 23rd, 2010, and as yet I've received no response.

--

Hello Jaime, I hope this finds you well,
Yes, this is misdirected, although I'd paint it as a "public relations" issue. The further I go here, the more I come to the conclusion that ubisoft is terribly out of touch with their long standing customers and will only become more so with this path. I've been trying to get this message through... a message from someone who sees a good enjoyable game that is being stuck behind a wall, for over a month now. I've emailed (and had the mail rejected, from addresses I found on ubi's various sites) repeatedly. This morning, I tried again, with the same results. So I'm appealing to you, as one of the only addresses I can find and hoping this one doesn't bounce, to read this, and see what I have to say.

If you scroll down, you can see the initial email and my initial thoughts, as of this morning. This isn't terribly different from the message I've been trying to send for the last month (or more). But in trying to do so, I've come across what I see as a deeper issue... a complete lack of attention to what the paying customer actually wants.

No customer wants to require an internet connection to play a game. No customer wants to spend many hours trying to figure out how to relay their desires. It seems clear to me that ubi has lost sight of the customer, and no longer really cares about what they want. There are not many publishers left who I can feel comfortable buying from with DRM restrictions and attitudes like this. Maybe ubi can turn around, and maybe ubi can even turn the tide and set an example, to their own benefit , of what is possible.

I will wait and see. While I do not expect a response, I nevertheless would appreciate one.
--

Re:Settlers 7

[billcopc]

I don't really think it leads to more sales. Let's suppose I'm a pirate (*ahem*). If I can't play Settlers 7, or Assassin's Creed 2, or whatever hot-game-of-the-minute, I will find something else to occupy my weekend. I'm not going to feel the overwhelming urge to go "haha, ok Ubisoft you win this time" and give them $70, when there are hundreds of other recent titles available right on the first page of my torrent site. In fact, if something is known to be "uncrackable" a pirate is more likely to NOT want to buy it, for fear that it will rootkit their PC, mess with Daemon Tools, or phone home with a list of all the other ill-gotten software they have.

Now I'm going to take a rather offensive stance: I, as an occasional producer of (low budget) software, pirate my own stuff. By that, I mean I routinely package the product that I myself created, throw in a valid unlock code, and seed it on torrent trackers, push it through Usenet, stick it on Rapidshare. Why in the fuck would I do that ? Because pirates make up the oldest and largest social network of all time. I shit you not, I have been making more money and more repeat sales. The reasoning ? There are several types of pirates, I lump them into four main categories:

    1. Hardcore pirates who won't pay for software, ever
    2. Casual/bored pirates who will download whatever's new and try it out
    3. Average Joe who shares stuff with a few friends and relatives, might do group buys
    4. Try-before-you-buy types (yes they do exist)

#1 is most likely 12 years old and/or living in the 3rd world, might as well forget about them there is no hope for this category

#3 is small peas, blue-collar cheap-ass. Even legit businesses don't spend much on marketing to these types

#2 and #4 are GOLDEN. The try-before-they-buy types often become life-long supporters. These are the guys who will chat you up in the forums and spread your gospel to coworkers and acquaintances. The casual pirates are similar, but they won't buy your product: their friends will. The casual pirate will blog about your app or mention it on IRC/Facebook, proportionate to your app's quality and apparent ease-of-use.

I know these observations don't directly scale to these big-name game houses. Obviously there is a greater benefit to indie guys like myself, but on some level, people will always buy a certain portion of their software... for some it's 100%, for others it's zero, and I don't think DRM has much influence on that.

Piracy is a constant. You can't kill it, no matter how clever you get, it's still just a software or hardware lock, and both can be broken by someone with a bit of smarts, time and motivation. DRM is nothing but a series of small pyrrhic victories and each incremental tightening of "security" leads to an equal or greater increment in the cracker's knowledge and skill. The only ones who truly profit from DRM are the people selling DRM.

Re:Settlers 7

[IamTheRealMike]

Um, surely if a crack is so complicated most people who try to use it fail then the DRM can be considered a "success"?

It's unfortunate that UbiSoft apparently can't keep their servers online. I have no doubt at all that some pissed-off crackers are venting their frustration through DoS attacks, but UbiSoft should have been able to anticipate that and build out enough capacity and expertise to handle very large attacks.

That said, it doesn't surprise me that this sort of DRM is hard to crack. I don't know how they implemented it, but I already predicted that net-based DRM can be significantly stronger than disk based. There's just a whole lot more potential for forcing adversaries into white-box reversing which can be a lot harder than simply building a better drive emulator.

I don't think this sort of DRM is going away if there are really no cracks out yet. I doubt the DRM in UbiSofts games is as strong as theoretically possible but it's apparently strong enough. Building DoS-proof, high uptime sites is definitely possible, look at Google or Microsoft for examples of this. So I fully expect other companies to follow their lead. Don't like it? Get a console ....

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Besides being illegal, it would just give UbiS*** ammo for their claims that they are losing sales to pirates.

I think you are under the misconception that they would only make that claim if they knew people were pirating it.

Fact is, companies expect X sales from their game. If they don't get (X * 1.5) sales, they WILL make the claim that copyright infringement is the cause. It doesn't matter if it's the greatest hit ever released or the shittiest game ever conceived. If they don't blame the "pirates" (Even if there are none) then the only ones left to take the blame for poor sales are THEMSELVES.

And that means shareholders select a new million dollar CEO at the next corporate meeting.

Re:Settlers 7

[billcopc]

If they can't get something they "really" want, they will redirect their digital lust to a different product.

I'm not picking on you personally, but please, everyone, stop making these unfounded generalizations about piracy. This isn't Digg, goddamnit! We're supposed to be educated.

Re:Settlers 7

[Rallion]

I was afraid that I would find it difficult to get in touch with them, which is why I said that I had a "plan" to "find a way" to get them a message. Disappointing (but not surprising) to hear that I was right, but I'll still be sending something to somebody.

Re:Settlers 7

[billcopc]

Sure, but that just one (or a few ) samples. You can't say that any significant number of people will pay for software if they can't pirate it. Some will, some won't. Some people can afford it, yet still pirate because it's easier (Steam converts a lot of these). Some people can't afford it, because they live in some idiotic slave nation, and will never buy anything because that big-studio game costs more than what they earn in a year.

Re:Settlers 7

[mcgrew]

DRM was rampant in the late 1980s, and gamers revolted and stopped buying and playing DRMed gamed. DRM went away.

It's time for another revolt, and maybe it's beginning. It's not proven that piracy costs sales, but it's very obvious that DRM costs sales.

Re:Settlers 7

[jargon82]

I wish you luck :) I've not given up all hope yet either.

Re:Settlers 7

[MrHanky]

Oh, so AC2 has somehow been kept away from torrent trackers even though it's been cracked. You're full of shit.

Re:Settlers 7

[init100]

retail server to a private one

I never understood how this could be possible. I mean, the software on the retail servers are unlikely to become pirated (unless they are broken into), so that means that the private servers must be developed by people outside Blizzard. But that sounds insanely complex. Not only do you need to reverse engineer all their protocols, but you need to (re)create the entire game world, along with the thousand and one other things to make it all work. So people have actually done this?

Not to mention other things, such as server infrastructure and development costs. How do they pay for it? Are players paying monthly fees? Or are the developers giving it all away for free? Donations could possibly be the answer, I mean, it is obviously possible to run a very-high-traffic site such as Wikipedia on donations, but the audience of Wikipedia is so much larger, so it might be somewhat easier to find donors (although it's probably not easy, as I've seen the long-running "please donate" banners from time to time).

I don't play WoW, and I never will, but this question is interesting anyway.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

It is cracked. In fact it's extremely easy to crack as now that the information has been parsed going between the two locations... using some network magic you can setup a service that replies to any query by that game with a yes no. (yes, it's a bit more complicated than that but that's how it is).

As to the normal individual who wants to install and then "apply" a patch that removes that code, I believe the hack is complete and being tested in the wild at this point.

Re:Settlers 7

[Jurily]

as nobody has a direct access to their server-side assets

But anyone can write a new server, and Blizzard is not doing anything to force you on theirs. That's how I started playing WoW, then got fed up with the quality, and moved to retail. In fact, most Hungarians start out with WoW this way (at least I've never met anyone who didn't).

Now, imagine people saying "Man, fuck this pirated Assassin's Creed, I want mine with DRM!".

Let me rephrase it: Blizzard found a way to turn the freeloaders into very effective marketing precisely because they concentrated on the product and not how it was protected. Ubisoft is actively scaring their costumers away.

Re:Settlers 7

[JackDW]

Good idea. I think I might try to send them a letter on paper.

Re:Settlers 7

[TheRealGrogan]

I have not been one to use pirated games. I have done it exactly once, for revenge... I ordered the expansion pack "Doom 3 Resurrection of Evil" directly from ID Software's web site and never got it. Support just blew me off. I even contacted their payment processor and got better support but still no results, despite the promise to try to help. So I downloaded it. I actually paid a lot of money for that... by the time I paid the shipping and exchange it was almost $70 Canadian for a $20 USD expansion pack. I didn't mind, because I thought I was rewarding the vendor directly (I was grateful that they allowed Linux ports of their games), with no middle men. But with the way I was treated I had no other recourse. I should have just done that in the first place and paid fuck all.

I have pirated other software for various reasons occasionally (usually to spite a company that I hated), but never games because I felt that for all the work (art) that goes into them, and for the relatively low cost, in addition to the fact that it's just entertainment software, I couldn't in good conscience use pirated games.

I spend a lot of money on PC games... thousands of dollars tied up in games. Ubisoft was one of my favourite game companies, because their titles were hassle free. But now they are on my black list... I'll never buy anything from them again, even though I was looking forward to Assassin's Creed 2.

I almost was going to stop buying games altogether due to developing trends of asshole DRM mechanisms, but there are still reasonable titles coming out. Even EA seems to be smartening up. (Battlefield Bad Company 2 is relatively hassle free). I even bought a game through Steam for the first time yesterday, "Just Cause 2". I used to hate Steam, but I have to admit that they are the lesser of the evils and they give you something in return. Convenience.

Re:Settlers 7

[Zaphod The 42nd]

Yeah, until you realize that Blizzard is running this program called Glider 24/7 in the background when you run the WoW client, spying on everything you do on your computer. Its quite documented, and you agree to let them do it every time you click "agree" on the EULA. So don't think WoW is DRM free.

Also MMORPGS are special, because you HAVE to be online to play them, its not unfair to require you login to a server, so they all do that. So really, MMOs have the MOST DRM, we just tolerate it because the online connection requirement was already there.

But with things like Settlers, AC2, etc. I refuse to buy a game disabled by design. The single player games do not require an internet connection, and yet ubisoft does. Thats huge. I could never play WoW in my car on a laptop, but I *could* play AC2 on my laptop. But I can't.

Re:Settlers 7

[Zaphod The 42nd]

Yes, people have done this and have been doing this since the early days of everquest, etc. You're correct, the only way to do it is to completely reverse-engineer a server from scratch code. It is indeed a huge undertaking, but since it allows you to then play an awesome game without a monthly fee, and also to have your own world you can modify, several people have spent alot of time working on it, and many games (everquest, WoW, dark age of camelot, etc.) have working private server code projects. Some / most are even open source :)

No, players do not pay monthly fees (normally) though there are some really BIG "private" servers out there on the internet that are really just huge non-blizzard public servers. The thing is, These private servers aren't quite like the blizzard server, they don't have a team of programmers adding new content to the game, so it doesn't cost what it costs to keep WoW going. All they have to do is host a server, like if they were playing counterstrike, thats pretty cheap. But yeah, alot of websites do ask for donations.

Re:Settlers 7

[Zaphod The 42nd]

The term that EVERBODY seems to be forgetting (AND NO, IT IS NOT A SYNONYM FOR THEFT OR PIRACY) is "Copyright Infringement"

Its the same crime as making a mix cd of cds you own, or recording the radio to a cassette, or recording the superbowl to a VHS. Yes, its illegal, but IT IS NOT THEFT, 100%, and piracy highly misleading as well.

