Ubisoft Brings Back Always-Connected DRM For Driver: San Francisco

Last year Ubisoft introduced DRM for their PC games that required a constant internet connection, going so far as to terminate single-player games if the connection was interrupted. After facing outrage, boycotts, and DDoS attacks, Ubisoft seemed to have softened their stance, issuing a patch for two games that allowed offline play. Unfortunately, it seems the change wasn't permanent; Ubisoft's upcoming racing game Driver: San Francisco marks the return of the contentious DRM.

Comments

That's ok

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll re-institute my boycott of Ubisoft, and nothing of value was lost.

Re:That's ok

[Lord Crc]

Indeed, I was going to get this on Steam, but that's just completely unacceptable. No sale.

Re:That's ok

[Mashiki]

Obviously since you refuse to buy it, you're just a filthy pirate.

Arrr. At least according to Ubisoft.

Re:That's ok

[derGoldstein]

They just don't learn. Who at Ubisoft was so stupid that they forgot the reaction last time they did this? And wouldn't that idiot's decision have to go through some other people? This is irresponsible from both a PR and a revenue point of view.

Re:That's ok

[mcgrew]

Agreed, it's not just Ubisoft, and it's not just for DRM, and it's not even just games. My GF got pissed at Comcast because when she decided she didn't need both a landline and a cell (she's on SS and rather poor), the cable price didn't go down so she just dropped Comcast.

Her daughter gave her a camera for Xmas last year and it was full, she wanted me to help her put the pictures in the PC. As soon as I turned it on, Norton complained that it needed to download updates. These days why do you even need AV without a net connection? The AV insisted on a net connection.

I plugged the camera in and Kodak demanded an internet connection to download its software. It didn't even need the damned software! after killing some processes, Windows happily downloaded the pictures from the camera.

People need to understand that a computer isn't a phone and has a lot of uses besides just surfing the web. We used computers without a net connection for decades. There is no reason whatever, from a customer point of view, for all these damned companies to demand an internet connection for a device or program like an AV or a camera or a single player game.

I pulled out my phone and emailed complaints to the damned companies, not that it will do any good.

If a single player game won't work without the internet, PLEASE don't buy it!

Re:That's ok

[myurr]

But the severity of the reaction will diminish each time they pull this stunt. By the 5th or 6th iteration it's likely to be such a subdued reaction that they'll get away with it completely. It seems to be human nature that each time we are outraged by something, the impact each time it happens slowly diminishes until we accept it as part of life.

Re:That's ok

[Dunbal]

I never stopped boycotting them...

Re:That's ok

[marcello_dl]

If you think about it, it is difficult to believe any manager with enough power to make this kind of choices is a somewhat retarded guy which can't see even immediate consequences for his decisions.

IMHO the objective is to make people accept the always connected slav... er.. lifestyle. A company gets damages because of that policy? well, what's a company? a name on some assets owned by the same banks that own the competitors' ones. Under control of the same class of PHBs which went to the same schools, got the same degrees, and switch from one name to another.

Re:That's ok

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

They just don't learn. Who at Ubisoft was so stupid that they forgot the reaction last time they did this? And wouldn't that idiot's decision have to go through some other people? This is irresponsible from both a PR and a revenue point of view.

They're a business, first and foremost. You can bet that if they didn't find it profitable to do the first two times, they're not going to do it a third time.

Here's an alternative scenario though it is bound to be an unpopular one: What if, the last time they did it, it was not the end of the world. What if they actually saw massive reduction in piracy, and a minor uptick in sales over what they expected? Sure, they patched it later - but if all they wanted to do was prevent the initial wave of piracy, the subsequent patch could have been indicative of success rather than failure. They gain some good PR for disabling it, while also receiving benefits from having included it in the first place.

Another unpopular but realistic way to look at it: they've already lost the customers they're going to lose out of this. They've seen the damage and deemed it acceptable in exchange for the benefits they receive by including the DRM.

Re:That's ok

[c0mpliant]

I couldn't help but laugh when I saw "why do you even need AV without a net connection... so anyway, I continued to connect the camera with its rewritable disk space to my machine that still has autorun enabled..."
*facepalm*

Re:That's ok

[Joce640k]

I'll re-institute my boycott of Ubisoft, and nothing of value was lost.

I'm guessing their bean-counters did the math and they don't need you.

Nothing of value was lost to them either...

Re:That's ok

[tepples]

the camera that has always been in their possessions and only ever used as a camera

Niche. I imagine that a lot of people carry a smartphone and use it as their primary camera.

Re:That's ok

[MichaelSmith]

Linux is great for moving files around...

Re:That's ok

[g4b]

viruses do not only transport personal data out of your pc.

sometimes viruses do different things. like particullary delete the personal data right where they are.

actually, viruses were around before the internet, even if it sounds pretty unbelievable.

oh back in the days, something that transported out data was called a trojan.

Re:That's ok

[Abstrackt]

Indeed, I was going to get this on Steam, but that's just completely unacceptable. No sale.

You complain about Ubisoft but would happily accept pretty much the same restrictions from Valve. That's supposed to be irony, right?

I'd say it's a legitimate decision. The defining difference between Ubisoft's DRM and Valve's is that Steam doesn't screw up your single player game if your connection drops out. For many people, Steam makes a pretty good case.

Re:That's ok

[WCMI92]

I've not bought a Ubisoft game since they introduced this DRM, despite the fact that they've released some that I wanted to get.

I think it's time for a new kind of boycott: Not only not buy games from companies that do this, but go out of my way to get the DRM free pirated version.

Re:That's ok

[Abstrackt]

It seems to be human nature that each time we are outraged by something, the impact each time it happens slowly diminishes until we accept it as part of life.

That seems to be true. At first I was outraged that I wouldn't be playing any Ubisoft games anymore but now I'm actually okay with it!

Re:That's ok

[DrgnDancer]

Most people, myself included, think Steam is a reasonable compromise. There's DRM, but it's pretty consumer friendly. Once the game is activated the first time it works fine without an Internet connection (or if Steam drops off the face of the Earth tomorrow). Since typically you're activating the game right after you just downloaded and installed it, chances of you not having a 'Net connection aren't high. It's not perfect, the chance exists that some time in the future you might want to reinstall a Steam game you purchased years ago and Steam might have gone out of business... By that time I've usually lost at least one of the media disks anyway, so the risk from my point of view is pretty small.

Re:That's ok

[mcgrew]

Yes, it used to be that the common virus vector was the floppy. A trojan can also be a virus but not necessarily. A trojan needs a person that isn't careful, a virus only needs a buggy program.

But there are so few viruses transmitted by removable media these days that a Windows machine not connected to the internet is almost as safe as a Mac.

And yes, viruses do all sorts of nasty things. But no program should assume that a computer is connected to the internet unless internet is needed. Browsers, email clients, multiplayer games, download tools, etc. But a camera or a spreadsheet or a single player game should NOT require internet.

Re:That's ok

[DrgnDancer]

Unless you don't always have an Internet connection. I mean really, this is a much more ridiculous requirement than Steam (which just uses the Internet to download and activate your game). If I have a laptop, obviously I have an Internet connection at home to download, install and activate the game... Will I have one at the hotel? Sometimes, not always, and often not free. The Airport while I'm waiting for a flight? Sometimes, but again not always, and often not free. The airplane? Sometimes, but never free. These are all places I can think of that I might want to play my new game. There are all kinds of situations where you wouldn't have an Internet connection on a laptop for some length of time, and even at home sometimes your ISP just has a bad day.

Re:That's ok

[GameboyRMH]

Worst of all is that recent cameras seem to be going back to the late '90s method of using a proprietary transfer method that requires a special application. What's wrong with USB Mass Storage mode? None of the recent consumer cams have it.

Re:That's ok

[PopeRatzo]

Who at Ubisoft was so stupid that they forgot the reaction last time they did this?

My reaction was putting Ubisoft on my permanent pay-no-mind list.

I stopped buying Ubisoft games, and will never buy another one, no matter what they do, just because they tried this kind of intrusive DRM. Ubisoft is dead to me.

Plus, the scene releases of Assassin's Creed 2 played flawlessly without being connected to the Internet, from what I hear, so Ubisoft is just wasting their time and losing customers for no reason whatsoever.

Now I'm more determined than ever not to ever give another nickel to Ubisoft.

Re:That's ok

[rtb61]

Yes, the dual boot solution solves many problems. I really can't understand why people set up a Linux dual boot even if they only use it solve various "do as I say not as they say" problems.

Re:That's ok

[petermgreen]

I remember when steam first came along and that despite the negative reaction valve largely got away with it (presumablly beause peoples desire to play the games was greater than their being pissed off at what they had to accept to play them) and most of the other vendors followed with their own online activation schemes (some of which were more draconian than steam some liess).