Re:Settlers 7

[sopssa]

Anyone can write a new server (accompliced with all the quests, npc's, items, and everything else that is handled server side). But it's a crazy amount of work, a lot more than just cracking the exe to bypass the copy protection. This is almost like saying "anyone can write that game" including all the aspects of art and everything else that goes into development. It just doesn't work like that and while everyone has broken your arguments about, you still can't see how WoW and DRM is different..

Besides all of these facts, Blizzard has served cease&desist letters to the larger private server owners and they have all complied and shut down their servers. Even while it doesn't really hurt their business.

Re:Settlers 7

[psnyder]

I'm rather skeptical of how well boycotts do these days.

However, bad reviews and ratings seem to work.

Re:Settlers 7

[iampiti]

Wow! Most insightful comment I've ever read regarding piracy. If I had mod points I'd give you two :)

Re:Settlers 7

[brit74]

If customers just stop buying their games, the determination will not be that they need to stop implementing harsh DRM. It will be that there are not enough people willing to buy PC games legitimately.

I think his assumption is that people would buy DRM-free games instead (e.g. from Stardock, 2dBoy, etc).

Their sales were too low before because of the pirates, and now they're too low because those pirates won't pay for the games even if they make them uncrackable.

I've seen pirates pay for stuff that they couldn't pirate. Conversely, I've seen people who used to buy software switch to "pirate only" once they discovered how to pirate stuff. I see no reason why, if piracy was unavailable to them, that they wouldn't switch back to buying - since that's what they were doing before they discovered piracy.

I also think part of the solution is not condoning piracy with excuses (e.g. piracy is just sharing / making a copy; I'm not hurting anyone because it piracy doesn't deprive anyone of anything, like stealing does). People are way too eager to use excuses in order to legitimize their piracy. It's important not to let pirates delude themselves into thinking that they have the moral high-ground or believe that what they are doing is entirely legitimate.

Re:Settlers 7

[Jurily]

I assembled my own recently.

The server and the databases are all developed separately, and it's up to you to host it. In fact,

MaNGOS is an educational project. This means, our primary interest is to learn and teach us and our users more about C++ project development in a large scale. Our software is not intended for running public servers, and we do not support that.

And to give you a hint about the complexity: MaNGOS is 12 MB of C++ (mostly uncommented), and my full database took 110 MB of SQL.

Re:Settlers 7

[brit74]

You can't say that any significant number of people will pay for software if they can't pirate it. Some will, some won't.

Yes, I'm fine with the statement that majority of pirates wouldn't have bought the game. However, when piracy numbers are as high as they are (Stardock / Demigod claimed 85% of the people trying to connect to their servers were pirates; 2dBoy said 90% of the people playing their game pirated it), you don't need a large percentage to get a big boost in sales numbers. If we said 90% of those pirates wouldn't have bought, that sounds like a strong argument. But, if 10% of the Demigod pirates or 10% of the World of Goo players bought instead of pirating, Demigod sales numbers would have increased by 56% and World of Goo sales would've increased by 90%. (Would you like to get paid 56% or 90% more money for whatever job you currently work at?) Sales increases of 56% or 90% are hard to ignore -- and that's based on the idea that only 1 out of 10 pirates equals a lost sale.

Re:Settlers 7

[pjt33]

AK47s?

Re:Settlers 7

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

Your post is almost correct, except for one small detail ...

You say it is "... the same crime as making a mix cd of cds you own ...".

It's actually not, because it's not a crime. Not everything that breaks the law is a crime. Breach of contract is not a crime. Parking in the wrong spot is an misdemeanor, not a crime.

Re:Settlers 7

[brit74]

I'd be careful about using Cory Doctorow's image (craphound.com) as a way to support your point. Cory Doctorow is a big proponent of piracy - in the past, he's promoted books that teach people how to pirate, and has sold "I pirate music" t-shirts on his website. Piracy advocates do nothing to reduce creators' desire to use DRM - quite the opposite, they make companies want to use DRM because they're so eager to pirate rather than pay. Doctorow is the enemy of creators; the only way to successfully get rid of DRM is to get more people to pay for their software, not less.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

please stop spreading this misinformation. the term "piracy" has been used to refer to intellectual property theft since before the concept of copyright was even legally defined - as far back as the 1600s.

"(an early reference was made by Daniel Defoe in 1703 when he said of his novel True-born Englishman : "Its being Printed again and again, by Pyrates"[2]). The practice of labeling the act of infringement as "piracy" actually predates copyright itself. Even prior to the 1709 enactment of the Statute of Anne, generally recognized as the first copyright law, the Stationers' Company of London in 1557 received a Royal Charter giving the company a monopoly on publication and tasking it with enforcing the charter. Those who violated the charter were labeled pirates as early as 1603.[3]"

Re:Settlers 7

[petermgreen]

Well the world geometry and textures will be either in the client already or downloaded by the client during the game so those should be relatively easy to copy (assuming you've already reverse engineered the protocol).

What will most likely have to be redone from scratch is all the scripting but that is a lot less work than creating the game from scratch.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

As someone who does download/copy stuff. I don't buy stuff I can't get for free, I buy stuff that I feel the developers deserve my money.

Churn house games and intrusive DRM do not make me want to pay the developers. If the devs are going to let publishers ruin their games with DRM, or they are going to churn out crap games for $100 (yes, they cost that much where I live) then I'm not going to shell out for it.

Case in point: I wouldn't buy anything published/developed by Ubisoft now, but I will buy games like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, hell, I even bought Tropico 3 recently (preordered too).

This bullshit excuse for DRM that states pirates will pay if the game is heavily DRMed just doesn't hold up when you look at what pirates will pay for and what they won't.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Pirating the game will just tell Ubisoft that you like their game but they need to make their DRM stronger so they get you to buy a game you like.

What utter nonsense. That has never worked and they know it. Regardless of the DRM's quality, it has always, always, always been cracked. DRM isn't there to stop habitual pirates, but the consuming masses who need a quick fix and will say, "Fuck this howto... I'll just shell out the fifty quid."

Re:Settlers 7

[Khyber]

The torrent is out there - LEARN HOW TO FIND THE CRACKFIX.

That isn't released via torrents. Why must you fools assume EVERYTHING is on torrent?

Re:Settlers 7

[TheRaven64]

Another poster in this story had the right idea. Buy a DRM-free game and post a copy of the receipt to the Ubisoft head office with a note saying 'I was going to buy your game, but because of the DRM I bought this one instead'. How many people do you think need to do that to send a message that DRM harms sales?

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

I know the steam version is taken, and I'm fairly sure the other is as well, but no one has taken the cred for it.

Re:Settlers 7

[TheRaven64]

I tried REALLY hard to find a good way to contact ubi about silent hunter... Anyway, I failed.

And yet, right there on their web site, it says:

UBISOFT
1st Floor, Chertsey Gate East,
London Street,
Chertsey, Surrey, KT16 8AP

The CEO's name is Yves Guillemot. I suggest that you write to him. And, as another poster suggested, include a photocopy of a receipt for a DRM-free game that you bought from one of their competitors instead of Silent Hunter.

Re:Settlers 7

[Zaphod The 42nd]

Then Copyright Infringement isn't a crime either.

Re:Settlers 7

[BikeHelmet]

Apparently Steam finally fixed Offline Mode sometimes not working!

Looks like next month they're also fixing Offline Mode sometimes not working! :P

But in all seriousness... Steam has amazing prices and convenience. It's a great platform. It's also where most of the great indy titles end up. Some of the best older games also end up there (and on GOG) as do strange retro or creative games.

Some of my favourites:

http://store.steampowered.com/app/22000/
http://store.steampowered.com/app/18500/
http://store.steampowered.com/app/26800/
http://store.steampowered.com/app/35700/
http://store.steampowered.com/app/41800/
http://store.steampowered.com/app/3590/
http://store.steampowered.com/sub/1662/
http://store.steampowered.com/app/44200/

There's plenty more. I've bought around a hundred games now off Steam. Most were worth buying.

Re:Settlers 7

[Inda]

You could have said that nicely and not been modded troll!

gamecopyworld says there's a crack. Clones all over the place. 'tis where I'd start.

Re:Settlers 7

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

That's what I was saying man. That Copyright infringement isn't a crime. It's against the law, but not a crime.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Regardless of the DRM's quality, it has always, always, always been cracked.

Which is why copies of Assasin's Creed II, the previous Ubisoft title whose DRM infamously screwed up a few days ago, are all over the Internet, right?

Re:Settlers 7

[chilvence]

In what way does that change the fact that the label is a gross exaggeration?

I grew up in many places where piracy was the norm, and not once bore witness to a copyright holder being keel-hauled or run through with a cutlass. Whether a modern term or one that can be demonstrated in old history, it is still a childish attempt to demonize what is essentially a comparitively harmless act. It is not successful, it simply waters down the original sense of the word with something weaker. Hence the 'Pirate' party can exist without being hunted down, hung drawn and quartered!

Re:Settlers 7

[Idiomatick]

I believe the problem is that input lag would move from 5~12 to 180~220ish. Which is a really big jump. The reason online games work is because you experience the 7~12 ping, most things are done on your computer, and people entering the map or talking are the things 220ms behind which is acceptable.

So it is safe to say that this won't happen for a long time. Long after we all have oc48 to the home with up/down of 5GBs/5GBs.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

But who cares? The fact is that if no-one buys their DRM'd game, they will either do the smart thing and remove the obstacle to legitimate players making a purchase, or they will do the dumb thing and go bankrupt, while those competitors who are more successful will see that doing the smart thing is, well, smarter.

The problem with people ripping them off, assuming the DRM gets cracked sooner or later, is that it creates a third possibility: filing genuine lawsuits against lots of people.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

We're supposed to be educated.

Right. So who sounds dumber, the one claiming that not a single person on this planet pirates a game they want just because they can but would buy it otherwise, or the one who accepts that while not all pirated versions would otherwise be converted into revenue-generating sales, some of them would, and provides a citation to support this claim?

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

You can't say that any significant number of people will pay for software if they can't pirate it.

You know, for a guy who was just bemoaning in another post the way we're supposed to be educated, you're awfully quick to tell us what we can and can't say, particularly when you haven't provided anything other than your personal belief to back up your position. What is it that you know so surely that none of the rest of us — including, presumably, the people whose job it is to research this topic — don't?

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Churn house games and intrusive DRM do not make me want to pay the developers.

It takes dozens, if not hundreds, of skilled, talented people to make a AAA title worth playing. The DRM is probably the responsibility of about three managers in head office and some external outfit who come up with the implementation. Why are you punishing everyone else who worked hard on the game just to get back at the tiny minority who had any say in the DRM policy? If you don't like the game, fine, don't play it, but please don't pretend that ripping off all those people who did work hard and probably aren't actually paid very well is somehow justified because you want to play the game but don't want to pay for it.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

They will decide to switch to an all-console strategy...

...and leave a huge market opportunity for games producers who continue to support the PC market — which in reality hasn't shrunk at all, only the part willing to buy handicapped products has — in a more customer-friendly way, and now with less competition. This translates into less money for the people who gave up because their business model didn't work, and more money who produced things people actually wanted, which is exactly how it's supposed to work.

Re:Settlers 7

[hairyfeet]

Uhhhh...you might want to try emule dude, as its been there awhile. I don't know how well it works because I don't care for AC and don't pirate, but it has rave reviews and all says it is working.

Re:Settlers 7

[aix tom]

I also wonder how much of the alleged "DOS" attack was their own games trying to connect all the time.

Re:Settlers 7

[Patman64]

Having learned SQL/databasing and C++ through mangos (among other things) I can vouch for awesome the project is.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree completely. I used to pirate games in high school because I had no money. I'm in the same situation; graduated from college, have cash to spend on games (because it's really satisfying to purchase a game), but unwilling to put up with DRM.

I bought FarCry from gog.com a few months ago because it has no DRM. I even already had an old pirated copy of the game. I was hoping on having Rainbow Six: Vegas be released to gog.com so I can finally play it but at this rate it might be there in five or so years.

For those readers who work for Ubisoft that have influence in this sort of thing: there are people who refuse to deal with DRM. Treat these people well and you will make money from them!

Re:Settlers 7

[Zironic]

Ehm, Glider is the most wellknown bot, the program you're thinking about is Warden which scans your memory for common keyloggers and bots.

Re:Settlers 7

[laparel]

You cant really compare an MMO and a single-player game.

Indeed you can't but I'm afraid you missed Jurily's main insight: "the [game] you pay for is better than the one you get for free." That doesn't mean moving/locking parts of the game to your servers; once it's been cracked (and it really only takes one), pirates gets the better copy than legit owners. (Let's not even mention how cumbersome all this is.) No, what you should focus on is making your legit buyer's experience better than the pirated version.

How? Well I don't have all the answers but I believe Stardock might have the right ideas: involve yourselves with your community; be part of custom content distribution; and continued game support through patches (bug fixes, new features, and new content). For multiplayer games, have a hand on the internet match making service to limit and weed out trouble players. Limit all those services only to your legit owners and pirates looking in would feel nothing but jealousy and inferiority.

In the non-software part of the world, it's no different - fake Nike shoes or Rolex watches are crap next to the real ones. Those who buy the fake ones wouldn't have likely bought the real ones anyways; moreover, the fakes make legit owners feel better and justified about their purchase. Likewise, I could see how pirated copies on the net would promote the game for free that could very well lead to increased sales!

Treat your customers like royalty and pirates would pay to be one.

Re:Settlers 7

[omglolbah]

Command and Conquer 4 - Tiberium Twilight was cracked.

* Gameplay worked fine
* XP accumulates properly
* Campaign worked fine
* Skirmish works fine

Considering the mountain of crap the game has gotten in various blogs due to the change in gameplay I am glad I didnt buy it. I tried out a few missions but found it very repetative. A friend of mine did buy it and was very disappointed as he could blast through the entire single-player campaign in one sitting... (4-5 hours). That is not worth the money.

I spend quite a lot of money on games, but I -never- buy a game until I've had a chance to try it out using a cracked version. I've been burned by games too many times in the past to trust anything but my own review ;)

Most of the games I buy these days come through Steam due to the incredibly convenient way of buying them. The DRM while there is non-intrusive. I've yet to have any issue with it at least.

Re:Settlers 7

[Omicron32]

Work on a server emulator is coming along very well apparently. I wouldn't be surprised to see it - and every other game using this type of DRM - 'cracked' in less than a month. It won't work for future releases. Regardless, I'm adding my voice here as another person who will neither be buying or pirating Ubisoft games. I won't pay for a defective game.

Re:Settlers 7

[MichaelSmith]

It amazes me that this bunch of clowns can't keep a license server working.

Re:Settlers 7

[Zaphod The 42nd]

Haha, good call, I got the two mixed up. I totally meant to say Warden.

Re:Settlers 7

[Blakey Rat]

The message is already out there: the World of Warcraft client doesn't contain anything that would resemble DRM, copy protection, registration, whatever.

Yeah it does. For one thing, it checks-in with a server before you can play-- which is identical to what the Ubisoft products here are doing. For another, it has the Warden anti-cheating system.

Re:Settlers 7

[Blakey Rat]

I have not been one to use pirated games. I have done it exactly once, for revenge... I ordered the expansion pack "Doom 3 Resurrection of Evil"

Why??

and never got it.

They probably assumed you were only ordering it as a prank to piss off your friends. I mean, nobody could actually *want* the expansion to Doom 3 having play the regular game, right? Must be a prank.

I almost was going to stop buying games altogether due to developing trends of asshole DRM mechanisms, but there are still reasonable titles coming out. Even EA seems to be smartening up. (Battlefield Bad Company 2 is relatively hassle free).

I find it amazing that people can completely give up on Ubisoft after, what, 3 titles with bad DRM, but they're perfectly fine with EA games-- despite the fact that EA has been screwing the entire industry for decades.

Then again, I'm talking to a person who actually paid good money (well... Canadian money) for Doom 3: Resurrection Of Evil. So I guess all rationality is out the door.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

You could play anything from your car on a laptop if you go anywhere with wifi. Nub.

Re:Settlers 7

[twidarkling]

I think even 1 out of 10 is optimistic. I think one in twenty would be a more realistic estimate. I firmly believe that the majority of pirates do it either for lack of funds, to circumvent DRM issues, or to simply give a game a quick try (they know they won't like the game, and don't intend to put a lot of time in, but need/want to check it out for some reason). None of those groups are going to be converted. People won't magically gain more cash to spend on games, DRM issues won't magically be solved, and people who know they won't like a game won't spend money on it. The only people you're going to get are the ones for whom pirating is easier. And even then, you won't get all of them. Hell, you'd probably be optimistic even with my one in twenty.

Personally, I pirated X-Blades when it came out because I *knew* it was going to suck balls, to the point where there was the train wreck factor. Like Hell I'm rewarding a company for making a shitty game though. So I downloaded it and played for 20 minutes. Then I couldn't take any more, and purged it from my machine. If I couldn't have pirated it, I wouldn't have touched it. You know why piracy is so high, and "lost sales" are so low? Because few games release honest demos any more. If they give any kind of demo at all, they pick the most polished part of the game, and give you *maybe* 15, 20 minutes of gameplay. You cannot get an honest representation of the game that way. The rest of the gameplay could be absolute crap.

So instead people pirate the game, and use that as a demo. And discover the game SUCKS. Or, if it doesn't, then hell, they've already got it. If they did proper demos, piracy would probably fall, but game sales would more accurately reflect game quality meaning sales would probably still suck for a lot of games. They definitely would not see a huge conversion.

Re:Settlers 7

[twidarkling]

Churn house games and intrusive DRM do not make me want to pay the developers.

Why are you punishing everyone else who worked hard on the game just to get back at the tiny minority who had any say in the DRM policy?

Except that

As someone who does download/copy stuff. I don't buy stuff I can't get for free, I buy stuff that I feel the developers deserve my money.

He's not "getting back" at anyone. He has criteria he uses to judge who is deserving of his limited financial resources. If one of those criteria is "doesn't use DRM," then it's not punishing those who do use it, it's rewarding those who don't. The ones who use DRM weren't getting his money either way.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

The ones who use DRM weren't getting his money either way.

I bet he still played their games, though. He's just a hypocrite, like everyone else around here who says they pirate because they don't like DRM, when what they really mean is they pirate because they think they can get away with not paying for the hard work of others as the law requires.

Re:Settlers 7

[twidarkling]

the only way to successfully get rid of DRM is to get more people to pay for their software, not less.

Unfortunately, that time's long passed. If people started purchasing in large numbers now, companies like Ubisoft would declare victory, and keep using DRM, and even try to come up with even *more* uncrackable DRM, so they could switch up schemes to snag any more pirates out there.

Re:Settlers 7

[LingNoi]

You're both wrong. The developers were already paid. It's the publishers that demand the DRM and they're the ones seeking a return on investment.

So yes. Not paying for the game hurts the publisher not developer who was paid almost nothing to do all the work.

Re:Settlers 7

[sopssa]

In case of smaller studios or indies it's almost always directly off from the developers. Also, even many big developer names do give a share of the revenue to their employees and they usually consider that while making a contract. It gives a good incentive to work better on the game.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Emulator for AC2, haven't tried by technically it is supposed to work.

http://www.cs.rin.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=55769

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

That return on investment is also what pays the salaries of those people to write the next good game. Companies that don't make money can't continue to employ people.

It's always easy to argue against copyright on the basis that if we revoked it tomorrow everyone could access more stuff, but that is completely missing the point. Copyright isn't a direct benefit, and in the short term it is actually harmful, but the principle is that in the long term it incentivises behaviour that we value more: creating and sharing new works. If society reneges on its side of the copyright bargain, then sure, whatever works we already have exist and whoever was employed to help create them got paid and it's only the investors who got screwed, but who's going to invest next time and make the next fun game in that case?

Of course, since the investors probably also didn't have much if any direct influence over the DRM policy, screwing those who put up their own money to create a game you enjoy by playing it without paying for it is no more ethical than screwing the developers who actually wrote the code.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Obvious troll is obvious.

Everyone here knows that you can get E V E R Y T H I N G online if you try hard enough.

Re:Settlers 7

[sopssa]

But C&C 4 doesn't even use the same copy protection. It uses something similar by EA, but they probably just didn't made it as good as Ubisoft.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

And I've seen non-pirates not purchasing a game they actually planned to because of restrictive DRM.
So what? Single incidents don't prove anything.

Yes, a (small) portion of the pirated copies are actually lost sales. Not anywhere close to 100% as game companies want to make us believe. Just pulling numbers out of thin air I'd guess it's as low as 1-2%, possibly even lower.

But DRM also causes lost sales. People are put off by it and want a convenient product. If you check amazon reviews and forum posts you will notice that this is actually a _huge_ concern for honest customers.

So in the end the question is: Will DRM cost you more sales due to not satisfying your customers the best way you can or will piracy cost you more sales due to a very very small percentage of those pirates that might have bought the game?
Personally I think DRM is not worth it economically.

It still gets implemented out of spite. Companies sadly don't always think with their profits in mind. They see "Hey, someone is using out stuff for free!" and automatically think that's bad. They don't think of free PR but only of _imaginary_ lost sales.

What we need is more capitalism, more soulless calculating which will show that a satisfied customer has more monetary worth to a company than one angered by intrusive DRM.

Re:Settlers 7

[X0563511]

Indeed. Publishing a fucking demo would cut a significant portion of the pirates.

Why?

Those who pirate to demo the game, have little incentive to buy it should they decide they like it. Only those ones who actually have morals and say "Hey, they deserve money for this."

These days - I only tend to pirate to test something out. Almost nobody releases demos these days, so I have no other way of finding out without tossing $40-$60 on a gamble. Of course, dropping the whole "whaaa you can't return opened software" blanket policy would help with this, but demos would be the best fix.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Mmmm,

As a rule I really like Ubisoft titles. Have all the Silent Hunter games (with the exception of 5), all the IL2 titles, and a number of others like FarCry and Farcry 2 ... but I will not buy any game which uses anything like this DRM/copy protection.

I mean, I understand how fragile the Net can be. I understand some of the security implications. I've seen servers fall over and die in the real world.

And in its short history all of the above has happened to the Ubi DRM

Ubisoft has seen the last dollar it will get from me - I'll go elsewhere for my sim fix.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

I work at a pretty large Wal-mart in the electronic section. I have to see anyone buy Assassin's Creed 2 (for PC) or Command And Conquer.4 Tiberian Twilight (PC similar DRM). One person was going to buy C&C 4 till I pointed to the constant internet connection required to play bla bla on the package..

The 'crack' for C & C 4 seems to work perfect, played it for a few minutes.. I never looked into AC2 'cracks'. They waited so long to release AC2 for the PC its not even a 'new' game anymore..

Re:Settlers 7

[GigaplexNZ]

If they can't get something they "really" want, they will redirect their digital lust to a different product.

No, if they really want it, they will buy it. Otherwise, they will pirate a different game.

Re:Settlers 7

[binkzz]

Except that it's not true. Companies will claim it's piracy hurting their sales or any other reason. Passive action doesn't work. Complaints to the company, the BBB and other instances, and class action lawsuits is what changes company policies.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

If ubisoft were to lose enough sales to their misguided DRM, perhaps they would just be declared "to fun to fail."

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

The message is already out there: the World of Warcraft client doesn't contain anything that would resemble DRM, copy protection, registration, whatever.

Yeah it does. For one thing, it checks-in with a server before you can play-- which is identical to what the Ubisoft products here are doing. For another, it has the Warden anti-cheating system.

Yeah it does check with a server. The user authentication server. And that ain't DRM by a long shot. Neither is the Warden.

Re:Settlers 7

[cfalcon]

The "whole MMO model is DRM" is a big fat lie.