I strongly HOPE the same doesn't happen with always online play but I wouldn't be surprised if it did. Already we see starcraft 2 where you are strongly encouraged to be always online (from what I hear you can play offline but only using a guest account whose progress is independent of your main account).

Re:That's ok

[Riceballsan]

Comparing steam's DRM with Ubisoft's is about as accurate as this comparison: "You complain about the backscatter rays and having yourself and your child to be groped randomly from TSA, but you were OK with the metal detectors, that's supposed to be irony right?"

In general steams DRM does little to actually harm you from playing the game, you can play it from multiple different PCs, on a laptop riding a bus etc... It even gives you some benefits over other methods (the ability to download the game on a PC you weren't expecting to be on).

while ubisofts drm not only adds nothing, and prevents you from playing anywhere you don't have a connection, it will also exit your game over a lag spike or server problems on Ubisoft's end etc....

Re:That's ok

[shadowfaxcrx]

The antivirus company does not know that you will never hook your computer up to the net, and that you will only plug in to the computer cameras which you have independently virus scanned (you did know that viruses have been payloads on factory-bought storage media before right?) on some other computer.

The antivirus maker figures you'll be on the net. Or at minimum will be sticking thumb drives and non-scanned DVD's (they've been virus vectors in the past too) and cameras in your computer, and therefore will expose yourself to a potential virus.

Even in the pre-net days the virus scanner would prompt you to call a BBS and download the latest definitions. There's nothing wrong with them encouraging you to go get them now.

Re:That's ok

[mcgrew]

Linux is better than windows for most things. The two things Windows is best for is high-end games and getting infected, it beats any other OS for those uses. If I was still into gaming I'd have a dual boot machine, but since I rarely play PC games any more I don't even have a Windows computer.

Re:That's ok

[mcgrew]

It's not mine, it's hers, and I've given up trying to get her to keep her kids from doing stupid shit on her computer (her last computer got so bad I had to wipe the drive and install Linux). In this case autorun wasn't enabled, the Windows dialog that says "what do you want to do" came up. The comment was too long as it was, I left steps out for brevity (or at least least less lengthy).

Re:That's ok

[EMCEngineer]

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that businesses always do what is in their best interest. Sure, most companies try their best to maximize profit, but they also make critical blunders over and over again. My company, for example, spent a ton of money on rent to own equipment, because the bean counters didn't want to approve a bigger, cheaper purchase.

Maybe having this DRM last time helped them, but I sincerely doubt it. I would suspect that the same managers that pushed it last time are pushing it this time. They just for some reason think it will work better on the second time around.

Re:That's ok

[mcgrew]

My phone's not very smart (it would have been a smartphone a few years ago since it has a qwerty keyboard), but it's my primary camera. It takes better pictures than a $1000 digital camera did fifteen years ago, and a lot better pictures than the old cheap analog cameras.

It would be nice if Windows knew what was being plugged into its USB port. Linux seems to know. As soon as I plug the little bluetooth dongle in, kbluetooth runs. As soon as I plug a thumb drive in, the file manager recognizes it. The OS should know the difference between a camera and a phone, even if the phone is also a camera.

I transmit the pictures from my phone to the computer with bluetooth rather than a cable. Since I don't use Windows and keep my data backed up, I don't need AV. But I can see how the phone could easily carry a trojan, especially in Windows with its (IMO dumb) method of file permissions.

Re:That's ok

[JuicyBrain]

How does this hurt them more ? The way I see it, it hurts them even less.If nobody buys the game AND nobody pirates it, this is a statement. It's a message that says :"Your DRM sucks and we won't give you our money until you remove it". Otherwise, if too many people pirates the game, it only justifies their use of DRM and may even be used as arguments by lobbyists to have new harsher laws against piracy or ask for government money.

Re:That's ok

[Samantha Wright]

Let it be so. Let "piracy" drive them into the ground. Let the Libertarians be right on this one, regardless of whether we agree with them or not.

Look, I'm "pirating" their software right now!

Re:That's ok

[PJ6]

But the severity of the reaction will diminish each time they pull this stunt. By the 5th or 6th iteration it's likely to be such a subdued reaction that they'll get away with it completely. It seems to be human nature that each time we are outraged by something, the impact each time it happens slowly diminishes until we accept it as part of life.

This is another reason on top of consilitis why I just stopped buying PC games. I used to buy them all the time.

What steams me is that now developers complain that the PC game market is "weak" and "fractured" when they don't even understand it's their own damn fault.

Re:That's ok

[ArcCoyote]

"My GF got pissed at Comcast because when she decided she didn't need both a landline and a cell (she's on SS and rather poor), the cable price didn't go down so she just dropped Comcast"

Umm...what?

Sounds like she had the triple-play where you get TV, net, and phone for a package price... Something like $50 or $99 a month for the first year.

There are no discounts from a package price. It's a good deal even if you don't use all of it, because it is still cheaper than any two of the three services at the regular price.

If you're paying the regular monthly price for Comcast, the price does indeed go down when you drop services.

Re:That's ok

[mcgrew]

What was especially stupid with her Kodak is that it does use the USB mass storage mode* but still wanted to download its own proprietary program. I'd guess that's why many are moving back to the pre-USB methods.

I can't figure out why companies want to make things harder for their customers. Are they stupid or what?

* It must, since Windows was able to easily transfer the files.

Re:That's ok

[chromeronin]

And I believe their last DRM was broken even before the game hit the shelves, and the DRM did not stop the pirating at all, it just really annoyed their legitimate users, who in some cases turned to the pirate copies so they could just play the damn game they just bought and paid for.

Re:That's ok

[sgt scrub]

Unfortunately, I think your right. They probably also believe this game will be popular enough to pull some people over the fence. The "uninformed parents buying their kids a game" source of revenue is going to stave off boycotts to a certain degree. Tempting enough informed people to bite the bullet is all they need to get over the hump. Unfortunately for UbiStupid, Driver isn't that good of a game.

Re:That's ok

[SquirrelDeth]

Windose issue not a net or flash drive issue.

Re:That's ok

[mpe]

Worst of all is that recent cameras seem to be going back to the late '90s method of using a proprietary transfer method that requires a special application. What's wrong with USB Mass Storage mode? None of the recent consumer cams have it.

How many of these cameras store their pictures some kind of removable SD card...

Re:That's ok

[tripleevenfall]

"studies have shown"

link?

Re:That's ok

[ginbot462]

Hell, I didn't even know they still made Driver games... It would feel like raiding a Sampan with a Dreadnought.

Re:That's ok

[WyzrdX]

I'll re-institute my boycott of Ubisoft, and nothing of value was lost.

And I will join in. When AC2 was released I planned on purchasing it until I found out it had the 'ALWAYS CONNECTED' DRM. I still played the game I just found another way to play with out having the DRM and Ubisoft didn't get my money. I was a big fan of the original Driver title and was looking forward to this. I guess I will stop buying Ubisoft until they stop the always connected crap. If I want to play a game that is always connected, I will play World of Warcraft.

Re:That's ok

[RoverDaddy]

You could make 50 accounts *ducks*

Re:That's ok

[Zibblsnrt]

Unfortunately? I dunno, I sort of like the idea of companies taking that approach to problems knocking themselves out of business. Maybe if it happens often enough we won't have to worry about this kind of thing as much.

Re:That's ok

[Tom]

We used computers without a net connection for decades.

We still do, all the time. Or have you never used your notebook on a train, plane or some other place without Internet?

Re:That's ok

[Tom]

Actually, that is not always true.

What is true, however, is that in politics and PR, there is a very common trick: Announce some plan so out there that protest is guaranteed. Wait for the protest and check how widespread and loud it is. Then adjust the real thing that you had planned all along to be just under your estimated protest threshold and release it as the "compromise solution".

In most cases, you will get more than if you had gone for the real thing right away, and with less protest, as people think you have "given in".

Re:That's ok

[hairyfeet]

Yeah I have to wonder how many sales they are gonna lose with this BS. I was REALLY looking forward to this game, simply because it had so many of the classic muscle cars of my childhood including my old Pontiac Le Mans. I would have been happy to pick this up on Steam, but always on DRM? Screw that. The hilarious part is 3 weeks after it comes out I'm sure there will be the Reloaded version on TPB with NO DRM, just as they figured a way around ass creed.

Ya just got to love how these megacorps don't ever seem to get it. The nasty DRM only hurts the customer and runs off potential sales, it NEVER hurts the pirates who are frankly ass deep in games as it is and have no problem waiting the whole 3 weeks for the Reloaded version. Stupid move Ubisoft but frankly with you we expect no less. But unlike many who will say "I would have bought it" ever since the trailer came out with the Le Mans I'd been waiting by Steam with my CC ready to go. Man I miss my Le Mans, sure it was a gas sucking piggy but dammit! It was FUN to drive. i miss that. With a Positrac and Quadrajet she was a sweet car to drive.