DRM is Digital Restrictions Management (Digital Rights Management to some). It controls what goes on on YOUR computer, the one YOU own, that is supposed to work for YOU. This is not the case in an MMO, where you have a client that talks to a server, and your client IS working for you. The server, running as Blizzard's property, is not. It's ok to run locally if you mess around with it a bit, but you end up with a vast boring world that isn't interesting like if you had, you know, other people in it.

Not even remotely DRM. The MMO model is actually selling you a SERVICE. These twits are just dillholes whose local code is broken by design unless their shitgobbling servers are up and gobbling shit at the correct rate.

Re:Settlers 7

[icebraining]

Saying that you can run WoW locally is like saying Ubisoft games don't have DRM because you can get on the Options screen without being connected to their servers. It's irrelevant.

The point is, the client is dependent on a server to play, and since Blizzard will sue competing servers, the client is dependent on their server.

The end result is the same as with DRM.

Re:Settlers 7

[paziek]

Yeah, that is true But only if your product is good. If its bad and pirated it still might get forum/blog attention, but not the kind you would want.
Anyway, I turned from #1 to #4 now that I have a job, but sometimes I don't do #4, instead watch youtube vids, read forums and just buy it if its good enough for me. Still I was burned a few times even with such precautions, as an good example would be Bioshock 2 with its Live! requirement, that is supported only in a few selected countries... not in mine. "Demo" obviously worked fine, so I didn't notice, cause if I try those I often don't go for YT/forums since I had first hand experience and it looked good, but its a god damn trap :

Re:Settlers 7

[jonbryce]

WOW's business model is the subscription access to the server. That's fine. It works, and some people like it, but it doesn't translate to a single player game.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

it have been cracked. kinda. (server emulator)

Re:Settlers 7

[Rogerborg]

A month is a win for DRM. They just need to keep it uncrackable for long enough to shift their initial inventory, while the ad campaign is running and Sergey Cracksalotski has just gotta have it one way or another. After that, it's gravy.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I've never heard of it and my Windows (and hence cracking) days are over, but visiting my old goto place GCW yielded "Assassins.Creed.2.Crack.7z - Assassins Creed II v1.0 [7.6 MB] Fixed Files [Updated] Done by IceCold" in under 60 seconds.

Re:Settlers 7

[KDR_11k]

The C&C4 system is probably different in implementation, it's only designed to track your XP gains, not to prevent piracy.

Re:Settlers 7

[Opportunist]

Especially, I won't rent a game at full price. Anything where the maker has every ability to reject your license at will and disallow you to play (or resell, which is explicitely allowed (as in, is a right you cannot waive) in the copyright of my country) is not a purchase.

Re:Settlers 7

[Opportunist]

I could buy it on Steam. I do not know whether that server issue would affect me as a Steam customer. Still, I won't buy it. First, I don't know whether that issue will affect me and UBIsoft refuses to tell me. And second, it's my money and I spend it with companies that treat me like a customer, not a thief that first of all has to prove (not only once, but permanently) that he's not stealing this time.

A shame. I liked the Settlers series. I actually broke out Settlers IV lately and play it again as we speak. Yes, I even bought Settlers V, despite the mediocre reviews and all, because I liked the series and I thought, yes, they should continue it. I will appearantly not be able to continue this.

Re:Settlers 7

[Opportunist]

So, essentially you say that Assassin's Creed 2 should have had a solid number 1 spot on all sales charts because of a killer DRM that forces everyone to buy?

Boy, I never thought the DRM boycott would be such a showstopper for them!

Re:Settlers 7

[Opportunist]

Oh please don't play the guilt trip card. The managers that decide on DRM are the same guys that take the responsibility to pay the artists, so you're actually hurting the right person. The artists get paid this or that way, they don't get more dough just because the game sells well, it's the managers that can't recover their expense and have to explain that. And that's how it should be.

Re:Settlers 7

[Opportunist]

Huh? Is Assassin's Creed the only Action-Adventure-3D-sorta-game out there (what's that genre called, anyway?)? Is Settlers 7 the only RTS game out there? Can't play that one? Ok, let's play another one.

It's not like there is no choice...

Re:Settlers 7

[Blakey Rat]

Yeah it does check with a server. The user authentication server.

So... in the strange world of Anonymous Coward, checking a user authentication server is *not* DRM when Blizzard does it, but it *is* DRM when Ubisoft does it?

Well, I'm convinced.

Neither is the Warden.

Warden definitely resembles "DRM, copy protection, registration, whatever" in the grandparents' word. It does some deep down mojo to your computer, far above and beyond what's required for the game to run.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

I hate to break this to you, but you're not really hurting the managers either, because they probably just get paid too. The people you're really hurting are the people who are willing to put their own cash up to invest in a game that doesn't exist yet, and those are the same people who you want on-side to fund the next game you're going to enjoy (but apparently not pay for).

Re:Settlers 7

[Grumbleduke]

Pirates are after free stuff.

... which is an excellent trivialisation of the issues involved (and one that publishing companies have happily encouraged). It doesn't seem to be true. I was at a conference recently discussing piracy and counterfeiting (from an academic perspective as part of an EU project) and one thing most of the studies presented seemed to agree on was that 'price' wasn't the biggest motivation (or justification) for piracy. In some cases, it wasn't even in the top 5 or so. The main motivation is convenience.

This makes sense when you think about it - people generally are willing to pay for things that save them having to do work themselves (being lazy and all that). People also tend to pay more for things that are more convenient.

Pirates are willing to pay; there have been a couple of big piracy-related court cases in the UK over the last few months (OiNK and Newzbin) and in both cases the prosecution highlighted how much money these sites were making from their users. There have also been a couple of studies that noted that those who file-share (unlawfully or whatever, depending on jurisdiction) spend more than those who don't. Now, in terms of computer games (rather than audio/video material) this might be slightly different, but it should be reasonably obvious that the money is there and people are willing to spend it - just in some cases, they are not willing to spend the price demanded for the product offered (i.e. £40 for a DRM-laden game) and due to the monopolies granted by copyright, piracy is the only other way of acquiring the material (obviously there is the third option, which is the one I personally chooses). In their Digital Music Report 2010, the IFPI noted that the major, successful developments in the music industry in 2009 were a) getting more content available, b) introducing variable pricing, c) removing DRM (and not the litigation and legislation they have been pushing). It is unsurprising that what was successful was giving consumers (yes, pirates are consumers) what they want.

Re:Settlers 7

[Opportunist]

I pay for a game I want to enjoy. I do not enjoy games that treat me like a criminal. Thus I do not pay for it. I know it's hard to imagine that someone actually manages to do without something he wants in this time and age, but people still allegedly exist who simply abstain from using something if they do not agree with the terms of use.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

I pay for a game I want to enjoy. I do not enjoy games that treat me like a criminal.

So presumably you've never played any of these games either?

That's lucky, because if you had enjoyed them enough to play them but not to pay for them, then I suppose that would make you just another guy hypocritically trying to justify ripping someone off so he can feel better about himself.

Re:Settlers 7

[EyelessFade]

Its DRM just like ubisoft. Also the prices in europe is from 100-350% higher then in the US since they use 1$ = 1. It's actually cheaper to buy retail.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Assassin's Creed 2 still hasn't been cracked successfully, and doesn't seem to sell particularly well. At least not enough to indicate that every pirated game is a lost sale.

Currently there is a server emulator that works up to sequence 13.

Re:Settlers 7

[Jedi Alec]

Um, surely if a crack is so complicated most people who try to use it fail then the DRM can be considered a "success"?

When 80% of the customers of a company that tries to make money can't be bothered to read some simple instructions and hence fail to use the program as advertised...that company has a problem.

When 80% of the downloaders of a torrent that leaked out of the scene can't be bothered to read some simple instructions and hence fail to use the crack as advertised...the guy that wrote the crack will laugh his ass off at the army of idiots out there.

Whoever made it will get credit from fellow crackers which in his world are the folks that matter. The unwashed masses out there...who gives a flying fuck?

Re:Settlers 7

[mcgrew]

Doctorow's pro-piracy because he's proven that free sells. Read "Little Brother", the forward (or is it the afreward?) is enlightening on the subject. It's on his website for free, and also in your local public library for free. Many musicians realize it; Roger McGuinn has stated that music piracy brought his career back; the labels wouldn't record him any more, and a new generation discovered his music through the old outlaw Napster. I've seen CDs that read "be kind, burn a copy for your friend".

Nobody ever went broke from piracy, but many artists have starved from obscurity; one of them was Vincent Van Gogh, who only sold one painting in his entire life and wound up committing suicide.

I've bought dozens of Asimov's books (he wrore hundreds), but had his work not been in the library for free, I'd never have bough a single one.

Doctorow's on the best seller list either partly or mostly because he posts his books on his website for free. Free sells, whether it's the author giving the work away, or pirates pirating it.

Anyone who puts DRM on a work is an idiot, period.

Re:Settlers 7

[Goaway]

And does this crack actually WORK?

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Like I SAID, I don't KNOW. Why don't you TRY it?

Re:Settlers 7

[Goaway]

Because I am not the guy trying to make arguments about it. You are.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

My argument goes something like this:

I know of no non-online game that hasn't eventually been cracked somehow. DRM is more to scare off the masses than people used to digging for cracks and trying different potential solutions. A quick search illustrates that there is at least one available. If one is to be found in under 60 seconds, my experience tells me more are out there, regardless of this one's quality.

I do not need to ascertain the validity of the crack for this argument.

Nor was I wrong, anyway. After digging a little more I came from Google to Piratebay to some blogs to YouTube and finally to a Russian forum with a server emulator. I'll not post the URL for obvious reasons, but Google might have heard about Russian forums that talk about Assassin's Creed II.

Re:Settlers 7

[complacence]

It's actually not, because it's not a crime.

I agree that it shouldn't, but it actually is:

The United States No Electronic Theft Act (NET Act) passed in 1997, provides for criminal prosecution of individuals who engage in copyright infringement, even when there is no monetary profit or commercial benefit. Penalties can be five years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines.

Prior, copyright infringement for a non-commercial purpose was not punishable by criminal prosecution, although infringers could be sued in a civil action to recover damages. Criminal prosecutions were possible only when the infringer derived a commercial benefit from his or her actions. This state of affairs was underscored by the unsuccessful 1994 prosecution of David LaMacchia for facilitating copyright infringement as a hobby, without any commercial motive. The court suggested that Congress could act to make some non-commercial infringements a crime, and Congress acted on that suggestion.

The NET Act amends the definition of "commercial advantage or private financial gain" to include the exchange of copies of copyrighted works even if no money changes hands.

(Wikipedia, shortened, emphasis added for skimming)

Re:Settlers 7

[billcopc]

That is certainly true, pirating your own stuff doesn't automatically make your product awesome. If it sucks, it sucks and the strategy will backfire, because more people will know of the suckage. That's a risk I'm willing to take, because if my app sucks, I don't want people to be using it.

Re:Settlers 7

[Anonymous Coward]

sopssa man, how many of your inane first posts do you need before everyone realizes you are slashdot's virgin key of the euro trash...

The pirated version has none of these problems

[Anonymous Coward]

I hear the pirated version of settlers 7 has none of these problems. Best of all: I hear you can get this "pirate" version for free!

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, you have to play the "pirate" version with the sound mixer on your computer set to 0 for the game because it won't stop yelling "aarrgh!" and "now ye be givin' me yer wallet matey!" (not unlike the DRM version).

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[TheRaven64]

Why is this flamebait? It's entirely relevant to the story and makes a valid point. DRM doesn't affect pirates, it just degrades the product for the legitimate customers and makes the pirated version more attractive in comparison. It's much easier to persuade a legitimate customer to switch to the pirated version than it is to do the reverse, and DRM schemes like this have exactly that effect. Any company that spends money driving its customers away is badly in need of new management.

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[sopssa]

It's so because there are no working cracks for Settlers 7, and the anonymous coward is just shouting out the usual piracy shit that add nothing to the conversation. It's not a valid point until the pirates can actually pirate it, and it's been 1.5 months with Assassins Creed 2 now that uses the same system.