Re:That's ok

[mcgrew]

Yeah, she had the "triple play". Now she has an antenna and a cell phone. She'll be getting AT&T internet, that's only $20 a month. Comcast cheated themselves out of a customer.

Re:That's ok

[mekkab]

The triple play expires (unless you know some work-around? If so, spill it!) I just wanted some kind of internet service but entertained the idea of the triple play, and though comcast advertised speeds were lower than dsl the first year of triple play pricing seemed like you got a really great deal at ~$70 a month... until it shot up to $170 a month (I think HBO was involved for a year?)

Re:That's ok

[mcgrew]

"Piracy" is always an excuse for other crap. For instance, the RIAA is against P2P even though studies all show music pirates spend more on music than non-pirates. They're against P2P because that's how their competetion, the indies, get the word out about their music, and indie sales actually do cost RIAA sales; twenty bucks on inde music is tewnty bucks you don't have for RIAA music.

The sad thing is, the "piracy is costing sales" meme, even though a lie, is so entrenched that people believe it. In fact, one book publisher commissioned a study to find out how much book piracy was hurting sales, and was astounded to learn that there was a second sales spike when the books hit the Pirate Bay.

Most of today's corporations are run by lying, thieving sociopaths.

Re:That's ok

[smooth wombat]

"I can't figure out why companies want to make things harder for their customers. Are they stupid or what?"

It's because the programmers think they need to program shiny into everything. It would be a waste of their "talent" to make something that is simple to use and just works.

Re:That's ok

[dasherjan]

I know this and nowhere in my post did I say otherwise.

Re:That's ok

[maxwell demon]

Well, in theory one could possibly craft a picture which uses a bug in the camera so that if it is photographed in the right way, it will create an executable to be executed when the camera gets connected.

In practice, of course, even if a camera turned out to have such a bug, the probability of the picture being taken exactly at the exact right distance with the exact right angle at the exactly correct light situation should be that low that winning the lottery six times in a row would seem like a sure bet in comparison. :-)

Re:That's ok

[maxwell demon]

There's a third category where Windows is the clear winner: Even the most obscure hardware device tends to have Windows drivers.

Re:That's ok

[grumbel]

the impact each time it happens slowly diminishes until we accept it as part of life.

That depends, the problems with always-on Internet DRM aren't just theoretical stuff that only some Free Software hippies will complain about, but very practical problems that a lot of gamer will encounter while playing the games. As while almost everybody has Internet, almost nobody has Internet that is solid enough to never ever have issues with disconnect.

The only way to fix those complains is to make the DRM solid enough to not only stop bothering the paying player, but to provide additional value to them. That is why Steam is so successful, in essence it is also online DRM, but the mildest kind of it, if your Internet is down, it will simply launch into Offline mode. So aside from the initial product activation, it doesn't need Internet. On top of that it handles all the patching automatically, provides a forum for every game for support, doesn't require a DVD in the drive, provides achievements and other stuff. In essence, this causes Steam games to work better and easier then regular DRM-free. That's why most people don't complain about it.

That's not to say that Steam is perfect, it still removes some basic freedoms you should have, you can't lend a Steam game to friend or family and you do have to have Internet to activate the game on install. But compared to all the benefits it provides, its an acceptable trade-off.

So unless the DRM actually gets good enough that people not only won't be bothered by it, but actually will welcome it, I doubt the complaining will stop anytime soon.

Re:That's ok

[hairyfeet]

Uhhh...dude? You DO realize that MicroSD cards, like say the one in that camera, coming with viruses is quite common nowadays, yes? And having Autorun enabled is seriously fucking dumb? And I gave one of those Kodaks to my now ex and I can tell you the reason why it asked for a net connection is it has a nice feature in the software where she could push a single button and it'll upload to FB, email family or friends, it really is a nice little feature.

Now if you know enough about tech to be hanging on a geek site like /. these instructions shouldn't be difficult so let your old pal hairyfeet show you what to do. first off you need to go to WSUS Offline and make her an offline updater. Really simple, just check the box by which OS she has and it'll download the updates from MSFT. Simply check the box by "copy updates for selected OS into" and choose where your flash stick is located and voila! An easy to carry windows update on a stick. Now for the AV I'd suggest either Comodo or Avast free, both have the ability to be updated by file and both have by default sandboxing so she shouldn't have to worry about an infected microSD or CD she gets from a friend. Simply disable the looking for updates in the options and when you come by to visit her bring the latest update on your flash. if she is offline once or twice a month should do it, no need for daily updates since she won't be dealing with zero days.

but don't think just because she isn't on the net she can't get pwned. i have senn cameras, those cheap digital frames, flash sticks, basically if it has memory and a way to launch an exe it can be infected. but follow the simple tips above and she'll have a nice safe up to date PC so if she does get the net back later on down the line (she might want to look at DSL, they don't advertise it but most have a very basic 756k hookup for sub $20 a month) she'll be ready to go and she'll be safe in the meantime.

Re:That's ok

[h4rr4r]

Desktop hardware. For really obscure stuff linux wins. Windows lacks drivers for wifi on most ARM SoCs for instance.

Re:That's ok

[Em Ellel]

The computer is a "communication" device. It is a fairly safe assumption that it is, or will be connected to the internet at some point, more often sooner rather than later (or never)..

Erm, computer is inherently a computing device, not a communication device, thats why they call it a "computer" and not "communicator".

Re:That's ok

[Flyerman]

http://oz.stern.nyu.edu/papers/drights.pdf

Re:That's ok

[Scarletdown]

You could make 50 accounts *ducks*

That is actually a good idea. In fact, making a separate account for each game restores the resale potential of said games. Get tired of a game? Disassociate any personal and CC info from that game's account and then hand over the login and password to your buyer. Then they change the password and associate their cc info with the account and call it good.

Re:That's ok

[X0563511]

Before you discount me as an astroturfer or MSTard, know that my preferences are Linux. These days Centos6 specifically - even on my netbook (yea, it kicks that much ass)

Windows can see this. Linux operates off the USB Vendor ID and Product ID. Incidentally this is the same exact bit of information Windows uses to check for (and load, or search for) drivers...

Indeed, and it does change what kinds of things it wants to do based on what type of device it is. For me (Win7) the only time it seems to want to search for the filetypes and suggest items (basically the replacement for autorun on removable media) is when it's a "mass storage" device. When I plug my scanner in, it shows as a scanner and gives me scanner-related options. I plug in my camera, and it gives me camera related options.

Perhaps you should upgrade if you're not yet running Windows 7? Really, a lot of things have changed for the better (far outweighs the changes for the worse, IMO).

Re:That's ok

[shutdown -p now]

Most cameras I've seen which don't use UMS, use MTP instead. It used to be proprietary, but is standardized now, and is normally supported fine: Windows has it out of the box; on Linux, Gnome supports it in the file manager, and many image viewers support it as well.

Re:That's ok

[lostthoughts54]

no but this will make me one. I am sure within a week there will be a pirated version i can play offline. When buying a game and installing it causes more headaches then downloading it off piratebay, we have a problem.

Re:That's ok

[mcgrew]

Yeah? Just last week the boss wanted a device connected to an ancient laptop that ran Windows 2000 (so old it had a 600 mz chip). I got it connected, but when I went to look for drivers I found that nobody supports any version of Windows before XP; I had the same problem looking for Win 98 drivers seven years ago, you couldn't get anything before Win 2000 then (I wound up buying XP). However, look at the first driver on the download list -- Linux. That driver will work on any Linux OS from the first one back in 1990 to the newest one out there.

One Linux driver, a different driver for every Windows OS supported, and half of the Microsoft OSes made since Linux began aren't supported. When I update my OS I won't have to update the drivers, AND all my software will still run; when I went from 98 to XP half my software wouldn't.

YMMV, but I haven't had driver issues in Linux for years; maybe it's because I'm not buying bleeding edge or obscure hardware.

Re:That's ok

[Darinbob]

Sales are dismal! Quick, blame it on piracy!

Re:That's ok

[wbo]

While many cameras default to using protocols like MTP or UMS, every camera I have seen over the past several years has had an option in their settings menus to enable USB Mass Storage mode. Turning that option on makes the camera act like any other USB storage device and allows pictures to be copied easily. Although honestly if the camera supports MTP I always use that instead since it is safer and is fully supported on Windows XP and later and on Mac OS X. Either way the camera manufacturer's software is not required.