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[Grishnakh]

It's so because there are no working cracks for Settlers 7

It's no different for paying customers either, evidently: the DRM version doesn't work, so whether you pirate the game or buy it properly, in the end you still have a non-working program.

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[Anonymous Coward]

As far as I know, it hasn't been cracked yet. Neither has Assassin's Creed 2, at least not satisfactorily. The only problem Ubisoft now have is that people aren't buying their games because of the bad publicity around the DRM- Assassin's Creed 2 is down to £15.98 already on Amazon UK, a sure sign that it's not selling very well.

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[Jurily]

DRM doesn't affect pirates

Everyone repeat this until it sinks in. It only takes one DRM-free copy from some ubercracker.

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[tagno25]

It's so because there are no working cracks for Settlers 7, and the anonymous coward is just shouting out the usual piracy shit that add nothing to the conversation. It's not a valid point until the pirates can actually pirate it, and it's been 1.5 months with Assassins Creed 2 now that uses the same system.

Assassins Creed 2's DRM was cracked in one day, it was even on Slashdot.
http://slashdot.org/story/10/03/05/027258/Ubisofts-New-DRM-Cracked-In-One-Day

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

And this is the crackers fault how?

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[Anonymous Coward]

> it was even on Slashdot.
>
Then it must be true.

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[sopssa]

It's false news. The crack doesn't actually work - just read this forum thread. You get all kinds of weird problems like cannot accept quests, cannot advance in the game, cant use items and so on... Or this: http://filenetworks.blogspot.com/2010/04/ipaki-group-aftermath.html

As you can see, new Tweets are glorifying UBISoft DRM which has so far been successful against PC game pirates. But is it the best future protection? We don’t think so. “It withstood all the efforts to get cracked.” All? Not all. Several folks in a well known Russian underground community (CS.RIN.RU) are working on a server emulation patch – and they’ve been partially successful so far and have apparently got the game to work until sequence 5. Their method involves playing a legit copy of the game, logging all responses that come from UBISoft servers and building a complete server emulator. However to make the emulator complete, they will have to explore the game 100% which is a time consuming process. Be that as it may, this clearly shows that UBI’s DRM is not as invincible as it is claimed to be.

It has taken them over a month now. And all that is needed from Ubisoft part is to make their games more open sandbox like with even more server-side stuff and you cannot ever get a complete working version.

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[Khyber]

'It's so because there are no working cracks for Settlers 7'
It's the same DRM as ACII and Silent Hunter, both of which were cracked WITH EASE.

I beat ACII before it ever hit store shelves.

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[Anonymous Coward]

Being able to run the game, and being able to play the game are two very different things. AI that just stands around and does nothing does not a fun game make.

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[sa1lnr]

Who needs a cracked version, they'll both be in Game's 3 for £10 bargain bin pretty damn soon by the looks of it.

Oh the irony.

Anti-piracy measures lead to less sales.

Re:The pirated version has none of these problems

[kiddygrinder]

the problem is the DRM will still be active in the bargain bin. do not want

Australia

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny how Australia is the hardest hit... What does Australia have that most of the world [except China] not have???

Re:Australia

[mrsteveman1]

Wallabies?

Re:Australia

[sopssa]

Funny how Australia is the hardest hit... What does Australia have that most of the world [except China] not have???

A really remote location? Both US and EU have hundreds of data-centers, millions people and several countries, so they ought to have a good connectivity. Australia on the other hand is away from many other countries and is surrounded only by China, other Asian countries and New Zealand.

Re:Australia

[Merls the Sneaky]

Internet censorship.

Re:Australia

[bmo]

Fritzl.

Bodybuilders that become governors of Cal-e-forn-ee-yah.

Chancellors name Schickelgruber.

--
BMO

Re:Australia

[Nathrael]

I find it a bit disturbing that you are ranking Schwarzenegger among the likes of Hitler and Fritzl.

Re:Australia

[Jesus_666]

I find it a bit disturbing that he can't differentiate between Austria and Australia.

Re:Australia

[bmo]

I find it disturbing you don't get the joke. :-D

--
BMO

Re:Australia

[Nighttime]

Thanks, I'll have a pint of McEwan's.

(1980s UK TV advert)

Re:Australia

[ravenshrike]

Clearly his history class glossed over Hitler's origins.

Re:Australia

[lordmetroid]

You forgot that the Oceanian countries are inbetween Australia and China.

Re:Australia

[Jesus_666]

The problem is that the joke was too plausible. It's as if you said "I'm ditching cable TV for internet video" - it might be a joke but it's entirely believable that you actually meant it.

And yes, it is perfectly reasonable to assume geographic ineptitude on any English-speaking discussion platform, unfortunately.

Re:Australia

[bmo]

As if someone who truly confuses Austria with Australia can actually spell Schickelgruber, or even know the name.

And yes, it is perfectly reasonable to assume geographic ineptitude on any English-speaking discussion platform, unfortunately.

Only if you want to look like a bigot.

--
BMO

Re:Australia

[petermgreen]

True not that it makes much difference. Australia looks pretty isolated even before you put the country names on the map and once you do things look even worse.

I'm pretty sure (if anyone has any facts to contradict this please post them) that o and north american form the core of the internet* with lots of ISPs including most if not all the teir 1 ISPS having a strong presense, good interconnections between providers and a large portion of the internets servers.

Going round via the land route or a mixed land/sea route from australia through asia/africa into europe you are going to end up dealing with a lot of countries that are either unfriendly, pro censorship**, unstable, lacking in internet infrastructure or a combination of those attributes. Not exactly ideal places to get your internet connection through. So australians get thier internet connection through rather long undersea links to north America. Afaict there are relatively few of these and bandwidth is relatively expensive on them.

I've also heard that issues with the peering policies and pricing structures of big operators within australia make things even worse.

*yes europe and north america are quite far apart physically but during the dotcom boom insane ammounts of transatlantic fiber were laid so connections between them are reliable, high bandwith and relatively cheap).

**even countries that want to censor generally want it limited to thier OWN censorship

Re:Australia

[Jesus_666]

I admit that that name should've been a hint. Few clueless people casually drop references to politically active landscape painters.


As for the bigotry: It's more of a pessimistic outlook. There are people around who could conceivably confuse two similar-sounding nations and there are enough of them to make such an error plausible.

I wouldn't assume that everyone can't tell a former part of Hungary from a continent but I still saw enough people pull stunts like that to take it at face value when encountered.

Re:Australia

[Anonymous Coward]

is surrounded only by China, other Asian countries and New Zealand.

Australia is "surrounded" by China the same way Sweden is "surrounded" by Egypt... Learn some geography, eurotrash.

Re:Australia

[bmo]

politically active landscape painters.

Somehow I'm going to work that into an argument about tea party activists.

There are people around who could conceivably confuse two similar-sounding nations and there are enough of them to make such an error plausible.

And over here, there is no shortage of stories of Europeans thinking that Halifax is within a reasonable driving distance to Vancouver or that Rochester, New York is somehow within a 10 minute's drive of New York City.

The US has no monopoly on ignorant people. At least we don't have football hooligans.

--
BMO

Re:Australia

[Jesus_666]

And over here, there is no shortage of stories of Europeans thinking that Halifax is within a reasonable driving distance to Vancouver

Poppycock. Everyone knows that West Yorkshire is thousands of miles from Canada. ;)

Re:Australia

[Dogtanian]

Thanks, I'll have a pint of McEwan's. (1980s UK TV advert)

Hey, look at those shores!

Re:Australia

[Nighttime]

What shores?

Maybe they should...

[Anonymous Coward]

get more than 7 servers.

Well, I sure am glad

[selven]

that pirates are, as usual, getting a superior product. Remind me, why am I supposed to pay for the legit version again?

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[declain]

Actually, Ubisoft's DRM is still not cracked.

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, Ubisoft's DRM is still not cracked.

So why don't you just pirate it, grandpa? You can get a torrent atSIGSEGV REDO FROM START
?ASSERT FAIL: assert(pirate_everything)
?UNIMPLEMENTED: CANNOT HANDLE CASE
?PANIC: MEMORY ACCESS VIOLATION
?PANIC: RESTARTING

TrollBotOS v2010 bootup, please wait...

that pirates are, as usual, getting a superior product. Remind me, why am I supposed to pay for the legit version again?

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[Korbeau]

As far as I can tell, the article you are pointing to refers to Silent Hunter 5, and both Assassin's Creed 2 and Settlers 7 remain uncracked.

Also note that the solidity of DRM techniques like these depend at how much time the developers spend to "secure" their product. My guess is that for Silent Hunter 5, a very niche product, they only did the minimum. But for their big titles they probably have hordes of programmers messing the game pretty much beyond recognition without the connection to the server. Oh, that never makes it impossible to crack, but it's no longer a simple matter of by-passing some CD key checks by inserting NOPs, you really have to build a set of tools around a particular title and it can take weeks to do so ...

And that's really their goal. Most of the sales of a game are done during the first few days / weeks. If it takes a month to crack the damn thing, they have reached their goal.

If they sell 10'000 more titles because frustrated kids can't find their free crack and must beg their parents to go to the store, they have reached their goal. I'm eager to see their financial numbers about this - I'm still skeptical it will change anything, but we'll see.

Now to answer your question: you are supposed to pay because 1) it is illegal to do otherwise 2) you support the developers of the games you love.

Wiseass like you wonder why all PC games are crap and developers focus on console gaming since the Internet got popularized ...

(PS: that is not to say I'm all for these draconian DRM practices. I don't really care about the "always connected" feature as long as the requirements are clearly visible when you buy the game, but I don't like the fact that it prevents resale).

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[the_humeister]

To support the programmers, artists, etc. for creating a game you enjoy playing perhaps? Or do you think these people, who are unlikely to even be the ones to decide to use DRM, don't deserve any compensation for the entertainment they give you?

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea right. We are supposed to support the poor artist and programmer. But it's ok for the big publisher to screw us over at every turn.

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[Khyber]

"Actually, Ubisoft's DRM is still not cracked."

Actually, you're wrong. It was cracked. ACII and Silent Hunter V are both out there and working, and they use the same DRM as Settlers 7.

Man can make it, man can and will break it. It's that simple.

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[the_humeister]

Then you should neither buy nor play the game. That was my point. Does the publisher's decision to use DRM give you the right to play a game you did not pay for? Ethically you do not.

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[Joe Helfrich]

The trick is, you can't judge the success of this strategy on the sales of Settlers 7. Sure, there might be an uptick in sales for this game, because they can't pirate it, but what happens when users frustrated by this don't buy Settlers 8? Will people blame that on DRM?

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[Anonymous Coward]

The DRM they include on it makes it worth 0$ in my eyes, though Silent Hunter and Settlers never really appealed to me, and AC2 I play quite happily on my PS3 where I can play it whenever I like.

I won't ever buy a single player game requiring online access at all times. I can understand requiring it for online multiplayer (not for LAN), but for Singleplayer? Never.

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[Anonymous Coward]

get a friend to pirate for you and put it on your computer that way you'll be doing nothing illegal :)

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[Korbeau]

The trick is, you can't judge the success of this strategy on the sales of Settlers 7. Sure, there might be an uptick in sales for this game, because they can't pirate it, but what happens when users frustrated by this don't buy Settlers 8? Will people blame that on DRM?

Yeah, I totally agree. Big Game Industry is making experiments these days with all sorts of DRM and DLC schemes. Even some titles shipped without any kind of DRM or even a basic form of CD-Key to see if it would change a thing.

My guess is that the effect of such schemes are minimal. I think good PC-only title can still make good money, but for all console ports the PC version is pretty much dead.

Currently Big Game Industry still allocates some resources in the last mile-stone to make a shippable PC version. Shippable meaning buggy, hungry on resources, needing the latest video card and often still with console artifacts in them (like you are asked to press "O" and "X" buttons instead of key names). They also "consolize" most game genres and now you cannot do without dumbed-down interfaces, targetting aids, etc.

At some point, my guess is that they will stop to bother.