Re:That's ok

[mcgrew]

Well, it's not my computer, and if it was I wouldn't upgrade a Windows OS; I made that mistake when I upgraded from W98 to XP and half of my programs no longer worked.

Win 7 did come on the Acer netbook (subnotebook or whatever you want to call it) and it was in fact a whole lot better than XP, I have to give MS credit there, but I got a little bluetooth dongle that warned me not to plug it in until I installed its software. I was afraid it wasn't going to work with the Linux box, since it had files on its mini-CD for Mac and Windows but not Linux, but when I plugged it into the Linux box it just worked. I didn't have to install anything.

AFAIK it may well have worked in Windows without the software, but I didn't try it.

Re:That's ok

[GameboyRMH]

That's the thing, the latest ones don't have the option to change to USB mass storage mode. Cameras 2 or 3 years old usually have it but default to a different protocol or a proprietary mode, but the latest ones don't have it at all.

Re:That's ok

[mcgrew]

You DO realize that MicroSD cards, like say the one in that camera, coming with viruses is quite common nowadays, yes?

No, thanks for cluing me in. How do the cards get infected in the first place?

And having Autorun enabled is seriously fucking dumb?

Indeed I do. It isn't my computer.

it has a nice feature in the software where she could push a single button and it'll upload to FB, email family or friends, it really is a nice little feature.

That may well be, but rather than automatically trying to get on the internet it should have a dialog explaining the software and asking if I wanted it. Just changing settings and installing software on someone's PC is past rude.

As to the automatic email and automatic FB, that's just plain dumb unless every picture you shoot is one you wouldn't mind your boss seeing. Uploading pictures to FB or attaching them to an email is brain-dead simple, even my 83 year old mom can do that.

first off you need to go to WSUS Offline and make her an offline updater.

It wasn't necessary, once I got past Kodak's rudeness the pictures transferred to the computer easily.

Now for the AV I'd suggest either Comodo or Avast free, both have the ability to be updated by file and both have by default sandboxing so she shouldn't have to worry about an infected microSD or CD she gets from a friend.

I've suggested Avast, but I get a blank stare. For some reason everybody trusts Norton, I have no idea why because it's a shitty program.

She probably will get on AT&T's $20 plan sooner or later.

Re:That's ok

[dasherjan]

After re-reading I see that I completely missed the points being presented. I thought we were discussing botnets only for some odd reason. Yes USB devices are a definite risk.

Re:That's ok

[caitsith01]

Indeed, I was going to get this on Steam, but that's just completely unacceptable. No sale.

Irony overload. You ordered it via one intrusive DRM system which requires an Internet connection but you're boycotting it because it has a different intrusive DRM system which required an internet connection...

Re:That's ok

[hairyfeet]

They actually get infected at the factory. They have pirated Windows for the most part in China, some floor PC that does the controls for the SD duplicator is a "XP Pro Corp SP2 Reloaded" PC and they surf on it at lunch or bring in a CD from home that has a bug (Or get paid by a malware bunch to put a bug on there) and voila! Instant virus duplicator. There was a bug that went around my area recently and I traced it back to a cheapo "digital picture frame keyring" that many of the discount stores were selling at the check outs for $10. It was a security tool variant and a royal PITA. Those people found out the hard way that having autorun was stupid and those $10 keyrings cost them $60 for me to clean them.

Now as for WSUS it isn't about being able to plug in the camera, it is about plugging the giant security holes your GF has on her PC right now. Many of these malware variants used reverse engineered Windows exploits to bury themselves deep down into the OS so you really don't want to have an unpatched machine period. And as I said most likely sooner or later she will probably get on one of the cheaper DSL or WISP providers and having an unpatched machine is a disaster waiting to happen.

An ounce of prevention is worth a ton of cure and WSUS Offline is free, it is simple, it is easy, and it is so brainless even your grandma can run it. Simply get a cheapo $5 4Gb flash stick and use it as a dedicated Windows update stick. When you come by to visit you simply launch it and check the box that says "reboot automatically" and hit the go button, that's it.

Finally here is an easy way to get the GF off the stink that is Norton. Simply print off the results of the latest Info World or PC World AV roundup, which will show her that in the top 5 you have no less than 3 free AVs, Adaware Free, Avast Free, and Comodo IS, and that Norton rarely even cracks the top 5 on results. You can also then point out that not only do Avast and Comodo (I'd use Comodo as Avast wants the Internet to register her free license and Comodo will give you a string that will let your register her PC offline if you simply contact them by email or phone) always land in the top 5 time after time but that the license is free for life. If she is on SS she will appreciate not shelling out $30 a year for Norton.

So listen to your old pal hairyfeet and your GF will not only have a safe PC, ready for anything the world can throw online or off, but your will look like a "Super PC Ninja" for being able to set it all up for her and will have saved her $$ and made her PC better to use as well. I can tell you as a guy with more than 20 years in the PC biz that both Comodo and Avast use less than 1/3rd the amount of CPU and RAM Norton does while giving her better security. getting her off the Norton crapfest will make it feel like a free PC upgrade!

Re:That's ok

[Lord_Jeremy]

FWIW my girlfriend plays Fallout, Portal, all sorts of single player games on my Steam account while I'm playing TF2 or something else on my own computer. She just keeps the Steam client on her computer logged into my account in offline mode and there are no issues. If Steam is set to offline it doesn't even bother checking if the account is logged in elsewhere. Every once and a while she goes online to check for updates but then she can go offline again. It would be cool if Steam had options more friendly to the "family account" concept, but I bet those will come eventually. When Steam was introduced, it wasn't targeted at the family market.

Re:That's ok

[FlyveHest]

One time validation and offline play != Always on, always validating

Just to set things straight

And "From Dust"

[Elbart]

"3rd-party DRM: Ubisoft Online Service" http://store.steampowered.com/app/33460/

Re:And "From Dust"

[Gwala]

Awwww man, I really really wanted to play that.

Re:And "From Dust"

[ultranova]

"3rd-party DRM: Ubisoft Online Service" http://store.steampowered.com/app/33460/

I guess the choice will be the Pirate Bay Edition, then.

Re:And "From Dust"

[Elbart]

In the fineprint:

High speed internet access and creation of a Ubisoft account are required to access this video game and online features and to play online.

Re:And "From Dust"

[Khyber]

That has to be a violation of the anti-tying clause of Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.

Re:And "From Dust"

[GameboyRMH]

The Pirate Bay edition is usually the best one. No DRM, easy setup, fast online delivery, online backup service. It's the next best thing to GoG.

Re:And "From Dust"

[barrtender]

This is one of the games that I was really looking forward to, but I'm not going to support "always connected" DRM. Thankfully I looked it up and it appears that the decision for this game has been reversed.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111941-From-Dust-Always-On-DRM-Rumors-Denied-UPDATED
*Check the update

Unfortunately the reversal only went part-way. Apparently the game will still phone-home on launch, though, which is basically as bad.
http://www.shacknews.com/article/69474/from-dust-pc-doesnt-use-always-online-drm

Yeah, I'm not buying it.

So? The game will just repeat itself.

[Opportunist]

They return to using the same harebrained DRM scheme, we return to boycotting it. Why does UBI think it will be different this time? That we somehow magically now accept that kind of crap? If anything, the people who got burned by their previous attempt at it will now be wary and also abstain.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[larppaxyz]

If DRM allows true PC version of games, then so be it. We are already seeing that PC is not very loved game platform. Most of the games released are ported from PS or XBox and games developed for PC from start could look much better. Mouse & keyboard also allow better controls, no reason to force controls to gamepad or similar device.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[Anonymous Coward]

DRM doesn't allow anything.
The PC is fine and has plenty of great games, the problem is casual players limit themselves to the big publisher games and won't explore real games that have depth and can only be created for the PC. Casual gamers want to pick up a pad, press buttons for an hour and then drop that pad. They don't want complex games where they are required to think and learn mechanics.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[Opportunist]

Sorry, but if the maker of a game I want to play requires me to be connected to his server all the time just to play it, I will not accept this deal. It pretty much means that this maker will dictate for how long and under what circumstances I may play the game. He can change the rules later and impose even more drastic control over it and I could not do anything about it. He could turn off the server and I doubt I'd get my money back if he does. Essentially, I pay for the game, but the control over how, when and if I play it remains in the hands of the entity who sold it to me.

The console "look and feel" due to more and more games being nothing but cheap ports after being developed for a console is a problem, agreed. But invasive DRM is not the answer. We won't get better games just 'cause DRM will keep the PC gaming platform alive. They will still do cheap ports without adjusting for the different controls and stack the DRM on top of it. But it has its advantages. When I saw R.U.S.E., I wanted it. Badly. I saw the DRM and I abstained. By now, I now that it's just a cheap console knockoff and hence I'm pretty glad I didn't waste my money on it. If more games had invasive DRM at release, I would have let a few more slip and wouldn't be angry at me now for buying a game that pretty much requires a console controller to be played sensibly on a PC.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[mcvos]

If DRM allows true PC version of games, then so be it.