Who I really blame for this are the gamers themselves. They don't realize their consoles are just a DRM-packed, slow PC, and proudly decide to chose for a DRM, costly solution to gaming, instead of refusing to buy consoles and stick to PC.

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[twocows]

Are you really going to argue that one download equates to one lost sale? That's the same shit-brained argument the RIAA/MPAA have been making for years, and it's just stupid. People tend to pirate for two reasons: they can't afford the game, or it's more convenient to pirate. The first group would not buy the game anyway, and the second group would not exist if it weren't for inconvenient DRM schemes. Look at Steam; it is, by definition, a DRM scheme, and yet customers and professionals alike praise the system. Do Valve's games still get pirated? Of course, but usually only by that first group. The second group is buying games off Steam left and right because it's so damn easy, and Valve is doing extremely well as a result; piracy of their games compared to the rest of the industry is remarkably low. Valve's business model is the perfect example of how to do PC gaming right. What Ubisoft did is stick their head in the sand and ignore this, opting instead to introduce something so inconvenient that paying customers can't even play the game they bought. There is no excuse for that in this day.

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[Anonymous Coward]

From the sounds of it, they are not enjoying "playing" this game because the servers wont even let them.

Thus, they should download and support the people who cracked it, and made a very enjoyable *playable* game! Can we give the money to the pirates instead?

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[Sycraft-fu]

"If they sell 10'000 more titles because frustrated kids can't find their free crack and must beg their parents to go to the store, they have reached their goal."

No, they haven't. With DRM, you have to consider all the costs vs the gains.

So your gains with a DRM system are your cut (generally 50% for the publisher) of the sales that you would not have got without said DRM. If we assume 10,000 sales that's about $300,000. Now you have to weigh that against the costs:

1) People who would have bought your game, but refuse to do so because of the DRM. I'm one of those. AC2 was on my list to get, and I was looking at Settlers 7. I have not bought those, and will not. I'll spend my money elsewhere, thanks. I've got more games than I can play, I don't need ones with shit DRM like that.

2) Development and purchase costs of the DRM. Buying commercial DRM isn't free, you pay up front and per copy. Likewise the developers of your own DRM don't work for free, you have to pay them to make it. Their costs must be incorporated.

3) Implementation costs of the DRM. DRM doesn't just drop itself in to your app, your coders have to spend time implementing it. This goes double when you are talking complex DRM, with checks all throughout the game. The time they spend implementing, testing and debugging that is time they either cannot spend on other features, or additional time until you can ship, or more personnel you need to hire. Have to include those costs.

4) In the case of this DRM, the cost of the servers and support staff for it have to be included. You've got to have computers that are running the DRM servers, and people keeping those online. That incurs hardware, bandwidth and staff costs.

5) Support costs. When the DRM doesn't work, and it WILL fail on various systems (particularly one like this) people are going to call you angry. You need to be able to support them. That means having phone and e-mail support staff to deal with the issues. The more issues, the more staff you need. Their costs need to be factored in.

So you don't just need to make a few more sales to make your DRM worth it. You need to make enough sales to offset ALL of the costs to make it worth it. If your DRM costs you $5,000,000 to design, implement and support and you only make $1,000,000 in additional sales, well then you failed. You cost yourself $4m.

Remember that business should be about profit maximization, not loss minimization. If something that reduces your losses reduces your profits even more, then it is not worth it. I mean a retail store could pretty much completely eliminate shoplifting by having only one entrance and exit manned by armed guards that strip searched all customers and employees upon entrance and exit. However you'd find that nobody would shop (or likely work) there and as such it would kill your profit, despite minimizing loss.

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[Anonymous Coward]

To support the programmers, artists, etc. for creating a game you enjoy playing perhaps?

Ah, but to meet that condition the game would have to actually play.

Or do you think these people, who are unlikely to even be the ones to decide to use DRM, don't deserve any compensation for the entertainment they give you?

If the game won't play they haven't given you the entertainment for which you compensated them. If you program for a company that uses DRM, don't cry about how it wasn't your decision. Anybody who spends time and money to deliberately make a product less functional before selling it to me has removed from the transaction any ethical principles by which they might claim I am bound to ensure their benefit or consider their wishes.

I have no interest in this game, pirated or not. DRM is a topic that interests me though. A couple of years ago, I bought a DVD which didn't work. Turns out the DRM was to blame, my DVD drive didn't have the region set (unknown to me) which apparently some DVD's require or won't play. I don't think I was at all morally or ethically out of line to download it.

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[blahplusplus]

"Now to answer your question: you are supposed to pay because 1) it is illegal to do otherwise 2) you support the developers of the games you love."

Pirates will start paying when the public domain is back and we get rid of software licensing. We deserve to OWN our software, not rent it from the mother-ship.

http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm

Re:Well, I sure am glad

[pandrijeczko]

I would rather remind you to get yourself a backbone so you find enough strength of character to stand by your convictions and neither buy the game nor pirate it.

There's Got To Be A Happy Medium

[WrongSizeGlass]

I am not a gamer simply because I stare at a computer screen 12 - 16 hours a day and can't see getting my entertainment from a computer or console. But ...

I am numbed by the lengths that these game developers go to try to stop piracy. I completely understand the need to protect their investment and product, but not at the expense of their paying customers. This seems like a ridiculous tale of a snake eating itself and smugly stating "see, I told you so" as it takes its last bite.

There has got to be a happy medium between this draconian DRM and unprotected products.

Re:There's Got To Be A Happy Medium

[Spatial]

I completely understand the need to protect their investment and product

I don't. Since when did an AAA game ever fail because of piracy?

Most games get cracked immediately and pirated thoroughly. But pirates are still a small group in comparison to the market for big games. I remember Spore getting cracked and pirated before it was even released, and yet it was a big success. It's hardly alone in that.

Re:There's Got To Be A Happy Medium

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually... no, there isn't. Either it has draconian DRM or it is, by definition, unprotected (uneffective DRM == no DRM, for all non-DMCA purposes).

Sun rises & sets

[Anonymous Coward]

...and the sun rises another day...

DRM is inherently flawed anyway, so...

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if one could stub the RPC functions of the Ubisoft servers, use a virtualisation layer to isolate it (on its own OS) and use suspend/resume functionality to "save" the game. Perhaps it could then be distributed as a disk image and configuration file.

Just my €0,02.

Want them to change?

[Dracil]

Don't just vote with your wallet. Show them you did.

Mail them the receipt of the next game you buy telling them why the receipt does not have their game on it.

Re:Want them to change?

[ciroknight]

Voting with your wallet doesn't work anymore anyways, not sense companies learned that they can blame some phantom nemesis on the reason they can't make sales and get 'bailed out'.

Re:Want them to change?

[Anonymous Coward]

So... voting with your wallet doesn't work because you get outvoted by people who don't care?

That's why democracy's a failure, people don't agree with YOU!

Re:Want them to change?

[nedlohs]

That's not what he said, in fact I see no way to interpret it as such.

You can type but you can't read, I take it?

Re:Want them to change?

[Trerro]

There's 3 companies that pull this crap - EA, Ubisoft, and Activision. That doesn't sound too bad, right? Just avoid those 3 companies.

Then you realize they've purchased or destroyed nearly every other game company in the US, and you quickly realize those 3 are the overwhelming majority of the industry.

I do indeed vote with my wallet - indie games, Korean and Japanese imports, Flash game sites (you don't pay for these but every time you go to one, you're giving the company ad revenue), webgames, etc.

That's fine if you're aware of those channels, but someone walking into a game store isn't seeing indie games, will see few, if any Korean ones, and obviously, won't see *anything* that doesn't ship in a box. That leaves nothing but Japanese imports - not that there aren't plenty of good ones, but the bottom line is, the average gamer simply isn't aware of how many options they have to avoid these companies, and until that fact changes, they're going to remain multi-billion dollar companies.

We need to do more than vote with our wallets, we need to make our friends, and by extension THEIR friends aware that you very much CAN avoid this crap. Then, and only then, will the industry move forward on large scale.

Re:Want them to change?

[Anonymous Coward]

I generally sympathize, but why bother? Are you hoping they'll come around, that you're having a dialog with them, a discussion where you're making a cogent point?

They're a business making a dumb business decision. Don't buy their games, and let them rot. The people that matter, devs and artists, will be inconvenienced but will ultimately find employment at a better business. (Not making light of their position in these times. I wouldn't wish unemployment on them. I hope they can have some success pushing clue up the management chain.)

The people you have to convince of the point you're making are the politicians and citizens of your country, so the first group can't easily whore themselves out to Ubi when Ubi lobbies for tougher "anti-piracy" laws.

Educate the population, and Ubi fixing their business model will come naturally. You won't educate Ubi. It's unlikely the management doesn't fully understand and embrace the hypocrisy or at least the impracticality of the screw-your-customers business model. Anyway, they can read Slashdot just as well as we can. Bad management is bad management and needs to lose.

Lost Sale

[Anonymous Coward]

I spotted a copy of Settlers 7 in my local Gamestop the other day. Came really close to purchasing it until I saw the little red sticker on the front, proclaiming that it "requires a constant Internet connection to play."
It could be the best Settlers game to date, and I'm sure it will satisfy my craving for a strategy game, but I will never purchase it (nor pirate it - you're still affirming the developer has made a quality product by incrementing the download counter on torrent sites), and will surely tell all of my friends (who love Settlers) to simply avoid it. So, not only have you lost a sale, you've also lost half a dozen customers.
One of the first laws of the business world is that it's always more valuable to retain a customer instead of seeking new ones - Ubisoft, your DRM does not lend itself to either. It may make your products more profitable initially (debatable, considering their system was circumvented in 24 hours for Assassin's Creed 2), but if ever given a choice between an Ubisoft game or a game from another publisher in the future, I know which publisher I will not be supporting.

DRMlicious

[Archaemic]

Can we all laugh in Ubisoft's face yet? Too soon? Too late?

Companies put all this time and money into DRM. Have they yet shown that the money they spend outweighs the money they lose from piracy? It seems like this DRM scheme is particularly bad as it actually INCREASES the piracy and DECREASES the legitimate customers--the exact opposite of the intent. Sure, if there's no DRM, it might have even worse actual sales, but then again, it might not. Even if it does have worse sales...are they losing more money than they would have spent on the DRM? It's hard to say, or even to do a study on this.

I commend StarDock for their anti-DRM attitude and manifesto, although I have seen their stuff on pirate sites. I have a friend who pirated an indie game a few weeks back, and I really hate that more than pirating a game by a large company (say, EA or Ubisoft). His reasoning was "I'll play it once for not very much time. It's not worth that money." I've seen other arguments, "Well I wouldn't buy it anyway, so they're not losing money." Is this really the selfish culture we've become? If it costs money and you're not going to pay for it, you shouldn't get to use it. That's kind of the way capitalism works. It's not about your impact on their sales, it's about exchange of goods. I'm not 100% pure, myself, having a fair amount of pirated music, and some pirated video games (all of which are pretty old and no longer published at this point), but at least I don't regard the idea of piracy as justifiable a lot of the time...

I find the way Steam handles DRM the least draconic of any DRM and am actually fairly okay with it. You can buy it and link it up to Steam. Steam needs to be online, sure, although there is an offline mode. I'm fairly certain that Valve has stated that if they were to bring Steam offline forever, they would provide a way of unlocking the games, and I don't really doubt this. This is a sane way to provide DRM, so long as you follow through with your promise.

Re:DRMlicious

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh right mod me troll instead of refuting the truthful facts I posted... because you can't.

Google "demigod pirates" for fucks sake!

Re:DRMlicious

[Anonymous Coward]

They probably modded you a troll because you claimed that Stardock does not make good products, when most people agree that Sins of a Solar Empire and the Galactic Civilizations series are both excellent.

Re:DRMlicious

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah I dunno about that. Overhyped trash.

Re:DRMlicious

[Anonymous Coward]

I find the way Steam handles DRM the least draconic of any DRM and am actually fairly okay with it.

Spelling Nazi alert!

You meant to write draconian or drastic. But I'll admit, the accidental compression is... interesting because lucky.