But DRM doesn't allow true PC versions of games. If anything, it reduces the market for them. And there were plenty of PC games before DRM.

We are already seeing that PC is not very loved game platform.

Mostly because of the crippling DRM that so many games are saddled with. DRMless games are thriving.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[guises]

They think it'll be different because it will be different, eventually.
 
Remember the outrage when people found out that the Quake 3 demo was sending back information about players' computers? Now everyone does it. Remember when TurboTax introduced software activation? How about Half Life 2? People were livid. Now it's almost ubiquitous among games and growing among productivity software. How about removing dedicated servers? DLC? Lack of user made maps?

They just keep doing it and people get a little less outraged every time. It's easier when you have a blockbuster like Half Life pushing it, some people just can't resist the shiny, but it'll happen eventually regardless.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[malkavian]

No, they don't.. Word about DRM slowly seems to be seeping out, and people are getting more riled about it across the board.
It's more like "They think the anti-DRM rally will get smaller each time, but in reality, it could more easily get louder and stronger".

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[MeNeXT]

"IF" this crippled game does not sell then PC gaming is dead....

If, I like that word.

If my aunt had balls she would be my uncle. There fixed that for you.... It won't happen!

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[Opportunist]

Actually, quite the opposite.

Take a friend of mine. An average Joe Gamer. No computer background whatsoever. One of the "I wanna play the game and not tinker with it or figure 10 things out before I get to play" people. He didn't know about DRM. Until one of the games he bought experienced "crashes" for no reason. Well, no reason other than the connection to the controlling server failed. Now I get a call every time he wants a new game and the first question is "will it work or will it be the same shit?".

In other words, the rally gets bigger, not smaller. More people are concerned with it because until the advent of this kind of DRM, it mostly worked. Ok, you had to insert a CD or something, but that was a minor inconvenience as long as the game itself ran. Now that point is broken and people start to notice and they start to notice that they do not want that. They want to play. And while they'd accept inserting a CD or having it tied to some account (like Steam), they get a bit miffed if the game doesn't work.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[Opportunist]

It ain't that hard. If you buy your games online, every seller has a rating page and the anti-DRM crowd is pretty vocal about voting games into oblivion.

And burned children shy away from the oven. More and more people check out those reviews before buying after their first "experience".

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[Opportunist]

These are all examples where the game originally worked. Which wasn't the case with UBI's "have to connect to play" scheme which failed miserably when it was first introduced, with people unable to play for days.

And while gamers accept things like privacy invasion and having to do without user maps and DLC, and while they may accept that servers will be turned off eventually, especially if they're not interested in playing a game longer than for maybe a year, what they DO care about is whether the game works when they buy it or not.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[houghi]

They will have looked at it from a financial point of view. Probably a wrong one, but still.
How many people did not buy the game? X
How many people did not pirate? Y

For them as long as Y is smaller then X they might think it is a win for them.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[petermgreen]

Steam had problems in it's early days too see for example http://games.slashdot.org/story/04/11/17/1758231/Steam-Registration-Servers-Overloaded and there were many complaints about large slow updates (which IIRC were forced in the early days).

Gradually things got sorted out, internet connections got faster, valve got more capacity online and the early problems were forgotten. Nowadays most new games requires online activation of some form and you see many people here singing steams praises.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[brainzach]

Previous DRM was consumer friendly but was largely ineffective at preventing piracy, which is why companies have resulted in taking more extreme DRM measures.

As Internet connections are becoming faster and more reliable and Ubisoft works out the bugs, less PC users will notice less and less of the DRM. The average Joe Gamer is probably just going to get the console version anyways so the effects on that demographic could be overstated.

There are obvious risks of negative PR and pissing off legitimate customers but Ubisoft is betting that the decrease in piracy would result in higher sales which could offset the effects. Only time will tell if they made the correct decision or not.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[alexo]

They return to using the same harebrained DRM scheme, we return to boycotting it. Why does UBI think it will be different this time? That we somehow magically now accept that kind of crap?

Who exactly is this mythical "we"?
What percentage of their customers do you think will care enough to boycott?

Face it, boycotts only work against small local companies.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[Opportunist]

But it doesn't result in less copying. The "sweet spot" was already reached with "CD-in-drive" copy protection.

There are pretty much two kinds of people who would not buy a game: Those that have a friend who has it, and those that download it from some warez page. And the former group was already easily thwarted by CD-in-drive protection. You couldn't simply copy your friend's game, you had to go out and buy it. Unless you belong to the 0.something percent people who could actually circumvent the protection.

For the latter group, neither the CD-in-drive nor the stay-connected variant of the copy protection does jack. Why? Because they get their game bundled with a crack that "fixes" this problem. And please don't try to tell me that this stay-connected variant would be harder to crack. Yes, the first took a while but then it was just plain business as usual standard cracking routine. Roughly within the usual day it takes.

There is no decrease in copying. If anything, all they can really accomplish that way is that they can somehow affect the second hand market. And that's far easier and far more user friendly to accomplish by using services like Steam.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[Opportunist]

So do I. But not because it's so convenient to have my game registered online automatically, but because I have a game library tied to my name rather than having to worry whether I keep the DVDs and manuals in perfect conditions so I can still play them and find the serial number to them. There's actually a benefit for me. More convenience.

Please care to show me how having to have a permanent connection to the internet just to play a single player game offers me any benefit AT ALL.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[Opportunist]

Me and my ego, of course.

It's also not so much an organized boycott, akin to "don't buy from $company because $company kills the $endangered_animal". Some "concerned" people (read: those with too much spare time) will join, far more will simply shrug and ignore it because they couldn't care less about the animal.

People do care about themselves, though. So while not organized at all, people will still go and check whether this game is about to hit them in the nuts like the last one they got. I frequent a few game review and shopping pages, and it's very noticeable that the questions about DRM and whether it's "like the crap in game X 'cause then they can (insert profanity including a description where the maker should put their game preferably)" are on the rise.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[Ihmhi]

Yes, they can turn off the server after a while.

For those of you who may be unfamiliar with basic online game architecture, most multiplayer games have something called a "master server" or "control server". Let's take Valve's game for instance - when you hit "Find Servers", the Master Server is rung up and presents a list of all servers that respond. Valve's system pretty much entails all of their games, so we're still able to play fantastic stuff like Team Fortress Classic over a decade after they've come out.

On the other end of the spectrum, we have TRIBES. Sierra apparently thought that a single server was way too expensive for their gaming heritage and finally shut it down... for about a month. During that time, the community banded together and made their own master server along with a client-side patch (that is quite simple) which permits you to lock onto the new master server and find games (which are indeed still going today).

This is why I've leaned more towards PC gaming. One day Blizzard will shut down WoW... and private servers will spring up, just as there's hundreds of them now. Prefer Vanilla WoW? There's an emulated server for you. Everquest has a movement to have an emulated server where the game is like it was in 1999 - much, much more hardcore. (Everquest has softened up a fair bit over the years, much like WoW has over the years.) So long as there are dedicated fans a game will never die. And if a game does truly die... then it probably wasn't all that good in the first place.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[brainzach]

What evidence do you have that it doesn't result in less copying?

At least companies like Ubisoft can get more accurate number in regards to sales and pirated copies that it can use for its analysis. Maybe they are making faulty judgments, but the company wouldn't be reimplementing their DRM again if it was a total failure in the past.

The whole basis of the argument is that online only DRM take longer to crack, extending the window which the company can sell its game without being undercut by pirated versions. If they do a poor job implementing it, it could be crack in a day and create a lot of negative publicity with nothing to gain. If they devise a system that takes months to crack, then it could be worth the effort.

Re:So? The game will just repeat itself.

[Opportunist]

It's not even that. It's part of the "appease the shareholders" game. I'm actually quite sure UBI knows that the more invasive DRM doesn't help in the quest against copying, but it makes it seem like they are doing "something" against it. And that's pretty much all that is required. They need to do something to convince shareholders they're trying their best to increase sales. Whether they actually do or not is not really an issue, it seems.

Simple solution

[NimbleSquirrel]

Don't buy their games.

They come out with the most amazing game in the world, but if they insist on doing this, they won't be seeing any of my money.

Seriously, they wonder why people pirate their games. Yes, there are people wanting it for free, but there is a growing number of people who pirate it just to get away from the DRM.