Re:DRMlicious

[Anonymous Coward]

Your unwavering commitment to perfect spelling embiggens me.

Re:DRMlicious

[petermgreen]

I'm fairly certain that Valve has stated that if they were to bring Steam offline forever, they would provide a way of unlocking the games, and I don't really doubt this.
The thing is afaict "promises" like that are not legally binding and even if they are contracts that would have been legally binding can sometimes be dissolved as part of a bankruptcy.

Companies fortunes ebb and flow and I would not be at all surprised if in ten years time the only way to play valves games is with legally dubious (or outright illegal) third party cracks.

The people running valve now probably won't want this but by the time the shit hits the fan (if it does) they are likely to no longer be in control.

Re:DRMlicious

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a nutcase. Not everyone is a capitalist cheerleader like yourself.

Re:DRMlicious

[Yvan256]

Save the cheerleader, save the World.

Of Warcraft.

Re:DRMlicious

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree, most people I meet these days think they are entitled to whatever they want for free.

Re:DRMlicious

[Anonymous Coward]

That's kind of the way capitalism works. It's not about your impact on their sales, it's about exchange of goods.

This applies for goods which are in a limited supply. Information, by contrast, is (almost) freely replicable. It's possible to shoehorn it into capitalism, by introducing copyright, or some sort of compulsory licensing scheme - but it's not a fundamental part of capitalism.

Re:DRMlicious

[Anonymous Coward]

You touch an interesting point: if we are to follow pure capitalist criteria, there is NO RATIONAL REASON for an economical agent to pay for IP or any intangible good that can be replicated at zero marginal cost if he can get it at neglegible risk/cost ratio. So, actually, if people really acted as the publishing corporations try to act (like fully informed rational economical agents), piracy would actually be even more mainstream than it is.

So, this is (yet) another specific case where (pure, real) capitalism is not exacty what corporations want, despite what they preach (after all, copyright is an artificial monopoly).

Welcome to socialism ;)

Re:DRMlicious

[Onthax]

Stardock used to be anti-DRM, but to get updates you need to connect to impulse which validates your game is legit, also if you wipe your pc, you have to either reinstall the game or redownload it from impulse or it will same invalid game installation. it is just DRM on update rather than DRM on play good times

iTunes

[DaMattster]

Funny how Ubisoft went in the exact opposite direction as the online music industry. Both iTunes and Amazon removed DRM from their music as a result of consumer outcry. Should be very easy to do with Ubisoft.

Re:iTunes

[brit74]

To be fair, music was impossible to secure with DRM because of the analog hole. Plus, there's the fact that CDs are DRM-free. Once either of those are exploited, then copies are available on the internet. DRM on software is more secure. I'm not saying it is secure, just that it's harder to crack and it isn't always cracked (e.g. Assassin's Creed 2 is still not cracked, Settlers 7 is still not cracked, it took 3 years for someone to crack the PS3, etc). I'm not so sure that iTunes removed DRM because of consumer outcry so much as the fact that music companies realized that their product was fundamentally impossible to secure under any circumstances.

Re:iTunes

[petermgreen]

I was under the impression that the music industry decided to allow their music to be sold online DRM free not because of consumer outcry but because they realised it was the only way to break the ipod/itunes dual product lockin. Also don't forget they had been offering drm free (or at least very weakly protected) CDs the whole time and that music has a HUGE analog hole (video has one too to some extent but there are things like macrovision to try and make it harder to exploit it).

Re:iTunes

[Anonymous Coward]

macrovision is the reason for vblank scrubbers.

My Internet connection was down for 5 hours...

[Xugumad]

...on Thursday, and boy was I glad I wasn't trying to play an Ubisoft game while I waited for it come back...

Settlers 7?

[Oidhche]

I thought the series ended with Settlers 2.

Re:Settlers 7?

[sopssa]

I thought the series ended with Settlers 2.

I did too, but I got really interested on Settlers 7 after reading the reviews and seeing some gameplay videos. It seems they have went more for the economy and all of those aspects that made Settlers 2 great.

Re:Settlers 7?

[Anonymous Coward]

Paying for it ended at Settlers 3. Damn copy protection stopped the game from working on Windows 2000.

Ubisoft should rest easy. They wont get sued.

[unity100]

For im sure that Razor1911, or Reloaded are fixing their problems for them, eliminating their chance of getting hammered by a class action lawsuit that would put them out of business.

Gamers are junkies

[doesnothingwell]

I would say only 10% of all gamers are of the slashdot variety, most are not. Quit calling out to gamers to show solidarity and discipline, monkeys would be easier to train. As a group they cannot think much past their next fix and the game companies know this. Most of the gamers I know are lucky if they graduated high school and can walk upright without scraping their knuckles.

I *WAS* about to buy

[aepervius]

Then i saw "this game need an active internet communication to be played". I avoided it like plague. I see that I was correct in my choice.

Re:I *WAS* about to buy

[Anonymous Coward]

At least this box had a warning on it. I bought Metro 2033 a few weeks ago and I looked all over the box. No mention at all of an Internet connection being required. I thought I was safe, in that I was actually buying a game instead of a rental.

Nope. The retail disc is fucking Steamed. And those bastards didn't have the balls to tell you on the box or even in the manual.

Good thing it's cracked.

I call bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

I call bullshit.
Aussies love to pirate their games. If you have a legitimate issue file a ticket with them, don't take it to slashdot where the antiDRM people who don't even buy games will say that they will not buy the game.

No export for you

[tepples]

If you were anticipating playing a certain up coming title when it became available you will like do whatever you have to do to get there even if that means paying for when your original plan was pirate it.

It could also go the other way: you plan to buy something, but the release in your region gets canceled. This has happened to fans of plenty of anime series, the film Song of the South, and the video game Mother 3.

DRM free games

[Anonymous Coward]

I avoid all this DRM hassle by buying DRM free games, like Settlers 2 from gog.com or Civilization IV: The Complete Edition. Neither has DRM and in fact both are explicitly advertised as being DRM free.

Glad Splinter Cell delayed

[failedlogic]

All I can say is I'm glad the new Splinter Cell for PC has been delayed until the end of the month. I'm hoping they've been able to resolve some of the DRM issues before it goes to Gold.

I'd say this is probably the only game I'm looking forward to. If it doesn't work well, I might have to resort to getting a PS3. I'll miss playing games on my PC though.

Most pc gamers will pirate when they can

[judeancodersfront]

it doesn't matter if the game is DRM free and $20 as the World of Good developers found out.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2008/11/acrying-shame-world-of-goo-piracy-rate-near-90.ars
This type of DRM from Ubisoft is likely a last ditch effort by Ubisoft to support pc gaming outside of casual games and MMOs. Single player games like Splinter Cell are pirated like crazy on the pc. There's certainly a cultural problem with pc gaming where everyone dismisses piracy and just expects game companies to ignore the fact that most pc gamers are skipping out on the bill.
What isn't fair is that paying customers are subsidizing the entertainment of pirates, many of whom spend their money on gaming hardware instead of supporting developers.

Re:Most pc gamers will pirate when they can

[TheRaven64]

And yet, World of Goo made record profits. Yes, it turns out that a lot of people are ass hats. This is well know, well documented, and should not be a surprise to anyone. If group A are behaving like ass hats towards you, then behaving like an ass hat, in turn, to group B will not make group A like you. It will not make group B like you. It will not make your profits go up.

this new DRM is an experiment

[mentil]

A year ago, Ubisoft released their new Prince of Persia game with no DRM as an experiment to see how it affected sales. Now, they're trying the opposite approach with draconian (and thus far uncracked) DRM. It will likely be cracked some day but most sales occur within the first couple months so that's all they need. They were skeptical that no DRM would work which is why they only released one game that way, yet have several new games with this new DRM that requires constant internet access. We have to do our part to ensure that they conclude that sales are better with no DRM than with this new DRM.

Class action might make them listen

[Anonymous Coward]

I would say at this point a class action lawsuit is the way to go. You paid for a product, you even meet their (very draconian) system requirements (read: network connection) and yet the game is refusing to let you use it.

You can try voting with your wallet, but odds are they won't care because they will still sell enough copies to pay the bills and then just claim the lowered sales are from "pirates". Or you can try voting with your legal system, which will definitely affect their revenue and send a clear, court-mandated message that this sort of DRM just won't fly.

DRM on the ps3 has been worth the effort

[judeancodersfront]

as for Stardock the CEO has stated that he purposely targets a subsection of pc gaming that doesn't have as high of piracy rates.
But even he wasn't able to ignore piracy as planned. Pirates overloaded demigod servers after all: http://drmnewsbits.blogspot.com/2009/04/demigod-servers-pounded-by-pirates.html
Big companies are not going to shrug their shoulders at 9:1 piracy rates on the pc when consoles and MMOs don't even come close. As the Unreal CEO pointed out there's a big overlap between people that install $200 video cards and people that pirate games. PC games like Nancy Drew have sales that aren't affected by piracy because a 12 year old girl is far less likely to pirate than a 24 year old male who has a gaming pc that is decked out with neon lights. The 'core' audience is pretty lousy when it comes to sales unless it is an MMO.

All those games you listed have DRM on them

[Anonymous Coward]

Almost all of the games you just listed have to contact some server before you're allowed to play them

Re:All those games you listed have DRM on them

[JarinArenos]

This is true. However, they are functional DRM, and more importantly, do not require a constant internet connection. It's not an issue of "No DRM" it's an issue of "DRM that doesn't actively piss me off". Admittedly, Dragon Age pushes that line, and I don't doubt that the PC version of Mass Effect probably does as well (I got the console version). They're still all FAR better than this new Ubisoft crippleware.

Then who cares?

[Sycraft-fu]

Either way they don't get money, and you don't get a problematic product. They'll either learn their lesson or go out of business from lack of sales.

These days, the problem with games isn't finding games to play, it is finding time to play games. We have a TON of good games out there. There are a bunch of companies working full steam producing games of nearly every kind you can imagine. Many of those games are quite fun. So what you find is that it is very easy to find more games you'd like to play than you've got time to spend on goofing off.

As such if Ubisoft wants to be retarded, just write them off. Buy your games elsewhere. It's easy too, they stamp their logo on the box of everything they publish so avoiding them is trivial. Just buy other games and you'll be happy.

They can be stupid about it or smart about it, makes no difference to you. If they wise up, buy their games again (if you want them). If not, who cares?

Re:Then who cares?

[petermgreen]

They'll either learn their lesson or go out of business from lack of sales.
Unless they extend this to consoles I doubt it will have that much impact on their buisness. Afaict PC gamers are a pretty small part of the gaming market.

Re:Then who cares?

[sortius_nod]

Well, just to throw a spanner in your works.

I have a console, and a PC (obviously). I game on both... I have pirated games on both. It was actually easier to copy ACII on console than PC.

Your move...

Re:Then who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not PS3 :)

Re:Then who cares?

[Sycraft-fu]

PC gamers are not a small part of the market. PC game revenues are larger than any single console. They aren't larger than all the consoles combined, but the PC is the largest platform.

Now you are correct that the console market, even a single console, is large enough to sustain a publisher. As such they could get out of the PC market. I'm fine with that, they go out of the PC business then too bad for them. Other publishers are still in it strong. I'd rather see a publisher that forces shit DRM get out.

Also, they well may try something like it on consoles (though I can't imagine MS would allow it, Sony might though) because of three things:

1) There is plenty of console piracy. Go sniff around online, you'll find you can pirate console games as easy as PC games. There is a more complex startup, as you have to hack the console to allow pirated games, but once hacked there is nothing additional that needs to be done. They are all protected by the console's own protection so that being bypassed means there's no per game cracks.

2) This is as much about preventing resale as it is about anti-piracy. For some reason publishers have talked themselves in to believing they have a right not to have their games resold. They believe that you should buy a game and it is yours forever, you can't lend or sell it. They see each used game sale as a "lost" sale, equivalent to a pirated copy. Well, this lets them tie the game to your account and thus prohibit resale or transfer. They'd love that one consoles too, as the used market for that is even bigger.

3) Forced obsolescence. One problem with making a good game is that people will keep playing it. They may decide they don't need a new game, they like their old one so much. Publishers want you to have to buy the new game all the time. This could allow that. They simply shut down the service for the copy protection for older games. They don't claim to be forcing you to buy new ones, just "Retiring old service," but the fact of the matter is you'd need to purchase new titles or have nothing to play.

Regardless, they won't get my money. It isn't some statement I'm making, I just don't choose to put up with this shit and I've got WAY too many other games to play. The quality titles come out at far too fast a pace to keep up with, given that I have a job and all that. I don't need Ubisoft's crap.

Re:Then who cares?

[GigaplexNZ]

They believe that you should buy a game and it is yours forever, you can't lend or sell it.

While I agree with most of what you said, I strongly disagree with this particular statement. They believe that you should buy a license to a game but it still remains their property. They can't really claim to prevent you from selling your own property, but they can try to claim that you aren't allowed to reassign an agreement between yourself and them to a 3rd party.

Re:Then who cares?

[Opportunist]

Which sane person wants to play a game like Settlers on a console?

Basically what you say is that Ubi could pretty much can the idea to ever milk the Settlers brand again. The same applies to pretty much all strategy games, a lot of very valuable IP would go down the drain because you simply cannot do a RTS game sensibly on a console. I tried my hand at one on a console. It was a quite frustrating and pretty much unplayable experience.

IMO the same applies to FPS games, even though some think that playing shooters on a console is a worthwhile experience. It's not for me. If I need "aiming aids" to compensate for controls that are simply not suitable for the game, it kinda kills my experience.

There is

[Sycraft-fu]

There are plenty of games out there with minimum to no protection that do just fine. Some offer online content that you need an account for . World of Warcraft would be an example. There's no copy protection, and you can actually change the servers it connects to in a text file. Makes it easy to change it to a non-Blizzard server. However, if you want to play on the real Blizzard servers you need to pay for an account, and their servers are much better than any free/hacked ones so that's what people do.

Other protections makes things convenient for gamers to play their games, but stop casual copying. Steamworks or Impulse Goo are like that. You install and play the game, no problems. It works offline just fine, you can put it on your desktop and laptop, it keeps the games up to date, etc, etc. However copy the folder to a friend's computer, and the game doesn't work. Yes the pirates get around it, but they'll get around anything. Ubisoft's new DRM will fall soon enough and once they've got the system figured out, future cracks will be fast. That doesn't matter, you can't stop that.

Also other companies simply offer benefits to being a legit purchaser. They offer access to things you can't easily get access to if you pirated the game. Maybe a game that has multi player features or whatnot.

Regardless, you find that indeed games can be quite successful without invasive DRM. It isn't needed, and it seems many people who pirate will pirate anyhow and not pay for it, others will pay for it despite being able to pirate it. Make no mistake, I can get pirated games if I want I know where and how. I just don't because buying them is more convenient, not to mention the right thing to do.

There is no piracy on the PS3

[judeancodersfront]

and many MMOs don't have piracy either.

So your claim about piracy being constant is false. Your excuses for pirates are rather sad as well. You didn't mention another group which is people who pirate because they just don't want to pay.

Re:There is no piracy on the PS3

[Techman83]

and many MMOs don't have piracy either.

There are off-line servers for the likes of WoW, you can play without paying a dime, there are others too. Some MMOs even have a single player mode built in (hellgate: london)

You didn't mention another group which is people who pirate because they just don't want to pay.

Group 1#

Re:There is no piracy on the PS3

[Anonymous Coward]

What was Sony reacting to when it removed the "Other OS" feature from the PS3?

Re:There is no piracy on the PS3

[billcopc]

Your trolling is very sub-par.

There is no piracy on the PS3, because the protection hasn't been broken yet. When someone finally cracks it, and I assure you there are quite a few groups working on it quite diligently, PS3 games will be pirated just the same as everything else. Sometimes it's a modchip, other times a firmware flash, but there's always a way to break the protection. It's all just bits on a disc, which become bits on a wire, and ultimately bits buzzing through a chip. There aren't a million ways to dress zeroes and ones.

MMOs have piracy too, but since the meaty bits are server-side, it involves a realm/shard emulator instead of a mindless bit-copy. Sure, it's complicated, but if you have access to the game, you have the ability to sniff the traffic to and from the server. It's not always easy, but then neither is making a modchip or patching encrypted firmware. It's a mental exercise, and there are quite a few people who enjoy the challenge and/or profit from the activity. World of Warcraft private servers are usually free to play, but they might sell in-game items for real-world cash, or charge fees for special tournaments (with prizes).

AC2 isn't fully cracked

[judeancodersfront]

someone here already posted a link from a piracy forum talking about it. It's a degraded experience.

Re:AC2 isn't fully cracked

[TheRaven64]

That's just for mundanes like you. Khyber, you see, is 'leet, sorry, 1337, and is in the scene (or possible sc3n3) and gets leet warez like the real crack that only leet people get, which really does work. He is so leet, he beat the game before it was even released. Actually, he beat it before it was even written, because he's that deep in the scene. He's definitely not making stuff up, because no one leet would ever do that.

Re:AC2 isn't fully cracked

[Anonymous Coward]

+1 Insightful or +1 Funny, I don't know which one to choose.

Pirates cannot get around anything

[judeancodersfront]

that's a fatalistic attitude that ignores successful cases.

A game with strong server side processing can eliminate piracy if done properly. All you have to do is have the client be dependent on dynamic data that only the server can create.

Re:Pirates cannot get around anything

[Sycraft-fu]

Ok, good luck with that. I'm sure since it is such a trivial thing to do you'll be right on developing the system and licensing it to game companies. Heck, I'm sure game companies already do it! What's that? They don't? There you go then.

People are still giving them money?

[rebelwarlock]

I don't get it. Don't people read the news? Surely you can't use the internet anymore without hearing about how badly Ubisoft fails.

Another sale lost, Ubisoft

[kupekhaize]

I was playing a game on Steam last night and got a Steam ad for this game. I don't have them turned off because once in a while they show good games, sometimes for $4.95, others full price at $49.95+ or whatever, but I have no problems paying for good games. Started looking through the screenshots and got more interested; I've never played any of the Settlers series before but 7 looked pretty good. Then I saw the publisher was Ubisoft... instinctively I started scanning for what kind of DRM was being included. Couldn't find anything, surprisingly enough. Nothing in the right hand columns about SecuROM or the others. But, it didn't seem right to me, so I googled it. Low and behold, "Permanent internet connection required." I went back and rescanned the Steam listing again, and sure enough it was listed. Wasn't in any small print or anything, it was just the middle section below the description; someplace I wasn't expecting it before.

As soon as I found that out, the game instantly became unplayable to me. Yes, I have an internet connection 99% of the time. No, I don't want to be kept from playing a game that I ****ing PAID FOR when my internet, or your DRM servers are down. End of story. Not the first time I've been kept from purchasing games; and it won't be the last.

I have a special message for you, Ubisoft, and anyone else willing to implement these DRM schemes. I hope you son of a *****es either get a clue or go out of business before you kill the rest of PC gaming. You're the ones keeping me from purchasing games right now, not the availability of some virus infested warez version. I'm your paying customer, the one who keeps you in business, and you're losing me. I'm not against DRM in general, I pay for lots of games via Steam and there's DRM in there. But having offline playability for up to two weeks at a time says one hell of a lot about a company who actually gives a **** about their customers. Especially ones that add features (unlimited download and install on any # of computers) vs 3 activations, ever. Please get a clue.

Re:Another sale lost, Ubisoft

[pandrijeczko]

Whilst I agree entirely with your sentiments, I think you're missing the point - and I'm an avid anti-DRM PC gamer myself.

Ubisoft and other major games companies do not want to make PC games any more because as long as they allow their games to be played on an open platform like the PC, then there are tools and utilities that can be run to crack those games, install no CD cracks etc.

However, the PC gamer base is still a very large one that they don't want to lose - therefore their theory is to make life as difficult as possible for PC gamers so that they eventually give up and buy a console instead to play their games on.

So what Ubisoft is doing is very deliberate...

I really do enjoy watching this mess unfold...

[Anonymous Coward]

I enjoy playing games. Matter of fact, I just finished the Penumbra games today.

I make it a point to not buy games that have bull-shit scams like product activation in them though. These people are so busy inconveniencing their customers, I hope they drive themselves out of business. That would really make me happy!

Ubisoft: I will never buy another game from you again after Splinter Cell CT, and hopefully the rest of the world will wake up soon and stop supporting you as well. Even if you somehow produce an incredible game that I must play, I'll buy it used, just to avoid giving you a dime..

cnc4 too

[phtpht]

Everyone focuses on Ubisoft but it should be noted that EA's latest Command & Conquer 4 has the same kind of DRM.

Re:cnc4 too

[Demonix]

Yeah, but thats command and conquer...its been stuck in its own death spiral for years now, and they are basically just copying everyone elses' game mechanics.

Re:cnc4 too

[phtpht]

How does that relate to DRM? Even if it was pacman and even if *you* didn't like it the point is that there's now another company -- EA -- that adopted this DRM. They even sell it as one of the advantages of the game: "your experience points are constantly uploaded to our servers and travel with your profile where-ever you play the game". It's no longer about Ubisoft, the other companies want it and they want it bad. No matter how many people whine about it, somehow they think this is necessary.

For UBI idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

Forcing DRM on a single player game is like forcing bicyclists to stop to a gas station.

     

AC2 hasn't been fully cracked

[judeancodersfront]

so there is nothing to repeat.

Many MMOs already work that way

[judeancodersfront]

they make pirating the client pointless and keep the server code secret.

Tell them how you feel

[Anonymous Coward]

I couldn't find a customer contact on their website, but the HQ PR contact is listed as Mary-Beth Henson. I emailed her the message below.

mary-beth.henson@ubisoft.com

Dear Mary-Beth

Unfortunately I was unable to find an actual customer support email address at the Ubisoft websites. While I am a journalist, this email is in my private capacity. I'd be obliged if you could direct it to the person most suited to reading it. I'm sure you've been receiving plenty of these anyway :)

I wanted to express my disappointment that Ubisoft's stance on DRM has deprived me and many of my friends of some great games. It's also deprived Ubisoft of a small amount of revenue, but that is not my problem.

I don't think I'm unique. I play games on a laptop which is sometimes online and sometimes not. I live in a country with internet connections which are relatively slow and unreliable. Because of this, the absurd idea of a single-player game which requires a permanent internet connection to function is simply incompatible with my environment. But that would be irrelevant anyway - the continuous reports of server failure on the Ubisoft DRM systems would be a dealbreaker even if I had access to the fastest and most reliable connections in the world.

What's particularly silly is that I have a fortune invested in games via the Steam platform. I've bought hundreds of dollars worth of games through that platform. It applies a particularly effective form of authentication which means that piracy is controlled, but offline play is perfectly well accomodated. It's silly because I could buy Assassin's Creed II through Steam. I could buy Settlers 7 through Steam. But those games don't trust the Steam authentication, they would apply the additional, broken, level of DRM.

When the company backs down from this ridiculous position, as it almost certainly will, I will be ready with my wallet. I want to play those games. I want to give Ubisoft my money. But I will not purchase a product I know to be broken. I fervently hope that there are enough users like me for the pressure to result in change sooner rather than later. That hope is purely selfish: I want those games. I should stress that fixing the broken DRM servers is not an acceptable solution to me. Remove the DRM, commit to rebuilding the relationship and trust with the gaming community, and I'll be first in line buying games.

I absolutely respect the company's need to protect itself from piracy. But there are better ways than this hamfisted approach, which has resulted, we all know, in large numbers of lost sales, a dreadful loss of face and trust, and a PR disaster of the first order.

Sincerely, ...

planet australia

[Anonymous Coward]

...for users worldwide, and Australian gamers...

I know that people worldwide are playing (online) games.
But where is that planet called Australia? Do they even have access to our earthly internet?