Re:Simple solution

[Vectormatic]

Yup, last week i contemplated picking up assasins creed 2 (used even, to not directly send money to ubi) or 3, because i really enjoyed AC1 (and supposedly, 2 and 3 have more free gameplay), but the always on DRM shit pretty much pushed me back to not buying it, this news once again strenghtened my resolve.

I have to little time to even play 0.01% of worthwhile games anyway, so cutting out ubisoft doesnt really hurt anyway, fuck those guys with their DRM

Re:Simple solution

[eulernet]

On the contrary, you should buy their game and ask for a refund because you cannot play without Internet.

After a large number of refunds, the large retailers will stop selling this game.

Re:Simple solution

[RobertLTux]

actually most retailers will not allow returns (even for store credit) of opened games.

Re:Simple solution

[shoehornjob]

Yes, there are people wanting it for free, but there is a growing number of people who pirate it just to get away from the DRM.

There will always be people out there that want it for free. Even if the price is reasonable they still want it for free. Those people are not your customers and they never will be. It's good to see that a lot of people are voting with their wallets here. Always on drm wouldn't be as big a deal if it's an online game but it still degrades your computer's performance.

Re:Simple solution

[ioErr]

You're right, but there's no need to open the box if you're buying it only to prove a point by returning it. The retailer still suffers administrative overhead from having to deal with you.

Re:Simple solution

[petermgreen]

There will always be people out there that want it for free. Even if the price is reasonable they still want it for free. Those people are not your customers and they never will be.

The questions are

1: how many people are there who want it for free but will pay for it if they can't pirate it in a timely manner
2: how many people who will either boycott it completely or wait for it to be in the "bargin bin" before buying because of the DRM.
3: how many people who would have waited and bought it used would buy it new if DRM is used to cut off used sales

The thing is none of these figures are easy to measure

Re:Simple solution

[brainzach]

There will always be people out there that want it for free. Even if the price is reasonable they still want it for free. Those people are not your customers and they never will be. It's good to see that a lot of people are voting with their wallets here. Always on drm wouldn't be as big a deal if it's an online game but it still degrades your computer's performance.

Most people will want it for free. It is basic economics.

The DRM is targeted towards people who want the game for free, but will are willing to pay for it if there is no free option.

pirate it

[Tom]

well, that game just went on my "download a pirate copy, just because" list.

I just realize that this has been a trend for me for years now. If I read "DRM free", I feel zero inclination to go on btjunkie - either I like it and buy it or I don't and don't. But the more DRM there is in the crap, the more I'm inclined to most definitely not give them my money.

Too bad we're not in the majority. Just imagine if putting DRM on your game were a surefire way of having close to zero sales, but being on the top of the torrent lists. The whole thing would disappear so quickly, we'd wonder if it was all just a dream.

Because in the end, these guys are just about money.

Re:pirate it

[flimflammer]

This is why I don't understand DRM these days. DRM doesn't stop pirates. Pirates never have to deal with DRM, and even this advanced form Ubisoft is throwing around has been rendered useless in previous games infected by it. All this sort of thing seems to discourage is actually purchasing the game at all.

Re:pirate it

[Darinbob]

DRM is not about piracy. It's about controlling the game you paid for so that you are essentially renting it and not owning it. This also applies to Steam games, Steam is DRM so they're guilty as well (a benevolent dictator is still a dictator).

Primarily the control is about preventing you from giving the game away. No used game sales is the number one goal. This includes selling to GameStop. Of course some people hate GameStop so they don't mind and will defend the DRM makers on these grounds. But this also includes being unable to give the game away to friends, selling to a reputable game reseller, giving it to a family member to use on another computer, etc. They want every user to buy their own copy. This is not copy protection, it is copy control.

There's other control too. Like other DRM they want to control the content. That means changing the content unilaterally. You always get the lousy director's cut. Someone comes up with a mod or unofficial patch that they don't like, then the game can get changed to prevent this. Or just prevent mods altogether (they hate fan based mods being better than $20 DLC). This is bad news for games, movies, phones, apps, whatever. Don't put up with it just because it's the game is fashionable. Control also means restricting how you can use it; no hacks to make it run on competing consoles, hacked consoles, Linux, unapproved versions of Windows. If you buy the game you should be in control of it.

I think some game makers have this dream of a day when everyone has to subscribe even to single player games. You pay for a month, and if you want to keep playing after that date you pay some more. That can only happen if the public lets this DRM stuff go forward and steamroll over their consumer rights a little at a time.

Thanks Ubi

[cbope]

... for yet another game to add to my "do not buy" list.

great article

[Tom]

btw, that RPS article is fantastic. Take a look (last link in the summary), just for the screenshots. What a way to clearly express your opinion. :-)

Re:great article

[Anonymous Coward]

Down modded for that? Did I huwt somewun's wittwe feewings? Here's a nickel, get yourself some real hosting, kid.

Did the wittle negative mod point hurt somewun's wittwe feewings? Here's a nickel, see a therapist

Not for me

[g051051]

I'm already getting a refund for an Ubi game that has that DRM (The Settlers 7). They tried to push me back to Steam for a refund, but I pointed them to their own EULA, where it says you can get a refund if you don't agree to the DRM and the retarded Ubi launcher, and they're handling it.

No game is so good, interesting, or important to my life that I'd be willing to submit to this always on DRM.

Re:Not for me

[barrtender]

Please elaborate. If this method is easy enough I'd love to buy a copy just to get Ubi to refund me the money.

Re:Not for me

[g051051]

I purchased the game via Steam. When I tried to run it, it popped up stuff about installing the Ubi launcher/client. The EULA clearly said I could get a refund if I didn't accept the terms of the agreement. I followed the instructions (requesting a refund via the Ubi support site.) They tried to send me to Steam for the refund, but I've dealt with their "customer service" enough to know that wouldn't work. So I pointed out the terms ofthe EULA, which specifically said it's Ubi's problem to handle refunds, and they contacted Steam to get the transaction reversed. I got notification from Steam today that the refund was issued, and the games are gone from my library.

Pirates more important than customers

[toxygen01]

If pirates are more important to the company than customers, players should think twice about buying their games.

In the end it's all cat & dog and we all know how it's gonna end. DRM cracked within weeks and paying customers left unplayable when disconnected while pirates will play happily offline.

Re:Pirates more important than customers

[Serpents]

DRM cracked within weeks and paying customers left unplayable when disconnected while pirates will play happily offline.

Luckily, in some cases DRM gets cracked even before the game is released, often within a few days of its release and only rarely it takes weeks. You'd thing they would draw some conclusions...

Not Interested in Buying a Game That Stops Working

[segedunum]

I have many games from years gone buy that I still like to play every now and again. So this means if Ubisoft turn off their servers the game stops working? No thanks.

I don't boycott much

[ledow]

But I do boycott overbearing DRM schemes. Seriously, this serves nobody's interest at all. It's now more difficult for me to even *look* at buying your games because I have to check if it has junk like this attached to it. So when it comes to purchasing decisions, if I see "Ubisoft" I have to expend more effort to check the product first before I buy it. That means that unless it's something fabulous, the chances are I just won't bother, and the name Ubisoft will put me off everything (it's already starting to now!).

And this time next year Ubisoft will be saying that sales of game X slumped because of completely unverifiable piracy when in fact it was just people annoyed with either previous or new purchases that have shite like that and either pirate or stop buying that and other, completely unrelated, products from Ubisoft.

Not everyone has a perfectly stable Internet connection, not everyone has a perfectly stable wireless connection, not everybody wants their PC constantly communicating online and taking up bandwidth for no good reason (how small the bandwidth is is irrelevant - it's more than it should be and adds up if every game were to go this route, you play a lot, and you have low bandwidth caps in the nation you're in). Just someone uploading photos as you try to do something can kill the average ADSL connection, now it means the game pause/saves/quits.

The people who don't have that stuff will be buying single-player games or games with lots of single-player content and still you force a completely ridiculous requirement on them.

A reliance on a constantly-available Internet connection to a third-party server in order to play a game is ridiculous. Hell, I might as well VNC into a damn computer on the other side of the world and play that way, there's little difference in practical terms between that and this DRM. Connection lost? Bye-bye game, or at best constant pauses and saves because it thinks it's gone.

In work, I have literally told companies to get lost after they tell me that the new iteration of their software is an online-only, access over the Internet, lose your session if it dies, affair. It's not that it won't work most of the time, but the point is that we lose control over when it does work. If local software dies, I can restore an image, or rebuild a machine, or do something to get it back and working. If remote software dies, we just have to twiddle our thumbs until their support line frees up.

It's a ridiculous thing and solves no problem that exists. Pirates will crack round it in days. Consumers don't have any problems without it but have massive ones with it. And console versions OF THE SAME GAME don't have that stupid requirement, despite consoles being online nowadays.

I loved the original Driver. The series got a bit lost after that but I was actually eyeing this up on Steam with the intent to buy it. Saw a thread on the steam forums pointing to those same articles, read them, saw the Twitter comment from Ubisoft itself and instantly removed it from my wishlist. My life is too short for that shit, my gaming time is gaming time, not tech support time. Ubisoft has forgotten that they are providing entertainment - that means "get everything out of my way because I want to have fun". Strangely, I don't want to be diagnosing my wireless/Internet in the middle of a game session, and will just choose a game that doesn't require that.

P.S. The game also doesn't support steering wheel controllers. A driving game. Seriously.

Re:I don't boycott much

[Kenoli]

P.S. The game also doesn't support steering wheel controllers. A driving game. Seriously.

That's just lazy.

Lazy? Negligent maybe. Or stupid. Or something.

It's something.

I still haven't bought Settlers 7 due to this

[Tridus]

And probably never will. Maybe it requires an MBA to understand how chasing away paying customers is good for business?

Oh, I get it.

[Seumas]

We don't want to keep wasting all those resources developing for the PC. We're going to make DRM on the PC a complete piece of shit situation. Nobody is buying the game on the PC, now. PC gaming is dying. We can't make money on the PC. We're only making titles for consoles, now.

Insecure, somebodyubisoftcough?

[eyenot]

Funny the lengths companies will go to in over-compensating for the fact that they aren't publishing "Need for Speed".

Cue DDoS in...

[Syberz]

3... 2... 1...

Re:Cue DDoS in...

[Vectormatic]

I dont remember what went down exactly with the AC2 DDOS, but where anonymous and lulzsec around anywhere near like their present forms back then?

I cant see any trolling which produces more lulz then DDOS-ing gamers, the flaming on the Ubi forums will provide enough lulz for Anonymous to keep going for a while.

[off-topic]

[eyenot]

BTW that's an awesome sig line, I had no idea where the quote originated so I searched for it and found the "Windows Usability Systematic degradation flame" email. What a riot!

Re:[off-topic]

[DrgnDancer]

Bill is not my favorite guy ever, but that was a well crafted flame. Made even better by the fact that it aimed at his own managers. In the long run it never really accomplished much, but you could see the light bulb going off as he realized what his customers had to go through when they had problems.

DAMMIT

[andydread]

I was going to get this game on steam. Unfortunately I can't buy a game with this kind of draconian drm. No Sale Ubisoft. No Sale

Irony

[Flipstylee]

Drm just cost them a definite sale here, but i guess considering they're creating pirates, drm it is, record-breaking sales it is not.

A better protest

[Comboman]

A better (and legal) form of protest is to give the game a one star rating on Amazon and note the DRM problems in your review.

Re:A better protest

[Syberz]

Totally agree with you, however we both know what's really going to happen.

Fool me once

[Xian97]

Many of the people I knew that bought the previous games with this DRM were not aware of it. Now after being burned once, their awareness of DRM has been raised. They won't get as many unsuspecting customers this time.

Re:DRM

[TaoPhoenix]

It's not about the pirates.

It's about sliding us into a Guilty-Until-Proven-Innocent culture!

The TSA will like this. "To prove you are not a terrorist, you must be constantly connected to our Trusted Citizen network. If you lose your connection, then you lose your trusted status and will be treated like the terrorist you have become until we clear you again."

Gamepads allow multiplayer

[tepples]

Mouse & keyboard also allow better controls

This is true for some but not all genres. How well would, say, a racing or fighting game work with a mouse and keyboard?

no reason to force controls to gamepad or similar device.

Other than that in multiplayer games, an extra gamepad for players 2, 3, and 4 is far cheaper than an extra PC, extra monitor, extra mouse, extra keyboard, extra copy of Windows, and extra copy of the game. True, some genres (like FPS and RTS) require concealing your position from other players, but not all games are in those genres.

Re:Gamepads allow multiplayer

[ProfBooty]

A sword fighting game using a mouse to control the sword would be pretty interesting.

Playing X-wing back in the day with a mouse was an exercise in frustration.

Re:Gamepads allow multiplayer

[SuiteSisterMary]

It's been done. Die By The Sword.

Re:Gamepads allow multiplayer

[Dewin]

A sword fighting game using a mouse to control the sword would be pretty interesting.

Daggerfall used mouse movement to determine how a weapon was being used. Thrusting the mouse forward while holding the attack button would do a forward thrust, and you could also slash side to side or diagonally.

OnLive anyone?

[tepples]

Hell, I might as well VNC into a damn computer on the other side of the world and play that way, there's little difference in practical terms between that and this DRM.

Let me guess: You're not a fan of OnLive service either.

Re:OnLive anyone?

[Joe_Dragon]

and hit the download cap? at least this works over slow links and higher ping unlike ONLive.

Boycott is the wrong answer...

[cypherljk]

We're going about this the wrong way. We should all buy copies of the game and then return it the next day because it won't play without the internet. That will cost Ubisoft thousand of dollars handling returns / RMA's from their various vendors and send a clear message about the DRM.

Re:Boycott is the wrong answer...

[sureshot007]

This actually sounds like an excellent idea to me. Just saying that X number of people are boycotting because of it doesn't really show the true value. But an actual number of units returned would demonstrate how much revenue they are losing because of this policy.

Re:Boycott is the wrong answer...

[medv4380]

Excellent!

Ubisoft off of Ban List

Ubisoft on always Return List

Re:Boycott is the wrong answer...

[alexo]

We're going about this the wrong way. We should all buy copies of the game and then return it the next day because it won't play without the internet. That will cost Ubisoft thousand of dollars handling returns / RMA's from their various vendors and send a clear message about the DRM.

Thousands of dollars, huh?

Ubisoft financial data for 2010:
Revenue: Euro 971 million
Operating income: Euro 260 million
Net income: Euro 89.8 million

Yup, that will show them!

Re:Boycott is the wrong answer...

[BillKaos]

Well, at least in my country such games prominently display: "Internet connection required" in the minimum requirements box. Given that, returning it because it doesn't work offline is not so easy.

Re:Boycott is the wrong answer...

[bananaquackmoo]

Good luck with that. Have you ever tried to return a game that has already been opened?

Re:Boycott is the wrong answer...

[ubergeek65536]

None of the stores in my area will accept returns on computer software, they will only exchange it for the same product.

Re:Boycott is the wrong answer...

[srmalloy]

"Internet connection required" doesn't tell you whether the game requires an Internet connection to a) register the product before it will complete the install (i.e., verifying that the product key you're putting in hasn't been used before), b) register the product after install, which unlocks the product (a and b being both one-time requirements), or c) dial home each time you start the program to see whether the software company wants to let you use the product this time, or d) periodically pings the software company while you're using the product to make sure that they haven't decided to take it away from you, and assumes that they've revoked your license if it can't connect. The first two are reasonable; I have no problem with the product calling the company once to make sure that I'm installing a legal copy of the product. The other two aren't; having the company assume that I'm pirating their product unless and until I prove otherwise each time I use their product, or having to repeatedly offer the same proof as I use the product is insulting.

Re:Boycott is the wrong answer...

[BillKaos]

The exact wording is (translated to English) "Internet connection required for playing", so I guess it is pretty clear. I've desisted purchasing some titles because of this warning.

Insanity?

[Marc Madness]

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein

No copyright

[X86Daddy]

Since this kind of DRM prevents the work from entering the public domain after a fixed amount of time... (ya know, the actual exchange brokered between the people and copyright holders), works with this kind of DRM have no valid copyright. There is zero moral disincentive against pirating it, cracking it, spreading it far and wide, and even repackaging the cracked version and selling it.

Of course, issues like this are decided not by the actual text of the laws, nor by the background intention of the laws, but by who can throw the most money at lawyers... so do it quietly. :-)

a wise man once said,

[nimbius]

the world is brimming with like-minded, motivated, brilliant people...



...who want more money.

Dangerous Decision

[WhitePanther5000]

New video games are expensive entertainment products, and in a down economy... a very easy thing to do without. Ubisoft is taking a HUGE risk by making the DRM this restrictive on such a non-essential item, and I think their sales numbers will reflect that. There are hundreds of other options for a good driving/racing game. The one does look cool, but I certainly don't feel like I "have" to have it.

Re:Complaining much?

[ledow]

So what your saying is that DRM is a complete waste of money anyway - because DRM or not, it will get pirated. And with DRM, the chances of someone pirating it are higher because they want to avoid this sort of crap even if they are a legitimate customer. So why bother with it at all?

I've yet to see an effective DRM scheme. In fact, I can't even name a title that got cracked/pirated AFTER it was out in stores - the only news stories I've ever seen were "Unreleased game X on pirate sites already".

Re:Back in my day ...

[DrgnDancer]

There is a very large amount of rose color in your glasses, or the you've just gotten unlucky. Speaking in broad terms, crime is lower now in the US (and in most major metro areas) than it was 25 years ago when I was a kid (God that statement makes me feel old). Now, of course that doesn't mean that crime is lower in any one particular town, or that the town you live in now doesn't have more crime than the one you grew up in despite similar size, but broadly speaking the country is a safer place than it was in the "good old days". The difference is that with our happy new 24 hour news cycles and paranoid "family values" commentators we now hear about every God damned bad thing that happens. It makes us feel less safe.

My suggestion

[Voyager529]

To send Ubisoft the clearest possible message, I feel that a four-tiered approach needs to happen:

1.) Don't buy the game, and tell all your friends not to buy the game, even the console versions.
2.) Buy the game, but return it three weeks later, unopened. The logic: Best Buy and Gamestop will have replenished their inventory after three weeks; they'll be none too thrilled with having twice that inventory taking up shelf space and will be pressuring Ubisoft's distributor to curtail production runs.
3.) Comment and rate down the game on Amazon, Steam, Metacritic, and wherever else you can.
4.) This is the tricky one: all the release groups that crack games like this need to agree to withhold their releases. Searches for "Driver San Fransisco cracked" need to come up either nil or with green pastures of fake/falsely named files, for the first three months of release.

If sales are terrible AND there's no viable pirated copy circulating the internet, then the bean counters at Ubisoft will be forced to conclude that it can't be pirated copies cutting into sales. Yes, I'm certain that we like to think that the people at Ubisoft have exchanged their brains for turnips, and I'm certain that there's some truth to that. However, if the legal department is stuck twiddling their thumbs because there's no one to send a takedown notice to, the distribution liaison is stuck recommending that the next run of disc pressings be halted due to overstock in the retail channel, while the PR department adds a third shift to handle all the e-mail volume they're getting in between cleaning up the Amazon page and drawing up press releases to handle the outcry that could quite possibly hit mainstream media if it's large enough.

The key here is that the response has to be CONSISTENT. This is not a boycott that will send the correct message to Ubisoft. It needs to be loud, consistent, and affect their bottom line every time.

Re:My suggestion

[ginbot462]

After all, it's Driver ... so if you been around for 12 years, you've already played it.

The Proper answer is

[camazotz]

Seiously, the only proper solution here is to boycott the game and NOT pirate it. period. Am I the only one who understands that this is the only reasonable solution? If I want Ubisoft or whomever to realize that they need to meet me halfway by not DRMing their games to death, then I also need to meet them halfway by demonstrating that I DO NOT PIRATE THEIR DAMNED GAMES. I actually do want to play Assassins Creed 2, Driver: San Fran and whatever else they produce. But if they make DRM that is punishing to the legitimate user, the answer is not to run out and authenticate theri worries with piracy....the answer is to find a different publisher (and they are out there) that offers its games free of DRM, and support that publisher.

Re:The Proper answer is

[c0d3g33k]

Seriously, the only proper solution here is to boycott the game and NOT pirate it. period. Am I the only one who understands that this is the only reasonable solution?

No, you're not the only one. To this day I haven't played a single second of (as one example of many) Bioshock. Didn't buy the game, didn't pirate it, just ignored it.
The same holds true for every other game that contains DRM. Didn't buy, didn't pirate. Only DRM-free games run on my system.

Re:The Proper answer is

[Jiro]

You can boycott the game and not pirate it. However, the company will still point to their declining sales as evidence of piracy.

Re:DRM

[ArcCoyote]

they DO want to do something like a trusted citizen program but you have to opt in.

If you're in it, you're pre-screened and get on the plane quicker. If you're not in it, nothing changes, you go through the same thing you do now.

but forget about the TSA... Presumed guilty is the attitude of the credit agencies.

Try getting a good rate on a car loan when your last one has been paid off for 5 years, you rent your home, and you pay for everything with cash or debit card.

It doesn't matter if your income shows you can easily afford it... (and the lending bank KNOWS this because you have your checking, savings, and credit card with them!) ... You're more of a risk with no credit than with a bad credit history.

Card Reader FTW

[AdamThor]

Ugh, that's terrible. I've always hated camera picture downloading software. But I have no idea of current trends, having switched long ago to using a dedicated card reader only. I found a nice little one that sits in the 3.5" bay, but there are plenty of removable USB ones. I recommend them to anyone hating their camera software.

Re:DRM

[RogerWilco]

Yeah. For top athletes, something like that already happens, pro prevent doping abuse. Now athletes get banned not because they used doping, but just because they couldn't get online, the website didn't work, or they forgot.

Things like this are going too far.

Trust the computer!

[arth1]

The TSA will like this. "To prove you are not a terrorist, you must be constantly connected to our Trusted Citizen network. If you lose your connection, then you lose your trusted status and will be treated like the terrorist you have become until we clear you again."

It used to be that the game Paranoia was fun because it was so outrageous. Now it's more of a documentary.

so what

[Osgeld]

Driver has always been a shit and shallow game, with only a gimick concept for the PS1 making it a franchise, only a fucktard would pay full price for a 3rd world GTA today

It doesn't fix anything.

[Tyr07]

People who pirate games would be using a fixed executable that would render the internet part NULLIFIED. That means it'll work offline, online, copied, whatever.

The only people who will suffer will be consumers who purchase the game legally. Any of them with technical knowledge will be tempted to use a fixed exec anyway so they don't have any hassle with their legit purchase of the game.

Re:Complaining much?

[Fned]

I don't know why everyone is complaining this much. I never had a single problem with their DRM.

You want OTHER PEOPLE to stop complaining because YOU'VE never had a problem?

Oh and to those saying that removing DRM will stop piracy...

Which would be... nobody?

People aren't saying that removing DRM will stop piracy. People are saying that removing DRM will encourage sales. Because people hate intrusive DRM on games they buy. You dumbshit.

Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot: you've never had a problem, so no one else has either...

Dear Ubisoft

[Scarletdown]

Dear Ubisoft, You are hereby cordially invited to go fuck yourself, as your actions disqualify you from the privilege of receiving any of my money.

Re:I still haven't bought Settlers 7 due to this

[psydeshow]

And probably never will. Maybe it requires an MBA to understand how chasing away paying customers is good for business?

One possible answer: marketing. By doing this, they get an article on Slashdot. They remove the DRM restriction with a mea culpa in a few days, and get another article. Two-for-one!

Then again, maybe I'm just being cynical, and Ubisoft management is really as stupid as they think their customers are.

That's not the point.

[Anonymous Coward]

I work in the games industry. No one has any delusions that DRM stops piracy. Yet we play all kinds of games with our PC executable to try an make it difficult to pirate, and we know full well that any party motivated enough can break it. Why do we bother?

To get a foot up on the pirates. We care about week one (and maybe week two) sales. Every day that we can delay the pirates improves our chances of making our money back. Piracy is a huge factor in profitability and risk. The people who are easily swayed by DRM aren't particularly likely to buy the game to begin with, and sales to them aren't factored into the budget. A few months after release the people buying the game are less likely to pursue pirated copies and the DRM can be loosened if everyone is still outraged.

Not intended to prevent piracy

[zzyzyx]

(Speculation) This DRM scheme is not intended to prevent piracy. Pirates so far have always been able to break protection schemes, and probably will be in the foreseeable future. The protection only need to be broken once to be duplicated on torrent sites instantly.
On the other hand it absolutely prevents the game from being resold, lent to a friend, etc, since one game key will be associated with one account, which is personal.
So it still is a mislead (but different) attempt to increase revenue by restricting customer freedoms.

Who owns UbiSoft...?

[RandomPsychology]

Don't look now, but I bet Apple is pulling the strings at UbiSoft. This sounds *exactly* like something they'd do!

So what?

[MemoryDragon]

I simply wont buy their stuff then...

They practically forced me to do this

[ColonelClaw]

Previous to this news I had no interest in the Driver series, and had no plans on buying this title - it just isn't my sort of game. However, in light of Ubisoft behaving like such massive dicks, I feel compelled to retalliate in kind, and download a cracked bittorrent of this game, and give copies of it to everyone I know.

Couch Potatoes play drm loaded games

[lsatenstein]

Instead of going to the park to play or support a baseball team, heat, humidity or whatever, you couch potatoes want to play games and put on weight.
Shame. Shame. Shame.

Is this really an issue?

[quietwalker]

Maybe it's just me, but every time I have a game I enjoy, I tend to crack it just so I don't have to put the disk in the drive to play. In most cases, I'm searching for the crack while the installer is still running.

Granted, I don't play many online-only games, like certain FPS shooters tend to be, but is it really an issue.